Jerry L. Cochran Complainant 1137 Crest Drive Morgantown, WV April

Transcription

1 ~ ~ ~~ Jerry L. Cochran Complainant 1137 Crest Drive Morgantown, WV April Ingrid Ferrell, Director Executive Secretary Division West Virgbia Public Service Commission P.O. Box 812 Charleston, West Virginia Dear Ms. Ferrell: Motion to Dismiss Letter from Attomev Glover Re: Case No W-C Jerry L. Cochran v. River Road Public Service The purpose of this letter is to iafonn the PSC and address or dispute the statements made in the letter dated April 3,2014 fiom Attorney David C. Glover and after stating these facts I 8m asking for a Motion to dismiss said letter from Attorney David C. Glover. 1. David C. Glover states, on Saturday, March 8& 2014, the District took advantage of the first weather day permitting the work to be done and moved the Complainant s meter service to the agreed upon location. 2. David C. Glover is falsely implying that no previous weather day before March permitted the work to be done, thereby making an excuse as to why the meter had not been installed sooner. 3. There have been 16 days before March that the work could have been done. See Exhibit #2. These are clippings from the Dominion Post newspaper daily weather report. It clearly shows and supports my claim that the delay to install the meter was not due to weather conditions. This clemh shows Evlatch the Sa 2014 was not the first weather day the District could have taken advantage of, but was done to delay district liabilitv. 4. My daily log in Exhibit #2 supports my claim in item 3 and clearly ~~ disputes Glover s statement in his letter April 3,2014. ~ David C. 5. David C. Glover states the District employees worked on a Saturday in order to satisfy the Complainant. Why did he make this statement? Does it have any relevancy to the i45

2 - issues at hand? No. He lacks bts to support their refusal to comply within 30 days and is asking for forgiveness or mercy. Maybe he is asking for a pat on the back for Saturday work a Most contractors work on a Saturday b. Most contractors would welcome work in the winter months, Saturday or not. c. The PSC AU ordered 30 days not 30 business days. That maim Saturday and sunday are included. d. Attorney Glover did not state that Charles Chip Malone is 811 RRPSD employee, and he is also Michelle Malone s husband; & works five days a week for 9 c/ Morgantown Utility Board that s why the work was done on Saturday. e. Attorney Glover did not mention that RRPSD keeps the RRPSD money in the PSD which is run by Michelle and Chip Maloney see Michelle Malone s fod complaint response, We will not do any work or spend any money!! Is what Michelle Malone said to me. f So, RRPSD did not want to contract out the job even if it meant not complying with ALJ, money, before PSC des and customers. 6. Truth is this, WSD had six days to instsll the meter between Hearing Date 12/20/13 and 1/20/14 to comply with PSC ALJ s Settlement Agreement of 30 days. See Exhibit #2 Dominion Post (Newspaper) weather reported weekly, and Complainant s daily log on d e r. The Exhibit clearly shows the dates the meter could have been installed, Those dates are January lo, 13&, 14*, IS, 16*, 17*, This clearly proves Attorney Glover s statement to be false and misleading. Also: Nine other days after the 30 days given were good days to put in the meter before t h s t March 8* Those dates are: February I, 19*? nd, 23, 2014 and March stthth 1,d,7,2014. Also: You see work could have been done many times and not on a Saturdaz It is my understanding that ifa Witness s Statement is found to be fake, then one cm ask to have the whole Witness testimony be dismissed. Complainant therefore asks that Attorney Glover s letter be dismissed and an Attorney is a member of are rules to cover Code of Conduct or Ethics that should be considered B

3 7. David C. Glover said Today, a bill of sale will be forwarded to the complainant for him to execute and provide to the District, as provided for in the agreement. Clearly proving the complainant s motions, and the fact that the District s Attorney clearly understood the settlement agreement. 8. David C. Glover clearly stated in letter dated 4/3/14 to PSC that he knew what the agreement was and he admits he has not yet complied with the Settlement Agreement. 9. David C. Glover clearly stated he is aware that the complainant has filed exceptions to the Recommended Decision (see motions Dec. 30, Jan. 2 d, and March 6*) and David C. Glover did not respond to the motions. So, he defaulted. Also, see Rule 6.2.g., Rule 7.1, Rule 7.3, and 7.4 Satisfaction. 10. David C. Glover stated the district s position is that the exceptions are meritless and should be denied. The PSC is supposed to require facts, rule of law, evidence to all be submitted and within the time fime required. RRPSD Attorney has done none of these, in fact has admitted to defaulting QII the settlement agreement. Also, see Rule 5.2.g., Rule of Civil Procedure West Virginia Judiciary Rule 37(3), and item 13+w/y, /X4d,~ /& Rek. %3 9% C 11. David C. Glover letter should not have been ordered; that said; it now should be dismissed and/ or denied, and in no way considered! 12. The complainant, at this late date, still according to Rule 4.2,150CS R7 has not received the receipt showing RRPSD received the check for the Tap Fee of $ on 12/21/13. Why? Are they not required to keep track of money coming in? Otherwise how does someone know the check is not laying in a drawer or whatever? This is clearly an attempt to avoid liability. 13. Rules of Civil Procedure West Virginia Judiciary Rule 37(3) evasive or incomplete p answer or response-is to be treated as a failure to answer or respond. Therefore: &&e. Glove 9 s letter should be dismissed OCSRl Rule 9.1 motion 9.1 a. After a case is docketed based on initial filing, all requests for Commission action shall be in the form of a motion. Therefore: $liadc. Glover s letter 9 bc/ should be dismissed OCSRl Rule 9.2 Response-Unless otherwise ordered by the commission, or otherwise provided in these rules, any party wishing to respond to a motion must file a response within (1 0) days of the date the motion is served, or as otherwise ordered by the Commission. d9tc Therefore: k& C. Glover Attorney for W SD has no legal right to respond to Complainant s *Motions now, after 10 days and much more. This 4/3/14 letter and any other motion response should be dismissed.

4 16. 15OCSRl Rule Answer Rule 7.3 The content of the Attorney s letter does not M y and completely advise the parties and the Commission of the nature of the defense and does not admit or deny specifically and in detail each material allegation of the deadine answered. Therefore:* d 9+ Attorney David C. Glover C. Glover s letter should be dismissed. A. Said District would cash check upon receipt. District DID NOT. B. Said He would write up water line Bill Of Sale within a week. He DID NOT. C. Said District would put meter in within 30 days weather permitting. They DID NOT. p. Said district would accept liability upon receipt of check. District DID NOT. E. Attorney David C. Glover did not respond to Motions dated December 30*, January Znd, and March 6* therefore; under PSC rules he agrees to accept the Motium as fact. F. Attorney David C. Glover s letter 4/3/14 DID NOT prove or justify any reason for denying Complainant s Motions. So the motions in kvor of the Complainants should be ordered by PSC. * G. Ask what would the District s Attornev have said ifthe line had been broken?%e are not liable. is what he would have screamed out! * H. The only reason RRPSD Attorney is mailing Complainant now, A Bill of Sale, for the waterline is to gain favor and hope that PSC will allow his comments to be allowed as evidence in the finat decision. I trust this WILL NOT HAPPEN. What about Code of Ethics covering WV Bar Attorneys, and PSC. Wherefore: It is the Complainant s position that they are not satisfied and they will not be satisfied until the District s position is denied, and District is ordered to comply with Complainant s Formal Complaint Remedies. The Complainants would not have agreed to the Settlement Agreement knowing the District would not immediately take liability (not at the close of the hearing) but upon receipt of check as stated by David C. Glover, and stated clearly in the tpanscpipt, and firlfill the agreement set out on time. Therefore: the Complainant s Motion to dismiss Letter &om Attorney David C. Glover should be approved. Kind Regards, Ierry L. cockan Complainant 7-/!

5 PUBLIC SERVICE COmSSIUN OF WEST VIRGINU CHARLESTON April 4fh 2014 CASE NO W-C JERRY L. COCHRAN Morgantown, Monongalia County V. RNER ROAD PUBLIC SERWCE DISTRICT Westover, Monongalia County Complainant Ddendmt CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Cochraa, Complainant hereby certify.that I have served %copy of the firegoing Motion to I4ismiss Letter &om Attorney Glover to all parties of record by, David C. Glover 516 West Maih Street Clarkburg, WV Ronald E. Robertson, Jr., Esquire Public Service Commission of West V i a Legal Division P.O. Box 812 Charleston, WV Jerry L. Cocbran

6 6- J 5

7 L L.I

8 Frigid with a ii& snm, Frigid tvith pcriids of sun 1Z=A THE DOMINION POST FRIDAY, JAN. 24,2014

9 SUNDAY, JAN. 26,20 ~ ~ POST ~ MONDAY, I JAN. ~ 27% N 2014

10 OST THURSDAY, JAN. 30,2014 THE DOMINION POST MONDAY, FEB.,dink a.m. rain, rhen

11 * POST THURSDAY, FEB. 6,2014

12

13 B.20,2014. I I t as cold with clouds a - _._

14 I.

15