Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/24/2025

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I am currently participating in the ********** electric supplier aggregate with proof by letter that this program provides exclusive pricing through May 2025. I opted out of the replacement aggregate program beginning in June 2025 and enrolled with Energy Harbor to be my new supplier. I received a letter stating the new supplier will take effect on April 30, 2025. This will cause me to lose my existing rate of 0.049900 for the last month of my current aggregate program and begin the new rate of .0829 a month early. The new supplier was not supposed to start until June 1, 2025. I have spoke to both Oho Edison and Energy Harbor with them pointing the finger at each other and not achieving any resolution. It is my belief Energy Harbor is employing deceptive practices by enrolling me a month early without initial proper disclosure so I could make an informed decision to choose them or not.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/09/2025

  May 9, 2025
  
  ********* *** ********
  ********* ****** ****
  ******** *** ******* *** *********** ** *****
  **** ****** ****** ***
  *********** ***** ******* ************
  ______________________________________________________________________________
  
  Description of Issue:
  
  This letter is in response to the complaint filed by ****** **** on
  April 24, 2025, regarding Energy Harbor LLC. In the complaint, Mr. **** asserts
  concern regarding the aggregation contract terms with Energy Harbor.
  
  Response:
  
  Upon
  receiving the complaint, Energy Harbor conducted an investigation and
  determined that the customer’s recent aggregation with Energy Harbor began on
  April 27, 2024, and was served for the full 12-month duration of their contract,
  which ended on April 29, 2025. It is important to note that the Austintown
  Township’s aggregation term was set to end with the May 2025 meter read, which,
  in accordance with the customer’s billing cycle, aligns with the April 29, 2025
  end date.
  
  Records
  indicate that on April 1, 2025, Mr. **** went online, subscribing into Energy
  Harbor’s 36-month term, with a rate of $8.29 cents per kwh. The enrollment
  request was sent to the utility, Ohio Edison, and they provided April 30, 2025,
  as the effectuate date. Based on these findings, Energy Harbor declares that
  the customer’s contract terms have been fulfilled in accordance with the
  agreement.
  
  Energy
  Harbor contacted Mr. **** to convey the aforementioned information. Mr. **** was thankful for the clarification and had no further questions or concerns.
  
  We
  trust this information will assist you in closing this complaint.
  _____________________________________________________________________________
  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/11/2025

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I never signed up to Energy Harbor *** ** ****** **** ****** **** *****

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/21/2025

  Greetings,

  
  Here are Energy Harbors findings and report on
  complaint#********.

  As an initial matter, the customer
  appeared on the utility’s aggregation file in February 2024 and therefore, the
  customer was aggregated and enrolled with Energy Harbor via the City of Akron Community
  Electric Aggregation Program. That offer was for a fixed rate of 4.97 cents per
  kWh through the May 2025 meter read date.
  
  Energy Harbor sent
  the City of Akron Community Electric Government Aggregation Notification Letter
  and Opt-Out Reply form for the Community Electric Aggregation Program on February
  26, 2024, to eligible residents. If the customer did not want to participate in
  the aggregation program, they had the option to opt out by March 18, 2024.
  Having not heard from the customer, they were enrolled.
  
  Energy Harbor
  submitted the enrollment transaction request to the utility on March 30, 2024.
  The utility, Ohio Edison Company accepted the request with the service
  effectuate date of May 4, 2024.
  
  Energy Harbor has
  no record of direct customer contact requesting to be opted out of the
  aggregation program.
  
  On April 13, 2025,
  Energy Harbor received a drop/cancel transaction from the utility with the effective
  service end date of May 5, 2025. Energy Harbor wants to assert that the
  utilities price to compare rate has been between 7.43 and 10.11 cents per kWh,
  and the customer’s aggregation rate with Energy Harbor being at 4.97 cents per
  kWh, which has been providing savings to the customer. The customer was billed
  the appropriate contract rate and was not double billed. Accordingly,
  reimbursement is not due to the customer as the customer was billed for actual
  usage.
  
  As a result of this complaint, on April 21, 2025, Energy
  Harbor contacted the customer via phone to acknowledge the complaint received
  and investigation findings. The customer could not be reached; therefore, a
  detailed message was left, and a call back number was provided. There are no
  records of any return calls from the customer to discuss the pending complaint.
  
  We trust this information will assist you in closing this
  complaint.
  
  Please see the Terms and
  Conditions of the agreement, Billing Report, City of Akron Community Electric
  Aggregation Notification Letter and Opt-Out Form sent to the customer.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:03/31/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I selected to receive electricity from this company. They have transferred my account to another electric company who is charging DOUBLE what my local utility is charging. There is no way to cancel my contract with them. I've been on the phone and on hold with them all morning trying to cancel my contract. I have not spoken to a single person and have wasted an entire morning.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/10/2025

  ***** *** ****
  ********* *** ********
  ********* ****** *****
  ******** **** * **** **** ******* ***** *** *****
  **** ****** ****** ***
  *********** ***** ******: ************
  _____________________________________________________________________________________
  
  Description of Issue:
  
  The customer has reported that her electric account was
  transferred from Energy Harbor to another supplier who is allegedly imposing
  double charges. She is requesting the cancellation of her electric account.
  
  Response:
  
  Energy Harbor's records indicate that on March 03, 2022, Oksana
  ***** authorized the online enrollment of her electric account at a rate of
  7.48 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh), with the contract effective through the
  meter read date in December 2024.
  
  Subsequent to this authorization,
  Energy Harbor promptly submitted an enrollment request to Ms. ******* utility
  on March 04, 2022. This request was duly accepted, and service was scheduled to
  commence on April 01, 2022.
  
  On November 01, 2024, Energy
  Harbor issued a renewal notification to the customer, outlining the impending
  contract renewal, including the forthcoming rate and terms. The notification
  provided the customer with the option to opt-out by November 15, 2024. In the
  absence of a response, the account was automatically renewed under the Mass
  Market Offer at a rate of 12.39 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh), effective
  through the meter read date in August 2027, without any associated early
  termination fee.
  
  On February 19, 2025, Energy
  Harbor dispatched a notification by mail to the customer informing her that her
  electric account would be transferred to Energy Harbor’s affiliated entity,
  Public Power effective as of her next scheduled meter read date. This transfer
  was to be executed without any alteration to the terms and conditions of the
  existing contract, which Public Power would continue to honor. 
  
  On March 26, 2025, Energy Harbor
  received a drop request from the utility on behalf of the customer,
  establishing a service termination date of May 06, 2025.
  
  On March 31, 2025, Ms. ***** contacted Energy Harbor customer care to request the cancellation of her
  electric account. Energy Harbor informed her of the above details and advised
  her to contact Public Power to initiate a drop request from their services.
  
  On April 01, 2025, Energy Harbor
  received a reinstatement request from the utility. In response, Energy Harbor
  immediately submitted a drop request to the utility. The utility has since
  accepted this request and has provided a service termination date of May 06,
  2025.
  
  Additionally on April 01, 2025, an
  Energy Harbor representative promptly communicated this information to Ms.
  *****. Ms. ***** expressed satisfaction with the resolution provided.
  
  We trust this information will
  assist you in closing this complaint.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:03/03/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  They made seller messages on my bill saying a had a certain rate (same as I was paying) locked for 11 months. 3 months later, they increase the rate 41% I called 4 times, they promised to look into it, promised to call back and completely ignored me.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/13/2025

  Greetings,

  Here are Energy Harbors findings and report on
  complaint#********.

  As an initial matter, on January 5,
  2024, the customer
  enrolled in a mass market agreement offer with Energy Harbor via a web
  enrollment. That offer was for a fixed rate of 5.82 cents per
  kWh through the January 2025
  meter read date. There was no early termination fee associated with the
  offer. See the Web Export Enrollment file illustrating this.
  
  Energy Harbor
  underwent a system upgrade, transitioning accounts from one platform to
  another. Mr. ***** account was included in this process in August 2024.
  However, this upgrade did not affect the customer’s current contract, including
  his rate and term length or any service interruptions.
  
  On November 21,
  2024, Energy Harbor sent a renewal letter informing the customer of the
  forthcoming contract renewal rate and term for 11 months. If the customer
  wished not to participate in the renewal, they were to opt out with either
  Energy Harbor or their local electric utility by December 15, 2024. The
  customer alleges he contacted Energy Harbor in November 2024 regarding a rate
  change request; however, according to Energy Harbors records, there were no customer
  interactions found for this customer and the associated phone number on record.
  Having not heard from the customer, their contract was renewed at a fixed rate
  of 8.19 cents per kWh through the December 2025 meter read date.
  
  The customer
  initially contacted Energy Harbor to clarify billing rates and terms but
  disagreed with the information provided, leading to an escalated service
  ticket. After multiple follow-ups, the issue was resolved on March 3, 2025,
  with an explanation related to a billing platform change. The customer was then
  compensated with a $40 courtesy credit and rate adjustments for the billing
  cycle of 01/15/2025 to 02/13/2025. Additionally, he enrolled in a new
  fixed-rate plan of 7.59 cents per kWh for six months.
  
  The customer was
  billed the appropriate contract rate through their prior contract term from through
  February 2024 through the January 2025 meter read date. Due to market
  fluctuation, the prior contracted rate of 5.82 cents per kWh is no longer
  available for the customer to be enrolled into. On March 3, 2025, Energy Harbor
  presented different rate offers to the customer, and the customer elected to be
  enrolled into a fixed rate of 7.59 cents per kWh for 6 months. The timeframe
  for the new rate to effectuate is one to two billing cycles.
  
  As a result of this
  complaint, on March 5, 2025, Energy Harbor contacted the customer via phone to confirm
  receipt and relay the above information. The customer was informed that the
  selection he made on March 3, 2025, would take effect within one to two billing
  cycles. He was also told to anticipate a one-time courtesy credit of $40. The
  customer expressed satisfaction with the resolution.
  
  Please see the Enrollment Export Data Export File, Contract
  and Terms and Conditions of the agreement and Renewal letter sent to the
  customer.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:02/23/2025

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Energy Harbor added to my bill for past 12 months without a signature from me.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/05/2025

  Greetings,

  Here are Energy Harbors findings and report on
  complaint#********.

  As an initial matter, the customer
  appeared on the utility’s aggregation file in March 2021 and October 2023;
  therefore, the customer was aggregated and enrolled with Energy Harbor via the Sandusky
  County Community Electric Aggregation Program. For the most recent contract
  with the December 2023 program start. That offer was for a fixed rate of 6.67
  cents per kWh through the December 2025 meter read date. There was no early
  termination fee associated with the offer.
  
  For the most recent
  contract, Energy Harbor sent the Sandusky County Community Electric Government
  Aggregation Notification Letter and Opt-Out Reply form for the Community
  Electric Aggregation Program on October 30, 2023, to eligible residents. If the
  customer did not want to participate in the aggregation program, they had the
  option to opt out by November 20, 2023. Having not heard from the customer,
  they were enrolled into the new contracted rate.
  
  On November 7,
  2024, Energy Harbor notified the customer by mail that their electric account
  would be transferred to Energy Harbor’s affiliated entity, Dynegy, effective as
  of his next scheduled meter read as Energy Harbor will no longer be operating
  in his utility. This transfer would be implemented without any modifications to
  the terms and conditions of the existing contract, which will continue to be
  honored by Dynegy. See the attached letter illustrating this.
  
  To effectuate this
  change Dynegy sent an enrollment transaction to Toledo Edison on December 11,
  2024. The utility accepted the request with a service start date of January 22,
  2025; however, on December 17, 2024, the utility submitted a drop and
  reinstatement of the account back to Energy Harbor.
  
  Energy Harbor nor
  Dynegy has record of direct customer contact requesting to be opted out of the
  aggregation program.
  
  On February 11,
  2025, a subsequent enrollment was resubmitted by Dynegy due to the prior
  enrollment being dropped and reinstated by the utility to Energy Harbor. The
  utility accepted the request with a service start date of March 22, 2025.
  However, on February 12, 2025, the utility submitted a drop/cancel transaction
  for the Dynegy enrollment and a reinstatement transaction of the account back
  to Energy Harbor. Consequently, Energy Harbor remained the supplier for the
  customer.
  
  As a result of this
  complaint, on March 3, 2025, Energy Harbor submitted the drop/cancel request to
  the utility. Toledo Edison provided March 21, 2025, as the drop effective date.
  Energy Harbor wants to assert that the utilities price to compare rate has been
  8.24 cents per kWh and the customer’s aggregation rate currently is 6.67 cents
  per kWh, which is providing savings to the customer.
  
  As a result of this complaint, on March 3, 2025, Energy
  Harbor contacted the customer via phone to acknowledge the complaint received
  and investigation findings. The customer could not be reached; therefore, a
  detailed message was left, and a call back number was provided. There are no
  records of any return calls from the customer to discuss the pending complaint.
  
  We trust this information will assist you in closing this
  complaint.
  
  Please see the most recent Terms
  and Conditions of the agreement and Brand Transition Letter sent to the
  customer.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 03/05/2025

   I am rejecting this response because:
  
  
  There should be a law against this, if Energy Harbour is charging me rates alongside Toledo Edison, that is theft from one of the parties involved. 
  Sending a letter to me, pending my response, and if there are none, you automatically enroll me in this program, it "should be" if I don't respond, I don't want it.

  I get mail all the time, most are things that don't interest me or from companies I'm not aware of (exactly this case) so I toss them in the trash. 
  
  I expect this matter to be resolved, and I will go back and make the phone call to Energy Harbour asking just that, to stop any future payment request as long as Toledo Edison is charging for the same service.

  I opted out of the Energy Harbour from Toledo Edison site once I noticed this was going on, not sure how this was not done and is continuing still today.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/11/2025

  Greetings,

  There seems to be some factual misunderstanding in this
  complaint. Energy Harbor is the electricity supplier for the Sandusky County
  Community Electric Aggregation Program. In an electric aggregation, the City/County
  officials negotiates on behalf of its residents for a fixed rate to protect
  them from fluctuations in the market. Eligible residents are automatically
  included in this program unless they affirmatively opt out. Energy Harbor and
  the County/Township make the opt-out process as easy as possible for customers
  by allowing them to opt out via mail, phone, or web.

  
  As initially stated, the customer appeared on the utility’s
  aggregation file in March 2021 and October 2023; therefore, the customer was
  aggregated and enrolled with Energy Harbor via the Sandusky County Community
  Electric Aggregation Program. The customer has benefitted from being enrolled
  in the Community Electric Aggregation Program with a fixed rate of 4.56 cents
  per kWh from May 22, 2021 through the December 2023 meter read date and a fixed
  rate of 6.67 cents per kWh from the December 2023 meter read date through the service
  end date of March 21, 2025. The utility’s price to compare variable rate has
  been consistently higher than Energy Harbors rate throughout this customers
  enrollment with Energy Harbor.
  
  Energy Harbor is the retail electric supplier while Toledo
  Edison is the electric distribution utility. The retail electric supplier
  provides the electricity supply to the customer while the electric distribution
  utility manages the distribution of the electricity supply to the customer.
  Energy Harbor only bills the customer for the customer’s actual electricity
  usage (electricity consumption) while the utility bills for the distribution
  portion of the customer’s bill. These are separate charges that will be passed
  on to the customer regardless of which supplier the customer chooses or if the
  customer chooses to remain with their utility as their supplier. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:02/12/2025

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  On October 1, 2024, I submitted an online application for *********** gas services to Energy Harbor via the PA gas switch website. That day I received an email confirming that the application was received. On October 8, 2024 I received a second email from Energy Harbor asking me to complete a survey about my experience (I did not complete survey). In January 2025 I received my PECO energy bill and noticed that the gas provider had not been updated to Energy Harbor, and rather my former gas provider (PAG&E) was now charging me a variable rate that had increased my energy bill by 45%. Upon contacting Energy Harbor to see why they were not providing me services I was informed that my application (from October 2024) had been denied due to the incorrect account numbers having been entered on the application. I asked to see the application and they told me this was impossible. I made repeated requests to see the application and they continue to state that they have no record of the application, other than that it was submitted and denied. At no time following the submission of the application was a denial or any decision communicated to me. More recently in a telephone call it was noted that Energy Harbor is the sister company of PAG&E, suggesting that both gas providers have access to my PAG&E account information and the knowledge that my application to Energy Harbor, if denied, would result in significant financial benefits to both companies as a result of the increased gas rate charged by PAG&E

  

  Business Response

  Date: 02/24/2025

  **** ****** ***
  ******* ** *****
  ******** *** ****
  ********* *** ********
  ********* ******* *****
  ______________________________________________________________________________
  Description of Issue:
  The customer is disputing their rejected enrollment with Energy Harbor. The customer states that
  he did not receive a rejection notification that the application did not go through.
  Response:
  Energy Harbor's records indicate that on October 1, 2024, ******* ***** initiated an online
  authorization to enroll his natural gas account at a rate of 54.9 cents per CCF, effective until the
  November 2026 meter read date. However, this enrollment was not successfully effectuated due
  to the entry of the account number (**********) rather than the required Choice ID, leading to
  the rejection of the enrollment. For your reference, please see the example below, which
  specifically instructs the entry of the Choice ID.
  A confirmation email was dispatched to the customer; however, it is crucial to clarify that this
  confirmation email does not serve as verification of successful enrollment with the utility. It solely
  acknowledges the completion of the enrollment process.
  On October 7, 2024 Energy Harbor sent an enrollment request to the utility who rejected the
  enrollment citing: *********** not Found.
  Channel Web Broker
  First Name *******
  Last Name *****
  Phone Number **********
  Email Address *******************
  Customer Type ***********
  Utility Account Number **********
  **** ****** ***
  ******* ** *****
  On January 30, 2025, Mr. ***** contacted PAG&E customer care to discuss his account. The care
  agent offered a new fixed rate of 51.9 per CCF for 36 months, to which Mr. ***** accepted.
  On February 24, 2025, Energy Harbor communicated with Mr. ***** to express apologies for his
  experience. During this conversation, Mr. ***** conveyed that he continued receiving supply
  from Pennsylvania Gas and Electric (“PAG&E”), an affiliated brand within the Vistra Corp brand.
  He expressed confusion, believing that, given the affiliation between Energy Harbor and PAG&E,
  Energy Harbor should have already possessed his account information and identified the
  discrepancy. Energy Harbor clarified that, despite the affiliation, both brands operate as distinct
  entities and do not exchange or cross-reference information during the enrollment process. It was
  emphasized that ensuring the accuracy of the information is the sole responsibility of the customer.
  In the interest of customer satisfaction, Mr. ***** was issued a re-rate for the November –
  February invoice totaling $153.09. Mr. ***** was informed he can expect to receive his refund,
  in the form of a check, within one billing cycle via US mail. Mr. ***** was satisfied with the
  outcome.
  We trust this information will assist you in closing this complaint.
  Please refer to the Enrollment Export attached.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 02/25/2025

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

  While I am satisfied with the company's decision to refund me the difference in the cost of my gas service, and accept this resolution, I do not see any indication that I entered the incorrect Gas Choice ID on the documents provided by Energy Harbor, which was one of my requests. What is provided is a pdf which no where indicates a choice ID number (only the account number is shown, and is correct). The example provided by Energy Harbor clearly indicates the need to enter a Choice ID, which having now seen the application page again leads me to believe that it would be nearly impossible to enter the wrong number (given the clear indication that a choice ID should be entered). Energy Harbor remains unable to provide me the details of my application for service, showing that the incorrect number was entered.

  During my phone call on February 24th, 2025, Energy Harbor indicated that they had completed their investigation and had determined that Energy Harbor made an error by not communicating to me that the enrollment had been rejected, either by email or telephone. I accept their apology and monetary refund, but wish to be clear in this case Energy Harbor failed to communicate and admitted to doing so.

  Finally, the email communications that I had prior to filing this complaint clearly show that the employees working at Energy Harbor were able to view and had access to all of my account information via PAG&E (these are available as an attachment). The notion that Energy Harbor and PAG&E are entirely separate is therefore false. Both companies work for the same parent company and are competing for same customer base. The Energy Harbor employee specifically stated at one point that my application was rejected because I was already a customer (he/she was looking at my active PAG&E account) and that current customers are not eligible for the rate that I applied. I have concerns about this practice as it seems likely to create a conflict of interest amongst these two Vistra Corporation entities. Particularly in my case, where my application was to switch from one company to the other. I think this is an important consideration moving forward.

  Again, I have reviewed the response made by the business
  in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is
  satisfactory to me.
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:01/23/2025

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  We entered into a 13-month fixed contract with Energy Harbor at $0.0848/kwH, starting in November 2023, per letter received from PPL. Energy Harbor sent a letter dated 11/15/24, indicating they would provide us with our new rate after the fixed period ended. The letter states: "Your new price will take effect once your current agreement expires on your January 2025 meter read date."
  
  They did not provide us the pricing information, and instead, charged a rate of $0.1199/kwH for a portion of our bill for the period 11/12-12/13/24. They charged $174.57 plus a duplicate flat fee of $9.99, when the charge should've been $123.47 plus a single $9.99 flat fee, for a difference owed to us of $61.10. Energy Harbor blamed a "system conversion" for this and said the billing team would be in contact with us, which they have not been.
  
  On our most recent bill (12/13/24-1/15/25), the entire 2,374 kwH was charged at $0.1199, and should have been charged at $0.0848, before shifting to the new negotiated 6-month fixed rate of $0.0959/kwH. This resulted in an overpayment of $83.33.
  
  All told, we paid $144.42 more for electrical generation & transmission charges than we should have between 11/13/24 and 1/15/25. We would appreciate your help in getting the company to issue the refund check they owe us and ensuring that our next bill will be at the $0.959 rate, which will be in effect until July 2025.
  
  Thank you kindly,
  ****** *********

  

  Business Response

  Date: 02/03/2025

  Hello,

  Here
  are Energy Harbors findings and report on complaint#********.

  As an initial matter, the customer is
  an active customer with Energy Harbor since November 2023. For the most recent
  contract between Energy Harbor and the customer, the customer enrolled via web
  on November 3, 2023. That offer was for a fixed rate of 8.48 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh)
  through the January 2025 meter read date and no early termination fee
  associated.

  In October 2024,
  Energy Harbor undertook a system upgrade, transitioning accounts from one
  platform to another. Which involved changing the utility DUNS number for all of
  Energy Harbor’s Pennsylvania electricity customers. To effectuate this change
  to the new DUNS number, Energy Harbor was required to send an enrollment
  transaction to PPL Electric Utilities Corporation for the new DUNS number. Unfortunately,
  due to timing, this transaction prematurely triggered the customers forthcoming
  renewal rate to effectuate.
  
  Energy Harbor sent
  the customer renewal letters informing the customer of the forthcoming renewal
  on November 15, 2024, and November 27, 2024, informing the customer of the
  forthcoming contract renewal rate and term of 11.99 cents per kilowatt hour
  (kWh) with a monthly fee of $9.99 dollars per month through February 2026. If
  the customer wished not to participate in the renewal, they were to opt out
  with either Energy Harbor or their local electric utility by December 20, 2024.
  Energy Harbors records indicate that the customer contacted Energy Harbor on
  January 3, 2025 and opted out of the renewal rate enrolling into the rate of 9.59
  cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) for 6 months with no early termination fee.
  Services on the new rate with Energy Harbor effectuated on January 16, 2025.
  
  Upon receiving the customers complaint, Energy Harbor's
  Billing Department conducted a thorough review of the account's billing
  invoices. Energy Harbor has determined the customer was not billed the
  appropriate contract rate from the November to January billing periods. The
  customer was also assessed an extra Monthly Service Fee (MSF) when Energy
  Harbor undertook a system upgrade, transitioning accounts from one platform to
  another. Energy Harbor apologizes for the negative experience.
  
  Energy Harbor has
  calculated a total lost savings of $144.76 for the aforementioned billing
  periods. The reimbursement will be sent this week in the form of a check via
  USPS.
  
  On January 28, 2025, Energy Harbor contacted the customer
  via phone to acknowledge the complaint received and investigation findings. ****** ********* took the call;  he was provided
  all the details of the complaints investigation. Mr. ********* was satisfied
  with the information and resolution provided.
  
  We trust this information will assist you in closing this
  complaint.
  
  Please see the Terms and
  Conditions of the agreements and Renewal Letters sent to the customer.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 02/04/2025

  Hello,

  Energy Harbor responded to this complaint on February 3, 2025. Please review the attached response sent.

   

• Initial Complaint

  Date:10/21/2024

  Type:Customer Service Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I got a letter saying that we switched from PECO to Energy Harbor, LLC WE WOULD NEVER SWITCH This is Fraudulant. WE NEVER Supported this switch….this is illegal have them stop!!!!! This is Fraudulant ….they need to stop[.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 10/28/2024

  Good afternoon,

  Here are Energy Harbors findings and report on complaint#********.

  As an initial matter, Energy Harbor is
  licensed and regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission to be a
  supplier in Pennsylvania.
  
  Records indicate, the customer enrolled with
  FirstEnergy Solutions (now Energy Harbor LLC) via web in July 2012. Energy
  Harbor is unable to obtain that contract or enrollment data export due to time
  limitations. The offer was for a fixed tiered rate of 4.38 cents per kilowatt
  hour (kWh) through the October 2012 meter read date, then 8.75 cents per
  kilowatt hour (kWh) through the June 2014 meter read date. There was a $150
  early termination fee associated with the offer. Please refer to the following
  record for the customer’s initial enrollment:
  
  The customer was subsequently automatically
  renewed into additional Mass Market offers in June 2014, December 2016, and
  December 2018, December 2020, December 2021, December 2022, and December 2023. Prior
  to each contract renewal, FirstEnergy Solutions (now Energy Harbor LLC) sent
  the customer renewal letters informing the customer of the forthcoming renewal
  contract upon the expiration of each previous contract. For the most recent
  renewal in December 2023, Energy Harbor sent the customer two renewal letters
  on October 31, 2023, and November 14, 2023, informing the customer of the
  forthcoming contract renewal rate and term. If the customer wished not to
  participate in the renewal, they were to opt out by either contacting Energy
  Harbor, PECO, or enrolling with another supplier by December 1, 2023. Energy
  Harbor has no record of the customer requesting to be opted out of the
  contract. Having not heard from the customer, their contract was renewed
  through the December 2024 meter read date.
  
  In August 2024, Energy Harbor informed its
  customers that it was going through a system upgrade that would cause PECO to
  trigger a notification indicating that the customer’s electric supplier had
  changed to Energy Harbor. Customers were assured, through the notification,
  that their supplier was not changing, and they would remain with Energy Harbor.
  
  On October 21, 2024,
  Energy Harbor received a drop/cancel notification from the customer's utility,
  indicating the reason as "B38 - CUST-DROP-REQUEST." The utility
  provided the service end date as October 25, 2024.
  
  On October 21, 2024,
  the customer contacted Energy Harbor via phone disputing the enrollment. The
  customer was educated about the transition from FirstEnergy Solutions Corp. to
  now being Energy Harbor LLC and that her contract has been renewed since
  inception and it could be verified on her billing throughout that Energy Harbor
  has been their supplier of record. The customer confirmed and acknowledged that
  Energy Harbor has been on their billing; however, it was never noticed. The
  customer advised that they were not aware, and she would proceed with a
  complaint and a request to drop/cancel has been placed with the utility.
  
  Energy Harbor contacted the customer on
  October 25, 2024 via phone and spoke with ***** ******,
  who identified herself as the customers wife. The details and the findings of
  the complaints were discussed. ***** ****** was not in agreeance of how the
  account was enrolled with Energy Harbor and requests all supporting documents.
  ***** ****** was advised that all the complaints findings and documents would
  be submitted to the Better Business Bureau.
  
  We trust this information will assist you in
  closing this complaint.
  
  Energy Harbor has nineteen documents to
  support this complaint; however, the BBB platform can only support five
  attachments. Attached are the five most recent documents and the complaint
  response. Energy Harbor can provide the other documents upon request.
  
  Please see the FES Name Change Document,
  Terms and Conditions of the agreement and Renewal letters sent to the customer.
  
  We trust this
  information will assist you in closing this complaint.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:10/11/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I received a letter from them saying that I had a service contract with them that is to go into effect starting November 26, 2024. I called this morning and the customer service agent was very ignorant and rude trying to argue with me. He stated that I signed up via the web back in December of 2023 and service took effect in January of 2024. How is that though when their letter dated October 2, 2024, and received on October 10, 2024, telling me that am to begin service with them on November 26, 2024. I told him repeatedly that I never signed up and never heard of their company before yesterday. I signed up with Arbor Energy over a year ago. I have Arbor/AEP at a service rate of .0647 and the Energy Harbor rate is .0849 according to their letter. I don't know where they came from but I never signed up. So, I don't know what happened but I told the unprofessional customer representative to cancel and I better not see a change. So, according to their letter by electric providers were to be Energy Harbor/Columbus Southern Power. I have never heard of either energy provider.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 10/31/2024

  October 31,
  2024
  
  
  Case
  ID: ********
  Customer: *** ********
  Address: **** ******** **** ********* ** *****
  Service
  Address: **** ******** **** ********* ** *****
  AIQ: Energy Harbor
  LLC
  Alternative
  Phone Number: ************
  Email: ******************
  NIQ: Columbus Southern Power Company
  
  EDC # *****************
  ______________________________________________________________________________
  
  Description of Issue:
  
  This letter is in response to the complaint filed by *** ******** on
  October 21, 2024, regarding Energy Harbor LLC. In the complaint, Mr. ******** asserts
  concern involving his enrollment with Energy Harbor.
  
  Response:
  
  As an initial
  matter, for the service address of **** ******** **** ********* ** *****, the
  customer’s contract with Energy Harbor was an online enrollment agreement for
  electric service through the December 2024 meter read date.
  
  Records
  indicate that Energy Harbor sent Mr. ******** a renewal notice on 10/2/2024,
  letting him know that his current plan will end on or around November 26, 2024.
  
  Mr. ********
  contacted Energy Harbor on October 11, 2024 regarding the notice, and requested
  to cancel service. Energy Harbor submitted a drop/cancel request to the
  customer’s utility, AEP Ohio. The utility accepted the request and provided the
  service end date of October 28, 2024.
  
  On October
  31, 2024, Energy Harbor contacted Mr. ******** and provided him with the above
  information. Mr. ******** was thankful for the follow-up and had no further
  concerns. We trust this information will assist you in closing this complaint.
  
  Please
  see the Terms and Conditions of the Agreements and Renewal Notice sent to the
  customer.
  ______________________________________________________________________________

  Customer Answer

  Date: 11/01/2024

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/29/2024

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I was entered into an aggregate with my permission or knowledge and because I was participating in budget billing, I didn’t notice the price increase until the end of the billing quarter I became aware of this 8/21/24 after business hours and called Duke 8/22/24 first thing in the am to cancelenergy harbor service. I was told I had to continue to pay it until 9/25/24 and was given energy harbor’s direct phone number.
  Immediately after this call, I called energy harbor to cancel. I received Confirmation #********. The representative said I still had to pay it through 9/25/24 which I do not agree with since I canceled 8/22/24 and the next billing cycle was 8/28/24 - 9/25/24. I expressed my frustration because I was canceling prior to the end of the billing cycle AND this was added to my bill without my permission back in May. Because I’m on a quarterly budget billing plan, I didn’t notice the increase on my bill until the end of the billing quarter. I continued to express my concerns and frustrations because I feel it’s unethical to add this to someone’s bill without their permission. She stated a letter was sent but I never received a letter. If I had received a letter I would have opted out. They have no proof that they sent me this letter. I asked if it was sent certified mail to ensure it was delivered to the correct address/person but it was not and I never received it.
  I am requesting a full refund of the unauthorized charges on my account by energy harbor from June-September, for a total of $1128.74.
  
  June: $260.17
  July: $294.55
  August: $307.20
  September: $266.82

  

  Business Response

  Date: 10/08/2024

  Good morning,

  Here are Energy Harbors findings and report on complaint#********.

  The customer appeared on Duke Energy’s
  aggregation file received in February 2024; therefore, the customer was
  aggregated and enrolled with Energy Harbor via the opt out process into the Ross
  Township Community Electric Aggregation Program for the May 2024 program start.
  That offer was for a fixed rate of 6.13 cents per
  kilowatt hour (kWh) through the September 2025 meter read date and no early
  termination fee associated.
  
  Energy Harbor sent the Ross Township
  Community Energy Aggregation Notification
  Letter and Opt-Out Reply form for the Community Electric Aggregation Program on
  March 25, 2024, to eligible residents. If the customer did not want to
  participate in the aggregation program, they had the option to opt out by April
  15, 2024. Having not heard from the customer, they were enrolled.
  
  Energy Harbor submitted the customer’s enrollment request on
  May 4, 2024, to the customers utility, Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. The utility
  accepted the enrollment and provided a service effective start date of May 30,
  2024. Additionally, the customer would have also received a confirmation letter
  from the utility confirming enrollment with Energy Harbor supply. This would
  have been another opportunity to cancel the municipal aggregation enrollment.
  
  On August 22, 2024, after the opt-out deadline, the customer
  contacted Energy Harbor disputing the enrollment and requesting an opt out with
  a drop/cancel. Energy Harbor processed the opt-out and submitted a drop/cancel
  request to the customers utility. The customer was also provided the
  drop/cancel timeframe expectations of one to two billing cycles. Also on August
  22, 2024, Energy Harbor received a drop/cancel request from the utility with
  reason: “Dropped by Customer Request”. The utility provided the service
  effective end date of September 25, 2024. Energy Harbor is unable to change the
  service end date provided by the utility as the utility regulates that process.
  
  The customer was billed the appropriate contract rate and
  was not double billed. Accordingly, reimbursement is not due to the customer as
  the customer was billed for actual usage. Energy Harbor saved the customer
  $162.41 compared to the utility’s Price to compare rate (Energy Harbors rate
  was 6.13¢ compared to the utility’s price to compare rate of 8.01¢) in the four
  months served while enrolled in the Ross Township Community Energy Aggregation
  Program. See attached Calculation file.
  
  On October 1, 2024, Energy Harbor contacted Michelle Frost via phone and left a detailed message acknowledging the
  complaint received and that a resolution would be provided to the Better
  Business Bureau.
  
  We trust this information will
  assist you in closing this complaint.
  
  Please see the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement sent to
  the customer.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 10/22/2024

  [[BBB transcription via email]]

   

  I do not agree with the outcome or response from Energy Harbor. I was never made aware of this aggregate program from them or Duke. My Duke bill is on autopay so I never actually receive a monthly bo and since I’m on budget billing, my bill auto adjusts every 3 months. That’s why I was late in realizing I was entered into an aggregate program. I never received a letter from anyone. This should not be allowed to occur without permission. One should have to opt in - not opt out. If opting out is the only option then the notifications stating you are being entered into an aggregate program should be sent to each customer via certified mail to ensure the customer is accurately receiving the information. This entire thing is frustrating and disappointing and did increase our bill quite a bit. I would like my response added to this case please.
  
  

  
  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 10/29/2024

  Hello,

  As referenced in the response, Energy
  Harbor sent the Ross Township Community Energy Aggregation Notification Letter and Opt-Out Reply form
  for the Community Electric Aggregation Program on March 25, 2024, to
  eligible residents. Customers who chose not to participate in the aggregation
  program, had the option to opt out by April 15, 2024, via mail, email or by
  phone.

  
  Additionally, the customer would have also received a
  confirmation letter from the utility confirming enrollment with Energy Harbor
  supply. This would have been another opportunity to cancel the municipal
  aggregation enrollment.
  
  Energy Harbor understands the customer may not be in
  agreement, however, determines the account billed for actual usage at the
  appropriate contract rate.
  
  We trust this information will
  assist you in closing this complaint.
  
  Please see the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement sent to
  the customer.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 10/29/2024

   I am rejecting this response because:
  I, again, was NEVER notified of this…not by this company, my township or Duke. I do not agree with signing a customer up for something without their knowledge or agreement. Letters should have been sent certified mail so a signature was required to ensure customers actually receive the correspondence. If I would have received a correspondence, I would have opted out in a timely manner which I have previously explained. What this company is doing is sneaky, wrong and just unethical.