PG&E Customers
Scammed and Slammed!
AAA and Its Affiliate “Tiger Natural Gas” Have Racked Up 532 “Abusive Marketing” Consumer Complaints and $377,000 in CPUC Fines
Monette-Shaw
• • • • • • • • • • March 2025 • • • • • • • • • •
The “7 on Your Side” segment, titled “Gas company leads elderly residents into unknowingly agreeing to pricey contracts,” reported that elderly residents thought they were signing up for a discount on heating bills. Instead, PG&E switched them to a third-party gas company—and, on top of that, their bills doubled. The segment appeared on April 19, 2024.
It happened to me.
I didn’t realize I needed to be alert to scams to prevent my natural gas utility service from being “slammed” to another provider without my explicit consent.
I belatedly learned that, only after my natural gas service was “slammed” from PG&E to Tulsa, Oklahoma-based AAA Natural Gas without my consent, after I received two scam phone calls from so-called “sales agents” who claimed “We are [calling from] PG&E.”
Despite hanging up and ending both phone calls when I finally suspected they were scammers, my natural gas service was transferred from PG&E to AAA Natural Gas anyway. I promptly called PG&E to report the scam phone calls, thinking PG&E would stop it dead in its tracks.
PG&E didn’t.
The scammers were soliciting business for a so-called “Core Transport Agent” (CTA). They didn’t mention the name of the company they were soliciting for. “We are PG&E.”
I received two calls from two people representing they were PG&E employees, claiming — during what was supposed to be a “recorded voice log” (TPV) — “We are PG&E. They told me I was eligible for a 30% discount on my PG&E bill.”
CTAs must register with and be approved by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to provide natural gas customers with alternative choices as their gas suppliers.
“Slamming” occurs when a gas supplier, whether a regulated public utility or a CTA, switches customers to another supply system without their authorized consent. In such cases, the gas supplier engages in “slamming.” The CPUC fines any gas supplier for such activities $1,000 for each instance.
CTAs are unregulated gas suppliers. That means that if you have a billing error, service dispute, or any other problem with the CTA, the CPUC will not come to your assistance. You could be stuck fighting about disputes in court. In 2014, the CPUC issued D.14-08-043, which set interim registration standards for Core Transport Agents.
Mainstream Media to the Rescue
A “7 on Your Side” segment, titled “Gas company leads elderly residents into unknowingly agreeing to pricey contracts,” reported that elderly residents thought they were signing up for a discount on heating bills, but instead they got switched to a third-party gas company — and on top of that, their bills doubled.
The segment focused on two elderly female customers who were misled into 36-month contracts they were (wrongly) told would save them money on their gas bills, contracts that required a 60-day cancellation period, and a $100 early termination fee. The marketing phone calls featured 10- to 15-second delayed pauses between questions. The victims’ guardians both stated the voices on the so-called recorded “Third-Party Verification” (TPV) MP3 audio files were not the actual voices of the two elderly women. The lengthy pauses between questions raised their suspicions.
Both things happened to me, too.
Diary of a Scam
I have been listed on the National “Do Not Call Registry” for over two decades. It’s obvious that AAA Natural Gas and its Third-Party Verification contractor, AnswerNet, do not check the Registry before they make marketing calls.
January 18, 2024
I received two calls from two people representing they were PG&E employees, claiming — during what was supposed to be a “recorded voice log” (TPV) — “We are PG&E. They told me I was eligible for a 30% discount on my PG&E bill. That’s why it seemed so odd that the first caller kept asking for my name, billing address, and PG&E account number. She kept telling me to answer only using “yes” or “no.”
I grew very concerned. If she really was a PG&E employee, she should have access to my billing records.
Then, she added a co-worker to the call. He began by asking me the same questions — interspersed with very long pauses where I could hear static or machinery noises in the background. He, too, asked me to answer his questions using “yes” or “no.”
I hung up the phone, terminating the call. Within one minute, she called back and angrily chastised me for ending the call “... before we completed our process for determining your eligibility for the 30% discount.” I hung up again. I assumed that by ending the call, I had avoided the scam.
At no point did they state they were an “Enrollment Agent” making marketing calls on behalf of a CTA. They never told me the name of their company, “AAA Energy Services,” but repeatedly claimed to be PG&E employees.
January 23, 2024
Worried about the calls — to make sure, I called PG&E to report the scam. I formally filed a grievance with PG&E, stating that I suspected a scam.
I requested that PG&E restore my natural gas service to the “bundled service,” which it had been providing for the 25-plus years I’ve lived at this address.
I assumed that reporting the scam to PG&E would resolve the matter. It didn’t.
February 8, 2023
I was surprised to receive a welcome letter from “AAA Natural Gas” thanking me for choosing AAA to be the CTA for my gas service through PG&E. I had done no such thing.
The “Welcome Letter” contained a “Terms and Conditions” insert with contract “legalese,” which asserted I had agreed to continue paying PG&E for “transport” delivery charges. Separately, I would be paying AAA for “gas supply charges,” I would never have agreed to or signed such a vaguely defined, opaque contract.
February 16, 2024
I received a letter from PG&E nine days after filing the scam complaint. PG&E took the word of AAA Natural Gas! The opening line of PG&E’s letter read:
“We received a request to change your gas commodity supplier from PG&E to a third-party gas supplier. This request came from the CTA and should have been issued with your permission.”
PG&E’s letter was shocking because it assumed that I had enrolled with another gas supplier and that I had pre-approved changes to my PG&E account. I had not done either of those two things!
March 19, 2024
I filed a formal written complaint with the CPUC’s “Consumer Affairs Branch” (CAB), noting the letter from PG&E switching me to AAA Natural Gas.
March 24, 2024
I filed a similar complaint with the Better Business Bureau of Tulsa against “Triple AAA Energy Services,” documenting the scam phone call and illegal enrollment. AAA Natural Gas eventually provided BBB an MP3 audio file asserting it contained “proof of enrollment.”
Within two days, I had transcribed the TPV file. The audio was very bad quality. What is evident in the TPV audio is that there is a switch to another male voice about 4 minutes in. An unknown male’s strong voice (with what seems to be an Indian accent) answered the remaining questions through the end of the recording; it was not my very hoarse voice (I am undergoing medical treatment for growths on my vocal cords). A copy of the 11-minute transcript is available online.
April 7, 2024
I provided a copy of the verbatim transcript to the BBB and the CPUC’s Utilities Enforcement Branch (UEB). The so-called “Third-Party Verification” agent named “Gail” at AnswerNet.com was never brought on to the line with me to complete enrollment as AAA claimed.
The TPV file was obviously a complete scam. The verbatim transcript shows it was digitally edited.
May 3, 2024
Bernice Zhu, a Regulatory Analyst in the CPUC’s UEB, e-mailed me the TPV file AAA Natural Gas provided to the CPUC. It matched the TPV recording the BBB had shared with me. It did, exactly. I assumed, therefore, that there was a single recording. (I was wrong because later AAA claimed there had been two TPV recordings).
June 28, 2024
The CPUC asked me to sign and return a “Declaration” under penalty of perjury summarizing what had transpired in illegally enrolling me as an AAA customer. I returned the signed Declaration.
July 5, 2024
The UEB issued Citation No. UEB-003-0197 against AAA for illegally enrolling me as a customer and assessed the paltry $1,000 penalty.
August 2, 2024
AAA filed an Appeal to the CPUC’s citation, alleging that my initial Declaration lacked credibility and that the Consumer Protection and Enforcement Division (CPED) erred in relying on it. It was in this appeal that CPUC learned that AAA had two TPV recordings. Why hadn’t AAA submitted the second TPV recording to the CPUC on April 5?
January 30, 2025
I submitted a second Declaration to the UEB disputing an assertion AAA raised in its “Material Disputed Facts” — a 15-page “Response Regarding Evidentiary Hearings.” It asserted, “Mr. Monette-Shaw regularly uses technology to assist with telephone calls.” That’s not true, and it is an assertion made out of whole cloth and presented during proceedings before the CPUC’s Administrative Law Judge, Debbie Chiv. I did not use my laptop’s text-to-audiofeature in any communications with AAA or PG&E.
In that filing, Rachel Strealy claimed she had called and spoken with me by phone and “had played the TPV for him.” That was another lie.
February 21, 2025
I submitted a third Declaration contesting “Undisputed” material facts in a “Joint Case Management Statement” because several items in that list were factually untrue and inaccurate. I refuted AAA’s repeated assertion that I “routinely” use technology to assist in phone calls. I do not — other than oral testimony at SF Health Commission meetings).
Moving through the Administrative Law Judge’s docket, several subsequent AAA filings falsely alleged that I had deliberately “withheld” material facts in the case, asserting I had not disclosed I relied on using my laptop’s text-to-voice feature during phone calls. Its legal counsel, Holland & Knight, insinuated I had somehow digitally altered the TPV recording. I don’t have those technical skills.
February 26, 2025
AAA agreed to drop its Appeal of the $1,000 fine. They claimed the parties (AAA and the CPUC) had agreed it was in the “interests of judicial economy” but only if AAA could do so without admission of wrongdoing. AAA added that CPUC agreed to dismiss AAA’s Appeal “with prejudice,” meaning that AAA would escape its violation of the “do not call” list —preventing me from filing an amended complaint. Hopefully, the dismissal will not apply to my pending complaint with the Federal Trade Commission over AAA and its marketing contractors for violating the National “Do Not Call Registry.”
Tiger Natural Gas’ $3.7 Million Lawsuit Settlement
AAA’s affiliate, Tiger Natural Gas (TNG), was the subject of a Federal class action lawsuit in 2018 named “Fishman v. Tiger Natural Gas, Inc.,” before US District Court Judge William Alsup. (C 17-05351 WHA). Tiger had operated in PG&E’s territory since 2013 as a CPUC-approved Core Transport Agent, and was subject to CPUC regulations requiring proper customer enrollment through an approved customer sign-up process requiring the CTA — not its authorized sales agent(s) — retain the audio recordings of sales call for one year and the TPV audio of the customers’ enrollment for two years. TNG didn’t keep copies of the TPVs for the two years.
Of interest, TNG employee, Rachael Strealy, provided testimony that Tiger could receive copies of sales call records upon request in case customer complaints arose.
California Penal Code §632 requires that sales pitches must request and obtain customer consent to record the calls.
Judge Alsup’s Order proposed a gross settlement fund of $3.7 million to be distributed evenly among the 26,637 class members. California’s Recording Law provides for $5,000 in statutory damages per violation, which put Tiger at risk for $133 million in statutory damages plaintiffs requested.
Judge Alsup reduced the potential $133 million in statutory damages to $3.7 million settlement. Tiger asserted that the risk of the Defendant’s bankruptcy and the Class Action plaintiffs would be left with much less. Alsup wrote: “… [D]efendants have demonstrated their limited financial resources and inability to pay a more reasonable settlement.” Alsup opined, “Tiger is a family-owned business with one shareholder.” That appears to be Tiger’s Lori Johnson. Did Alsup miss that TNG is 100% owned by Lori Johnson? Or that Tiger’s application to do business in Nebraska claims Tiger had 100 stockholder shares issued with the value of $12.8 million in 2022 in stockholder equity?
A slap on the wrist — 2.8.% of the potential $133 million Plaintiffs were statutorily due.
After Alsup’s February 2019 Order, Tiger and AAA went on to start racking up the 532 abusive marketing complaints and the $377,000 in CPUC fines.
Glut of Consumer Complaints Against CTAs
It took the CPUC 27 years after deregulating natural gas services in California to realize that rogue CTAs need a deterrence against possible fraudulent activity.
The CPUC’s “Utilities Enforcement Branch” (UEB) began issuing citations and penalties against rogue CTAs only in 2019.
In the past six years since 2019, there has been a flood of 4,900 customer consumer complaints filed with the CPUC involving abusive marketing, and a staggering 604 $1,000 citations, as shown in Table 1. The 604 citations and penalties represent just 12.4% of the complaints received — suggesting the CPUC isn’t aggressively investigating and punishing the rogue CTAs to protect consumers and deter this predatory practice behavior.
Table 1 contains a list of the 23 CTAs customer complaints involving only abusive marketing practices, such as illegal enrollment of customers without their consent.
The UEB’s list of citations and penalties it has assessed against the 23 CTAs is also available here.
And, as for “AAA Natural Gas,” its significant 549 abusive marketing complaints and $377,000 in citation penalties should have also triggered a CPUC consumer protection alert!
During the CPUC’s delayed investigation of AAA’s re-enrollment of 437 customers, the UEB issued “cease-and-desist” letters to AAA Natural Gas, which had re-enrolled 437 customers without obtaining new enrollment authorizations. In AAA’s “Plan of Correction” submitted in response, AAA claimed it “has instituted new directives to its customer service department that any future customer re-enrollment will require new and separate third-party verification.”
Just 10 months later, UEB was forced to issue a second Cease & Desist letter to prevent enrolling customers until its Third-Party Verification (TPV) process fully complied with the requirements.
Consumer Warning
Readers who encounter similar scams “slamming” your natural gas service should fight aggressively against AAA Natural Gas, or any other rogue Core Transport Agents who scam you. Demand the TPV audio files. Transcribe the recordings, and pinpoint where on the audiotapes it is clear it is not your voice, or the voice of anyone in your household who could approve such a change to your utility service accounts.
File a complaint with the CPUC’s Consumer Affairs Branch (CAB), and advocate that the CAB escalate your complaint to the CPUC’s Utility Enforcement Branch (UEB) and their Regulatory Analysts. Stay on top of communicating aggressively and frequently with CPUC staff to make sure your complaint isn’t swept under the rug.
Be sure to check your utility bills carefully, and check the gas section of your gas and electric bill regularly to make sure your aren’t “slammed” to a CTA without your consent. Share this news with your neighbors and friends, and be aware these scammers target the elderly. If you get a call that makes you suspect it involves scammers, hang up on them promptly.
And if you were on the “National Do Not Call Registry” and received telemarketing calls from AAA Natural Gas and/or its TPV verification provider, AnswerNet, be sure to file a complaint with the FTC’s “Do Not Call Registry” staff. After all, while the CPUC’s $25 “Do Not Call” violation penalty never took effect, and since the $1,000 CPUC penalty for illegal customer enrollment hasn’t deterred AAA from racking up 549 “abusive marketing” complaints, perhaps the FTC’s $50,120 penalty per violation might force AAA to start complying with the law about fraudulent customer enrollment and force AAA to cease-and-desist from its telemarketing enrollment of customers on the “National Do Not Call Registry”!
Don’t just roll over, play dead, and let these bad actors scam you!
Monette-Shaw has been a columnist for San Francisco’s Westside Observer newspaper for almost two decades, and is a member of the California First Amendment Coalition (FAC) and the ACLU. He operates stopLHHdownsize.com. Contact him at monette-shaw@westsideobserver.com.
March 2025
