Confusing SoCal Edison Letter?

By an edhat reader

Not long ago I received a letter from Southern California Edison regarding the Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) for the new energy program.

The letter stated, “We’ve received your request to transfer to CCA” and included something about “rescheduling your transfer.” I was confused because everything else I read said that Santa Barbara residents would be automatically opt-ed in to the new program and it would be a seamless transition. 

I called SoCal Edison about this and they didn’t seem to understand the letter either was told I can opt-out and to call the city.  Did anyone else get this?

Avatar

Written by Anonymous

What do you think?

Comments

0 Comments deleted by Administrator

Leave a Review or Comment

7 Comments

  1. Even more confusing are these strategically timed Ed Hat postings about this. No one seems to have a problem with the city and the county opting them into a program with little to no notice. Of course it’s a seamless transition if you are not aware it’s happening.

  2. The City was deceitful with this entire process. The cost to an “average” home is double what they claim in the flyer. Also, you can already get green energy from SCE, just ask them for it, simple switch. I did it a while ago.
    Is this corruption in the city or incompetence?

  3. I didn’t get a letter from SCE. This past week I got a large postcard notice from SB clean energy. I ctober 2021 SBCE will replace SCE as your defualt provider. Hey, its November, This needed to be sent out in September. There are 3 options. Funny they chose 100% green for me. Its not an option if someone else does your choosing. No I don’t want to pay around $5 more to have this. I’ve opted out.

  4. This whole fiasco is a pea and shell game.
    CCA said the switch would raise our electric bill by about $5 per month. SCE responded by raising the distribution costs, which would impact CCA even more on their cost to us.
    I don’t know if SCE lowered their rates to compensate for the higher distribution costs. Hmmm!

  5. The whole fiasco is a scam from institutional money investors and such who hope to make a small amount on every account while they sit in offices and pretend to search for cleaner energy to sell to SB. They are not doing any service by this. There is no reason SCE could not directed to do it themselves if it is beneficial without adding to our costs and confusion. Just get the PUC back in place and make them do their job for consumers, not utilities.

  6. Months ago I called and asked to opt out. Apparently it didn’t happen. So then I called a few days ago to MAKE SURE I was OPTED OUT, but NO, I’m IN. SO I asked to be immediately removed, and the nice lady said it would take a full cycle so I’d be IN for a month. I of course asked to speak to a supervisor, and she said the same thing, that since I had been IN for 3 days I was hooked in for 30, would get a bill from them, and then I’ll be paying a reinstatement fee to Edison to return to the fold. Looks to me like it is a secondary level of bureaucracy and we’d be paying for all those desk sitters to manage the “energy” and of course it will cost more to pay all their wages. A woke scam.

Goleta Deploys the First EV ARC™ 2020 Charger in the County

Repair Service for iPod Classics?