PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIO~ OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON

Transcription

1 PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIO~ OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON At a session of the PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA in the City of Charleston on the 271h day of December CASE NO MC-GI DANNY MARKS, JR., doing business as MARKS TOWING General Investigation into the tariff application and billing practices of Danny W. Marks, doing business as Marks Towing, in the operation of third-party tow service. CASE NO MC-GI DANNY MARKS, JR., doing business as BUCKS TOWING General Investigation into the tariff application and billing practices of Danny Marks, Jr., doing business as Buck s Towing, in the operation of third-party tow service. COMMISSION ORDER The Commission modifies the Recommended Decision. BACKGROUND Case No MC-FC and Case No MC-GI On August 17, 2015, Great American Insurance (Complainant) filed a complaint docketed as Case No MC-FC that alleged Danny W. Marks, dba Marks Towing (Marks Towing) overcharged on labor, hours and rates for a tow that occurred on July 27, On May 13, 2016, the Division of Administrative Law Judges (ALJ) issued a Recommended Decision directing Marks Towing to refund the Complainant $6, On May 3 1, 20 16, Marks Towing filed a Notice of Settlement and Exceptions to the Recommended Decision and reported that the Complainant and Marks Towing had reached a settlement in this matter.

2 On August 26, 2016, Commission Staff filed a petition to initiate a general investigation into the operation of third-party tow services by Marks Towing that included its billing practices and the application of its tariff. On November 28, 2016, the Commission issued an Order in Case No MC-FC that (i) acknowledged and accepted the monetary settlement in resolution of the dispute over the amount owed for third-party tow services, (ii) closed Case No O-MC-FC, (iii) initiated a General Investigation (GI) into the application of tariff and billing practices of Marks Towing in the operation of its third-party tow services, (iv) made Marks Towing a respondent to the GI and (v) required that Marks Towing file a response to the Staff petition within ten days. The GI was docketed as Case No MC-GI. On December 8, 2016, Scott Summers, former counsel to Marks Towing, filed a letter that stated he received a copy of the Staff petition for the GI, but had not been retained by Marks Towing. He requested that the Commission effect service of the petition on Commission Order on Marks Towing and consider his letter as (i) a general denial of the allegations in the Staff petition for a GI and (ii) a request for an extension of any deadlines in this matter until proper service can be effectuated. Also on December 8, 2016, the Executive Secretary served the Staff petition and the November 28, 2016 Commission Order that instituted the GI docketed as Case NO MC-GI. On December 15, 2016, Staff filed its first set of data requests to be served upon Danny W. Marks, doing business as Marks Towing. Staff requested Marks Towing file responses to the data requests as soon as possible, but no later than January 4, On December 21, 2016, Marks Towing filed a request for an extension of time to gather the material requested by Staff in its December 15, 2016 data requests. Marks Towing stated, Not only is this a time consuming task as it involves two locations of operations, it also falls directly within two holidays as well as being the busy season for our industry. Additionally, there was an electrical fire at our Walton location on the night of Monday, December 19, 2016, that destroyed a garage and one of the offices used at that facility. Marks Towing requested a two-week extension for providing responses to the Staff data request. On December 28, 2016, the Cornmission granted Marks Towing request for an extension of time in which to provide responses to the Staff data requests. The Order directed Marks Towing to file its response to the Staff data requests on or before January 18,

3 On January 3, 2017, Staff filed its Initial Joint Staff Memorandum and stated that it was in the process of gathering information, would continue its investigation of this matter and would file its final findings and recommendations in a timely manner. On January 13, 2017, Marks Towing notified the Cornmission that the documents requested by Staff in the December 15, 2016 data request no longer existed because the fire that occurred destroyed their main office and file storage area. Marks Towing stated that they had paperwork from December 20, 20 16, forward if that should suffice. On February 9, 2017, Staff filed a second set of data requests. Staff requested Marks Towing to file its responses no later than March 1,2017. On April 14, 2017, the Commission directed Marks Towing to file a response to the August 26, 2016 Commission Staff petition to open a general investigation and to the November 16, 2016 Staff final memorandum within ten days of the date of the April 14,2017 Order. The April 14, 2017 Order also consolidated Case Nos MC-GI and MC-GI. Case No MC-P On October 12, 20 16, a letter dated September 18, 20 16, from two City of Spencer Police Department Officers (officers) was docketed as Case No MC-P. The officers described an investigation that included the need for the towing services of Danny Marks, Jr., dba Bucks Towing (Bucks Towing). In the letter, the officers alleged that (i) Marks family operations are usually out of compliance with Commission rules and (ii) the Marks family has a monopoly on the towing services in Roane County. On November 16, 2016, Staff filed a Final Memorandum that included the petition for a GI into the application of the tariff and billing practices of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing in connection with their third-party tow services. Staff stated the officers used Marks Towing and Bucks Towing interchangeably because the Marks family owns and operates both. Staff asserted that the letter from the officers corroborates the evidence included in its petition for a GI into the application of the tariff and billing practices of Marks Towing that the Commission granted and docketed as Case No MC-GI and recommended that the Commission initiate a GI into the application of the tariff and billing practice of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing, in the operation of their third-party tow services. On April 14, 2017, the Commission issued an Order that opened a GI into the application of the tariff and billing practices Bucks Towing in the operation of its thirdparty towing services. The Order made Bucks Towing a respondent in Case No MC-GI. The Order directed the Commission s Executive Secretary to serve a copy of the October 12, 2016 letter from the police officers and the November 16,

4 Staff Petition for a general investigation within ten days of the date of the April 14, 2017 Commission Order upon Bucks Towing. The Order also required that Bucks Towing file a response to the November 16, Staff petition for a general investigation within ten days of the date of April 14, 2017 Order. The April 14, 2017 Order consolidated Case Nos MC-GI and MC-GI. The Order required that Commission Staff file its final report in both cases on or before 4:OO p.m., on May 30, The Order required that Bucks Towing file a response to the Staff report filed in this case ( MC-GI) no later than 4:OO pm., on June 30, These cases were also referred for a decision to be rendered on or before September 29, Consolidated Cases The April 14, Order required Marks Towing to file a response to the Staff report filed in Case No, MC-GI by June 30, The Order also dismissed Case No MC-P. On May 19, 2017, Staff filed a Motion to Compel Marks Towing to respond to Staffs second set of data requests previously filed on February 9, Marks Towing had been ordered to file responses no later than March 1, Staff requested information related to the online accounting system Marks Towing mentioned in its filing. Staff requested certain information and clarification regarding the fire that allegedly destroyed all of the invoice records of Marks Towing. Staff noted that in past cases against Marks Towing at the Commission, it was apparent Marks Towing created electronic invoices, ed copies of invoices to customer, and scanned or faxed copies of handwritten invoices to customers and/or insurance companies. Staff requested that Marks Towing search through its computer databases and histories, and an employee s, John Holden s, computer database and history for any invoices or related records for all first-party and third-party tows froin the last three years, and then to provide Staff with any pertinent information that Marks Towing found. Staff stated that Marks Towing did not submit any information in response to Staffs second data request and Staff needs the information requested in order to make a full and complete report to the Commission. On May 19, 2017, Staff filed its first data request on Bucks Towing. requested that Bucks Towing file responses no later than May 29,2017. Staff On May 26, 2017, a Procedural Order was entered that set this case for hearing on July 13, 2017, in Spencer, West Virginia, at the Roane County Courthouse. On May , the Procedural Order was entered that granted Staffs motion to compel. The Order required Marks Towing and Bucks Towing to file full responses to Staffs second data requests on June 9,

5 On May 30, 2017, Staff filed its Final Joint Staff Memorandum. Staff reported that as of May 19, 20 17, neither Marks Towing nor Bucks Towing had filed responses to either of the general investigation cases, as ordered by the Commission. Bucks Towing failed to respond in any manner whatsoever to the general investigation case. Marks Towing did not respond to the second set of data requests in Case No MC-GI. A motion to compel Marks Towing and/or Bucks Towing to respond to Staffs second set of data requests filed by Staff on May 19, Staff also filed its first set of data requests to Bucks Towing on May 19,2017. The Final Joint Staff Memorandum contained an extensive history of the Commission interaction with Marks Towing and Bucks Towing. See, Final Joint Staff Memorandum 4-9. Staff determined that between 2006 and May 30, 2017, there were fourteen formal complaint cases filed against Marks Towing. Two additional formal complaints were filed after the general investigation (Case No MC-GI) was initiated by the Commission. Staff stated that a review of those matters illustrates a twofold pattern of bad behavior whereby Marks Towing first violated its Commission approved tariff and the Commission s Rules Governing Motor Carriers, Private Commercial Carriers, and the Filing of Evidence of Insurance and Financial Responsibility BY Motor Carriers, 150 C.S.R. 9 (Motor Carrier Rules) by overcharging customers and failing to provide customers with an invoice that includes all of the information required to be on every third-party tow invoice. Then, after a formal complaint was filed against Marks Towing, it violated the Commission s Rules of Practice and Procedure, 150 C.S.R. 1 (Procedural Rules) by being wholly uncooperative, refusing to respond to Formal Complaints, refusing to respond to interrogatories, refusing to show up for evidentiary hearings, violating Procedural Orders, violating Commission Orders, and refusing to issue refunds or pay civil fines ordered by the Commission. Despite many admonishments by the Commission over the years, Marks Towing continues to operate in that manner with impunity. Staff explained that Marks Towing and Bucks Towing were not properly registered with the West Virginia Secretary of State. They have separate Department of Transportation numbers and are registered with the Commission as two separate entities. Danny Marks is the owner of both entities and his father, Danny W. Marks, Sr., and his mother Terrie Marks, work for both of the towing companies. Staff argued that any penalty or action against Marks Towing will have no effect if the same is not imposed on Bucks Towing. The public will not be protected and the problem will not be fixed if the same person who owns and operates Marks Towing is permitted to own and operate another towing service next door to Marks Towing. Staff concluded that the numerous third-party tow complaint cases, both past and present, show the same disturbing pattern of alleged overcharges, non-compliant invoices, refusal to file answers and responses, refusal to attend evidentiary hearings, refusal to pay refunds that were ordered, refusal to pay civil penalties that were levied, 5

6 and a complete disregard for the Commission processes by Marks Towing. The actions of Marks Towing amount to an unreasonable practice pursuant to W.Va. Code and tj24a-5-1. The Commission has the power to investigate unreasonable and unjust practices of regulated entities. Staff recommended that the Commission revoke the authority of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing to charge for third-party tows pursuant to W.Va. Code 24A-2-2a, cancel the Commission approved tariff of both Marks Towing and Bucks Towing, require Commission Staff to issue a press release of the revocations and notify all authorities and law enforcement agencies in the counties services by Marks Towing and Bucks Towing that they are no longer authorized to engage in third-party tow services in West Virginia. On July 11, 2017, the Commission received correspondence signed by John Holden. John Holden requested that the hearing scheduled to take place on July 13, 2017, be continued. The letter explained that Danny Marks, Jr., was in South Carolina when he learned his West Virginia driver s license was suspended. Mr. Holden explained that Mr. Marks was attempting to resolve the problem with his driver s license but would not be able to return to West Virginia for the hearing. He also explained that if the hearing was not continued or postponed, someone would have to drive to South Carolina and bring Mr. Marks back to West Virginia for the hearing. Mr. Holden did not explain his relationship to Mr. Marks or to Marks Towing or Bucks Towing. On July 12, 2017, a Procedural Order was issued that cancelled the hearing scheduling for July 13, On July 13, 2017, a Procedural Order was issued that rescheduled the hearing for July 27,20 17, in Spencer, West Virginia, at the Roane County Courthouse. On July 27, 2017, the hearing took place. Danny W. Marks, Danny Marks, Jr., Marks Towing and Bucks Towing did not appear at the hearing. Mr. John Holden appeared at the hearing and testified as a contract employee of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing. Staffs witness, Jennifer Moore, also testified at the hearing. On August 1 5, 20 17, the Commission received correspondence, signed by Danny Marks, Jr., that stated, Effective August 11, 2017 Marks Towing of Spencer will no longer accept 3rd party tows unless specifically requested by owner. At the end of the letter Mr. Marks stated, Owners always maintain the right to request Bucks Towing. On September 20, 2017, Staff filed a Further Final Joint Staff Memorandum in which it reported on certain actions taken by Danny Marks, Jr., since the Commission hearing on July 27, Staff explained that two newspaper advertisements have been paid for by employees and/or representatives of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing and 6

7 have been published in the Roane County newspaper regarding the Commission s investigation at issue in this case. The first advertisement was published on Thursday, August 3, 2017, one week after the Commission s hearing took place on July 27, The advertisements were misleading and disingenuous. The advertisements did not state the specific reasons why the third-party towing service would no longer be provided. The advertisement contained a copy of the letter from the officers in Case No MC-P and stated that Marks Towing and Bucks Towing were having problems with the Commission because of that letter and they could not provide the information to the Commission to disprove the wrongful allegations due to the fire at one of their businesses. The advertisement did not mention (i) that the General Investigation that was instituted months before Case No MC-P, (ii) the long list of bad actions and proven allegations of wrongdoing by Marks Towing, and (iii) that Marks Towing and Bucks Towing failed to show up for numerous hearings they requested at the Commission, including the hearing in this case where they would have had an opportunity to defend themselves and disprove the allegations therein. The second advertisement notified the residents of Roane County that Marks Towing and Bucks Iowing would no longer accept third-party tows as of August 1 1, 20 17, due to the issues published a week before. Staff also attached to its Further Final Joint Staff Memorandum various reports from the West Virginia Department of Environment Protection (DEP) and West Virginia Department of Transportation. The reports contained further allegations of misinformation from Marks Towing to authorities regarding their business locations listed with the Commission and Roane County The information also contained allegations of environmental violations and operating an unlicensed salvage yard. Staff confirmed with the representative of DEP that enforcement action has been taken against Marks Towing and further enforcement action may occur. Staff also learned that the DOT has taken enforcement action against Marks Towing for operation of an unlicensed salvage yard. Staff explained that the business locations of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing are not licensed salvage yards. They are storage lots for a wrecker company. Commission records show that Marks Towing has an unsecured storage lot due to the fence having been taken down. Staff explained that this was a violation of Motor Carrier Rule 5.9, which required storage lots to have a fence at least eight feet in height. The storage lots also have more than three junked or dismantled vehicles. This is also a violation of Motor Carrier Rule 5.9. Staff recommended that (i) the Commission find that the voluntary removal of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing from the third-party rotation does not absolve the tow companies of any responsibility to cooperate with the Commission in these General Investigations and other matters before the Commission, (ii) the Commission adopt in full the recommendation from Staff s Final Report dated May 30, 2017, (iii) the 7

8 Commission order that all outstanding issues from these two General Investigations, including but not limited to complete responses to Staffs First Data Requests, have been satisfied in full, and all refunds and civil penalties ordered against Marks Towing and Bucks Towing in previous cases, that have not yet been satisfied, be paid in full with proof submitted to the Commission before any consideration is given to reinstatement of authority for either tow company to perform third-party tows in the State of West Virginia and (iv) the Commission order that the individuals associated with Marks Towing and Bucks Towing, including Danny Marks, Jr., Danny Marks Sr., Terri Marks, and John Holden not be permitted to acquire any authority from the Commission to operate a new wrecker company for any manner of towing operations in West Virginia, whether first-party or third-party, unless and until the actions set forth in Recommendation Number 3 above have been satisfactorily completed. On September 29, 2017, the ALJ issued a Recommended Decision. The ALJ ordered that (i) the third-party towing service of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing be revoked, (ii) the tariffs of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing be cancelled, (iii) the Executive Secretary publish the attached legal notice of the revocations, (iv) the Executive Secretary issue the attached press release regarding the revocations, (v) that the 91 1 authorities and law enforcement agencies in Roane, Clay and Kanawha Counties be notified of the revocations, (vi) all outstanding issues in Case Nos MC-GI and MC-GI and previous formal complaints filed with the Commission against Marks Towing and Bucks Towing be satisfied, in full, before either entity is allowed to petition for reinstatement of authority to perform third-party tow services, and (vii) that all individuals (including but not limited to Danny Marks Sr., Danny W. Marks, Jr., Terri Marks and John Holden) associated with Marks Towing and Bucks Towing not be permitted to acquire any authority from the Commission to operate a wrecker company for any manner of third-party towing operations in West Virginia, unless and until all of the outstanding issues in Case Nos MC-GI and MC-G1, and all previous formal complaints filed with the Commission against Marks Towing and Bucks Towing be satisfied, in full. On October 2, 2017, the ALJ issued a Corrective Order to the Recommended Decision. The ALJ stated that all press releases must be requested from the Commission s Director of Communications, Susan Small. The Order was requested by Staff. The Recommended Decision was corrected to strike the fourth ordering paragraph regarding the Press Release and the Appendix B. On October 12, 20 17, Marks Towing and Bucks Towing filed Exceptions to the Recommended Decision. 8

9 DISCUSSION Marks Towing and Bucks Towing argued in its first exception that the ALJ did not make a finding to the number of complaints which were dismissed, ruled in favor of the Marks Towing or Bucks Towing or settled. The ALJ s Finding of Fact Number 5 stated Between 2006 and May 30, 2017, there were fourteen formal complaint cases filed against Marks Towing. See Final Joint Staff Memorandum filed on May 30, The ALJ did not go into extensive detail in the Recommended Decision regarding the formal complaints filed against Marks Towing. It is not necessary, however, to repeat the pages of information regarding the formal complaints when the information is found in the Final Joint Staff Memorandum. Id The Final Joint Staff Memorandum provides details for each of the fourteen complaint cases that have been filed against Marks Towing. The Commission will deny the exception because Finding of Fact Number 5 adequately references the prior cases with sufficient specificity to determine the outcome in those matters. In the second exception, Marks Towing and Bucks Towing argued against Finding of Fact Number 10. In that Finding, the ALJ noted Staffs recommendation in its Final Joint Staff Memorandum to revoke the operating authority for third-party tows of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing because of the long standing behaviors of Danny W. Marks, Jr. and the formal complaints filed against Marks Towing. Marks Towing and Bucks Towing stated that there is not a formal complaint on file regarding Bucks I 7 I owing. Marks Towing and Bucks Towing are correct that there are no complaints on file against Bucks Towing. Marks Towing and Bucks Towing are both owned and operated by Danny W. Marks, Jr.. Tr However, the operations have separate Department of Transportation numbers and are registered with the Commission as two separate entities. Final Joint Staff Memorandum filed on May 30, The long standing behaviors of Marks Towing cannot be attributed to Bucks Towing. We will strike Finding of Fact Number 10 and Conclusions of Law 2 and 3. Marks Towing and Bucks Towing third exception argued against the ordering paragraph that required a press release be issued regarding the revocation of the thirdparty towing authority of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing. Marks Towing and Bucks Towing asserted that the Commission does not have authority to publish information about this case or other cases as a press release. The ALJ issued a Corrective Order on October 2, 2017, to strike the ordering paragraph regarding the press release and the press release attached as Appendix B to the Recommended Decision. Therefore, a press release was not a requirement of the Recommended Decision. The Recommended Decision did, however, require that public 9

10 notice be published. The Commission will not require public notice of the revocation and will strike the ordering paragraph regarding public notice. The Commission will only notify the 91 1 agencies and all law enforcement agencies that Marks Towing and Bucks Towing are no longer authorized to provide third-party towing services in West Virginia. Finally, Marks Towing and Bucks Towing excepted to the ordering paragraph that required Marks Towing and Bucks Towing to satisfy all outstanding issues in Case Nos MC-GI and MC-GI and all previous formal complaints filed with the Commission against Marks Towing and Bucks Towing. Marks Towing and Bucks Towing asserted that the Commission does not have jurisdiction to enforce collection issues. It is true that the Commission does not have jurisdiction to directly force payment of the refunds that would have to be pursued in a proper forum. Marks Towing and Bucks Towing have voluntarily relinquished their operating authorities and therefore will have to register with the Commission in the future if it wishes to perform third-party tows. In order to register with the Commission in the future, we will require that Marks Towing resolve the issues in Case No MC-GI and the previous complaint cases filed with the Cornmission. The issues include overcharging customers, noncompliant invoices, refusal to file answers and responses, refusal to attend evidentiary hearings, and refusals to pay refunds or civil penalties. However, we will modify the Recommended Decision to exclude Bucks Towing from this requirement because there are no formal complaints against Bucks Towing. As described above, the Commission will modify the Recommended Decision and will strike Finding of Fact Number 10 and Conclusions of Law 2 and 3. The Commission will also strike the ordering paragraph that requires public notice and will modify the ordering paragraphs to exclude Bucks Towing from satisfying the issues in previous formal complaints if Bucks Towing wishes to register with the Commission in the future. Marks Towing and Bucks Towing filed the two newspaper articles that showed that both companies have voluntarily revoked their operating authority. Therefore, the Commission will adopt the ordering paragraphs in the Recommended Decision that revoke the operating authority of both Marks Towing and Bucks Towing. We will also cancel the accompanying tariff of both entities. The Commission will notify the relevant law enforcement agencies that Marks Towing and Bucks Towing have voluntarily revoked their operating authority with the Commission. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Commission initiated a General Investigation into the application of tariff and billing practices of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing in operation of its third- 10

11 party towing services MC-P). (See, Commission Order in Case Nos MC-FC and 2. Marks Towing and Bucks Towing are owned by Danny Marks, Jr. The entities have separate Department of Transportation numbers and are registered with the Commission as separate entities. (See, Final Joint Staff Memorandum filed May 30,2017; Tr. at 16-18). 3. Marks Towing has repeatedly violated its Commission approved tariff and the Commission Motor Carrier Rules by overcharging customers, failing to provide customers with an invoice that includes all the information required to be on every thirdparty tow invoice. (Final Joint Staff Memorandum filed May 30,2017, Tr. at 12-13). 4. Marks Towing has repeatedly violated the Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure by being wholly uncooperative with Commission Staff, refusing to respond to formal complaints, refusing to respond to interrogatories, refusing to show up for evidentiary hearings, violating Procedural Order and Commission Order, and refusing to issue refunds or pay civil fines ordered by the Commission. (Id.). 5. There are no formal complaints filed against Bucks Towing. 6. After the hearing, Danny Marks, Jr. filed two newspaper advertisements that indicated that Danny Marks, Jr. had voluntarily revoked Marks Towing and Bucks 'lowing third-party tow services. (Staff Memorandum filed on September 20,20 17). CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Because Marks Towing and Bucks Towing filed advertisements that indicated that each had voluntarily revoked their respective operating authorities regarding third-party tows, it is reasonable to adopt the Recommended Decision that revokes the operating authority and cancels the accompanying tariffs of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing. 2. Because of the voluntary revocation of the operating authorities of Marks Towing and Bucks Towing regarding third-party tows, it is reasonable for the Commission to notify all "91 1" authorities and law enforcement agencies in Roane, Clay and Kanawha Counties that Marks Towing and Bucks Towing are no longer authorized by the Public Service Cornmission to engage in third-party tow services. 3. Because of the history of repeated violations with the Commission's Motor Carrier Rules and non-compliance with the Commission's Procedural Rules, the Commission will require that all outstanding issues in Case No MC-GI and previous formal complaints filed with the Commission against Marks Towing be 11

12 satisfied, in full, before Marks Towing petitions for reinstatement of authority to perform third-party tow services. 4. It is reasonable to not allow any individuals (including but not limited to Danny Marks Sr., Danny Marks, Jr., Terri Marks and John Holden) associated with Marks Towing to acquire any authority from the Commission to operate a wrecker company for any manner of third-party towing operations in West Virginia, unless and until all of the outstanding issues in Case No MC-GI, and all previous formal complaints filed with the Commission against Marks Towing be satisfied, in full. 5. The Commission will not require public notice because Marks Towing and Bucks Towing have published advertisements that indicated that Marks Towing and Bucks Towing will no longer be performing third-party tows. 6. The Commission will modi@ the Recommended Decision to strike ordering paragraph number three that requires public notice. 7. The Commission will modify the Recommended Decision to strike Finding of Fact 10 and Conclusions of Law 2 and 3 because there are no formal complaints filed against Bucks Towing and Bucks Towing is a separate entity from Marks Towing. ORDER IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the September 29, 2017 Recommended Decision is modified as reflected in the Discussion above and in the Ordering Paragraphs below. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission will strike Finding of Fact Number 10 and Conclusions of Law 2 and 3 of the Recommended Decision. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission will strike the third ordering paragraph in the Recommended Decision that states: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission s Executive Secretary publish the attached legal notice of the revocation of the third-party towing authority of Danny Marks, Jr., doing business as Marks Towing, and Danny Marks, Jr., doing business as Bucks Towing, by publishing the attached notice of Roane, Clay and Kanawha Counties once a week for two consecutive weeks. IT IS FURTHERED ORDERED that the Commission will modify ordering paragraph number six of the Recommended Decision to read as follows: 12

13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all outstanding issues in Case No MC-GI and previous formal complaints filed with the Cominission against Marks Towing be satisfied, in full, before Marks Towing is allowed to petition for reinstatement of authority to perform third-party towing services. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission will modif) ordering paragraph number seven of the Recommended Decision to read as follows: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all individuals (including but not limited to Danny Marks, Sr., Danny W. Marks, Jr., Terri Marks and John Holden) associated with Marks Towing not be permitted to acquire any authority from the Commission to operate a wrecker for any manner of third-party towing operations in West Virginia, unless and until all of the outstanding issues in Case No MC-GI, and all previous formal complaints filed with the Commission against Marks Towing be satisfied, in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that except as modified by this Order, the September 29, 2017 Recommended Decision as corrected on October 2, 2017, remains in full force and effect. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that upon entry of this Order this case shall be removed from the Cornmission docket of open cases. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Executive Secretary of the Commission serve a copy of this Order by electronic service on all parties of record who have filed an e-service agreement, and by United States First Class Mail on all parties of record who have not filed an e-service agreement, and on Commission Staff by hand delivery. A True Copy, Teste, Ingrid Ferrell Executive Secretary MFP/sc ~ 13