Crime

PRESS ROOM: Don’t Fall Victim To Scams From Fake Cps Energy Callers

SAN ANTONIO OBSERVER — In 2018, CPS Energy saw an increase in the number of customers reporting to have been victimized by someone representing themselves as a CPS Energy employee to steal money from them. CPS Energy urges their customers to be on full alert for individuals posing as CPS Energy employees either by phone or in person.

Published

7 years ago

June 5, 2019

CPS News Release

By CPS

San Antonio – Texas, (May 31, 2019) – In 2018, CPS Energy saw an increase in the number of customers reporting to have been victimized by someone representing themselves as a CPS Energy employee to steal money from them. CPS Energy urges their customers to be on full alert for individuals posing as CPS Energy employees either by phone or in person.

Knowing how CPS Energy operates is the first step to recognize imposter activity. CPS Energy says if customers receive calls from anyone claiming to be from the utility who threatens to cut off service if payment is not made immediately, they should hang up and call customer service directly at 210-353-2222. And if someone approaches their home or business claiming to be from CPS Energy, always ask for an employee ID. If a customer feels like they are in immediate danger, they should call 911.

“We want residential and commercial customers to protect themselves from scammers going after their hard-earned money,” said Maria Garcia, Vice President of Community Engagement and Corporate Responsibility. “The only time we will call customers is to remind them when their account is past due. However, we do not take payments over the phone.”

Payments can be made through Manage My Account (MMA), a free online portal. MMA also provides CPS Energy customers with monthly energy use information, a view of their billing statement and payment arrangements options.

Last year, CPS Energy received a combined 1,799 reports from both residential and commercial customers who fell victim to scams. In all, thieves were able to steal nearly $52,000, an increase of $20,000 from 2017.

CPS Energy employees will:

NEVER threaten to disconnect service at your home or business.
NEVER call residential or commercial customers to request payment by phone.
NEVER ask a customer to purchase credit cards or prepaid cards (for example, Amazon gift cards) and call back with payment.
NEVER ask to enter a customer’s home or business unless the customer initiates a request for service or receives prior notification.

Signs that the call is a scam:

· Threatening to cut off power. Scam artists demand quick action as a scare tactic.

· Asks customer to purchase any prepaid card to make payment.

· Once the imposter gets the card’s PIN or security number, it’s like wiring money.

The funds cannot be recovered

· Sends customer to CVS Pharmacy/Office Depot/Walgreens to make a payment

· Refuses option to pay at H-E-B, claims it takes 24 hours to receive payment.

· Claims recent payment was not received or was misapplied.

· Gives customer 30 minutes to pay or get shut-off.

· Caller claims someone from CPS Energy is on the way to turn power off.

· Asks customer for banking information.

· Caller asks customer for their account number.

· Supplies customer with an account number to apply a payment.

· Gives a toll free (i.e.: 1-800 or 1-844) number to have customer call back with

payment.

This article originally appeared in the San Antonio Observer.

CPS News Release

Posts by CPS News Release

Up Next

'When They See Us:' Central Park Five vs. Scottsboro Boys

Don't Miss

The List of Black and Missing Continues to Grow

CPS News Release

Click to comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of September 30 – October 6, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of September 30 – October 6, 2026

Published

1 day ago

October 4, 2026

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of September 23 – 29, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of September 23 – 29, 2026

Published

1 week ago

September 27, 2026

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Community

Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins’s Bill Would Pause Law Enforcement’s Use of Shock Gloves Pending Study

The device at the center of the debate is known as the G.L.O.V.E., an acronym for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement awarded a $16.7 million contract for 6,000 pairs of the gloves, which are designed to deliver an electric shock through an officer’s hand.

Published

2 weeks ago

September 22, 2026

Post News Group

Asm. Dr. LaShae-Sharp Collins (D-San Diego). File photos by Antonio Ray Harvey. April, 29 2025.

By Antonio Ray Harvey, California Black Media

A bill temporarily prohibiting law enforcement agencies from using electric shock gloves in California is awaiting action by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Assembly Bill (AB) 2760, authored by Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins (D-San Diego), passed the Senate 29-9 on Aug. 31. The Assembly concurred in Senate amendments the same day on a 55-16 vote.

The bill would prohibit state, local and federal law enforcement agencies from using wearable electroshock devices in California until Jan. 1, 2030. It would also bar agencies from using state funds to purchase the devices and require them to update their use-of-force policies accordingly.

Traditional handheld devices, including tasers and stun guns, are exempt.

Newsom has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto the bill. If he takes no action, it will become law without his signature.

Sharp-Collins introduced the measure after reviewing information indicating that the devices could cause serious injury or death if used without adequate safeguards and training.

“AB 2760 draws a line that public safety technology must be proven safe and accountable before it is employed. Not after someone is killed or injured,” said Sharp-Collins, a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC).

“Our commitment is to protect our communities, especially the most vulnerable. That is what AB 2760 is about and that is what AB 2760 will do,” Sharp-Collins told her colleagues.

During the Assembly debate, Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom (D-Stockton), also a CLBC member, thanked law enforcement representatives for helping negotiate amendments to the bill.

“This is something new to us (and) it’s something that absolutely should be studied,” Ransom said. “I appreciate law enforcement for agreeing to work with the legislature to figure out if this is an appropriate tool to be used.”

Neither the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department nor the Los Angeles Police Department has reported using electric shock gloves. However, the Santa Monica and El Monte police departments have obtained devices for testing.

The Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office purchased 10 shock gloves as part of a $35,000 acquisition that also included 10 remotely activated shock bands. Sheriff’s officials had been developing training and policies for the devices before AB 2760 advanced.

State Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Huntington Beach) opposed the legislation, arguing that it would unnecessarily force agencies to change their use-of-force policies and could compromise public safety.

“I don’t disagree with the author that the electric shocks are not a great option, but at the end of the day, I think it’s important to understand that we need to give law enforcement the tools they need to keep themselves safe and the community safe,” Strickland said.

Supporters countered that wearable electroshock devices have not been sufficiently studied and could pose particular risks to immigrants, children, older adults and other vulnerable groups.

“People who are Black or Brown could be test subjects for these gloves of torment,” Mark González (D-Los Angeles) said. “I appreciate law enforcement for agreeing to work with the legislature.”