IBJNews

Chrysler drives off with $2.5M refund from Duke Energy

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Chrysler Group LLC has proved it’s of sufficient financial caliber to be a Duke Energy Indiana customer, saying the utility has finally refunded a $2.5 million security deposit that was used to ensure electric service at its Kokomo transmission plant following the automaker’s 2009 bankruptcy.

Chrysler filed a complaint with the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission on July 5, saying Duke Energy “is the only public utility in North America still holding a security deposit from Chrysler.”

The automaker complained Duke resisted returning the $2.5 million deposit even after its finances improved, including 32 months of a “clean payment history.” Chrysler attorney Todd Richardson, of Indianapolis law firm Lewis & Kappes, argued that Duke was taking a “draconian” approach in its deposit rules.

He also noted that Chrysler added nearly 1,000 jobs at Kokomo since the 2009 bankruptcy filing. The plant employs about 3,500.

In a filing with the commission late last month, Chrysler said that Duke had refunded the seven-figure deposit, plus an undisclosed amount of interest, “upon review of Chrysler’s most recently published financial reports and further discussions with Chrysler."

The automaker posted a second-quarter profit of $346 million versus a loss of $370 million in the same quarter last year, when it paid off $551 million in federal loans.

“Chrysler reported its second-quarter results after its IURC filing was made, and the company has demonstrated a strong financial trend. Based on its performance, we agreed to fully refund the company’s security deposit,” said Duke spokeswoman Angeline Protogere.

Chrysler filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization in April 2009 and agreed to sell most of its assets, including its Kokomo transmission manufacturing factories, to a new entity partly owned by Italy’s Fiat SpA. As a result, according to Chrysler's complaint, Duke said it would regard Chrysler as a new customer and demanded a security deposit.

Duke had responded that it was simply using a deposit policy designed to minimize overall costs to all its customers.

“Duke Energy retains its right to request and obtain future customer deposits from Chrysler should they become warranted, and Chrysler retains its right to contest any future requests for customer deposits,” according to Chrysler’s recent filing withdrawing the complaint.

“Chrysler Group is pleased this matter has been resolved. Our company is achieving great success with our new products and Chrysler Group’s plan to invest more than a billion dollars in its Kokomo operations is strong indication of our financial performance and commitment to economic development in the state of Indiana,” said Chrysler spokesman Michael Palese.

Chrysler said it has $12.1 billion of cash on hand.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. You are correct that Obamacare requires health insurance policies to include richer benefits and protects patients who get sick. That's what I was getting at when I wrote above, "That’s because Obamacare required insurers to take all customers, regardless of their health status, and also established a floor on how skimpy the benefits paid for by health plans could be." I think it's vital to know exactly how much the essential health benefits are costing over previous policies. Unless we know the cost of the law, we can't do a cost-benefit analysis. Taxes were raised in order to offset a 31% rise in health insurance premiums, an increase that paid for richer benefits. Are those richer benefits worth that much or not? That's the question we need to answer. This study at least gets us started on doing so.

  2. *5 employees per floor. Either way its ridiculous.

  3. Jim, thanks for always ready my stuff and providing thoughtful comments. I am sure that someone more familiar with research design and methods could take issue with Kowalski's study. I thought it was of considerable value, however, because so far we have been crediting Obamacare for all the gains in coverage and all price increases, neither of which is entirely fair. This is at least a rigorous attempt to sort things out. Maybe a quixotic attempt, but it's one of the first ones I've seen try to do it in a sophisticated way.

  4. In addition to rewriting history, the paper (or at least your summary of it) ignores that Obamacare policies now must provide "essential health benefits". Maybe Mr Wall has always been insured in a group plan but even group plans had holes you could drive a truck through, like the Colts defensive line last night. Individual plans were even worse. So, when you come up with a study that factors that in, let me know, otherwise the numbers are garbage.

  5. You guys are absolutely right: Cummins should build a massive 80-story high rise, and give each employee 5 floors. Or, I suppose they could always rent out the top floors if they wanted, since downtown office space is bursting at the seams (http://www.ibj.com/article?articleId=49481).

ADVERTISEMENT