Judge to hear cases involving emergency work orders
Share with others:
When is an emergency an emergency?
And when is it not?
That was the question Commonwealth Court Senior Judge Keith B. Quigley was asked to resolve in a contempt of court petition the state attorney general's office filed in July against Waldron Electric Co.
The attorney general's office accused the Waldron company of violating a consent agreement it signed in 2006 by telling 22 consumers that emergency situations existed at their homes that threatened their safety when no such emergencies existed.
It said Waldron then used that emergency declaration to require consumers to sign emergency work authorization forms waiving their rights to cancel contracts within three days.
It also charged that Waldron refused to refund consumer payments when the consumer, after signing an emergency work authorization form, learned that an emergency didn't exist and tried to cancel the work.
Because the pre-trial work for each of the 22 consumers couldn't be completed in a reasonable period of time, the judge decided to rule on the contempt allegations on a case-by-case basis.
Senior Deputy Attorney General Jesse F. Harvey of Pittsburgh asked the judge to consider the case of John Vazzana, an associate professor of sociology at Penn State.
Mr. Vazzana had an electrical problem with a hallway light that affected his office and a bedroom, both on the second floor of his home that had been built in the 1940s. He went to the basement, found that a breaker in the panel box was tripped and tried to replace it, something he had done before.
The electrical problem persisted.
He testified in November that the panel box was old, bent, had surface rust and had been exposed to water. He said it had been replaced on at least one occasion. He called Speedy Electric. Waldron Electric is a subcontractor of Speedy Electric.
First Published February 17, 2011 12:00 am
