Conn Atty Gen Blumenthal – Loves To Announce Investigations, Slower To Announce Results

Normally standing between Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal and a television camera is as dangerous as walking among a herd of elephants during mating season.

But when the candidate for U.S. Senate was offered an opportunity to be videotaped for an interview by me, Blumenthal politely, but firmly, declined.

It’s not that he suddenly found a disdain for a television camera or didn’t think it was worthwhile to be interviewed by me. It’s the topic that he didn’t particularly want to be seen discussing: what happens AFTER he announces one of his numerous investigations.

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who is the leading Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate

It took several weeks, and requests from his public relations staff for what specific areas of questioning I would have for Blumenthal, before the Democratic politician would agree to an interview.

And the only interview he would grant was a limited telephone interview with him on a loudspeaker, surrounded by his top deputies and two media staffers listening, prepared to jump in to help their boss for some of the rougher questioning.

Before I continue with the brunt of the column, I want to say that I have known Blumenthal since he was the U.S. attorney for Connecticut and have dealt with him on numerous issues. I have the highest regard for his integrity. And compared with most politicians, I have found him to be a straight shooter. There have been many investigations where I have worked closely with his office, and I believe that my cooperation worked to the benefit of consumers.

However, just like you and me, everyone has strengths and weaknesses. Blumenthal loves to be in the spotlight, being seen in shining armor ridding a white stallion. That however makes him reticent to admit mistakes and makes many of his staff resentful of his taking the limelight for their work and they believe frequently switching their priorities to what will attract media and public attention.

My questioning of Blumenthal mostly grew out of two investigations he publicly promised: one was against a small East Hartford computer company – Computers Plus Center Inc. owned by Gina Malapanis – and the second involving the accuracy of Connecticut Light & Power’s electric meters and tests conducted to make sure the meters provided accurate results.

In the East Hartford case, Blumenthal accused the company seven years ago of selling the state computers that lacked the proper parts and sued for $1.75 million in damages, claiming that for 10 years the firm has been ripping off Connecticut taxpayers.

Malapanis, however, counter-sued the state, claiming that her and her company’s civil rights were violated and her business was destroyed as the result of false accusations.

I have no idea who is right or wrong, but a Waterbury jury agreed with her and in January awarded her $18 million in damages.

One would have thought that the attorney general, who made these accusations, would have at least told the public that his lawsuit had not gone as well as expected, and instead of winning money for the state, Connecticut appears to be out $18 million plus legal costs.

Nope. The well-oiled public relations engine in the attorney general’s office had no public announcement of the defeat. His office has since provided some reporters with copies of his appeal of the verdict on the grounds that the jury did not get to hear all the evidence his office had available. They can be read at the end of this column.

To this day, Blumenthal has been silent on this case and has not permitted his staff to discuss it. Through a spokeswoman, Blumenthal told me he would not even comment on why he won’t comment.

That raised the question in my mind of how many of the hundreds of investigations that Blumenthal has announced publicly over the years ended up without his office finding any improprieties and how would we know.

To get to that question I first had to learn how Blumenthal keeps track of the cases that he announced publicly. One might think that is a simple question, but it turns out it can be very complex.

Blumenthal explained that his office receives 50,000 complaints a year, of which last year 4,373 involved consumer complaints ranging from one complaint against one business to complaints of systemic problems. That doesn’t count the 12,000 letters his office receives yearly with questions and comments and the 100 to 200 e-mails they receive daily from citizens.

Very few of the investigation ever become public knowledge, he said. And when they do, they can become public through various means: He can announce them; he can confirm them; or the complainants can disclose them.

While Blumenthal insisted that all complaints are tracked by his various departments and department heads, he conceded that investigations that are known by the public, including those he announces, are not tracked separately.

“We don’t track the announcement of an investigation,” he said.

I asked him if he felt a responsibility to tell the public what happens when an investigation is concluded, especially when it was found that nothing illegal, unethical or even improper had actually taken place.

“We consider that issue case by case,” Blumenthal replied.

Often, he said, companies, charities or individuals reach out-of-court settlements with his office where no wrongdoing is admitted, but restitution or fines are made – something that is normal in civil litigation.

“The vast majority of cases are settled with the consumer made whole,” he said. “And the business, or the hospital or the car dealer or whatever it is, is very, very very happy to have no publicity…they are very happy to make the whole thing go away.”

Blumenthal said that “99 percent of the time” targets request that there be no publicity. If a business requests a release at the end of an investigation, he said, he would grant it.

So I asked him if there has ever been an instance in the 18 years he has been attorney general where there was a public announcement of an investigation and there was nothing wrong found.

“I don’t know if I can answer that question,” he replied.

Have you ever had a press release, I asked, where he admitted that nothing wrong was found?

“I don’t know. I don’t know. We would have to go back and look,” he replied. Certainly, he said, there had been cases where he complimented targets of investigation for making positive changes.

“We try very hard to be fair and as honest as possible and there are very few complaints about what we say at the conclusion of an investigation,” he said.

And then Blumenthal filled in the rest of puzzle.

If no wrongdoing is found, it doesn’t mean that wrongdoing wasn’t or isn’t taking place, therefore there is no press release announcing the clearing of the firm.

“Very often we purposely avoid announcing the end of an investigation because new evidence may well emerge,” Blumenthal said.

CL&P’s meter issues falls into that category, Blumenthal said.

As some of you may recall, when I was the Watchdog columnist at The Courant, a group of CL&P customers and I stirred up a hornet’s nest by showing that the state’s largest utility was refusing thousands of requests for meter testing from customers whose bills did not make any sense. And we showed that the company had terrible customer service.

Blumenthal joined our investigation and along with state legislators convinced state utility regulators to force CL&P to honor all requests for meter testing – as had been required by state regulation – and to drastically improve its customer service.

However, one issue remains open as far as I am concerned, and that is whether, in rare cases, can CL&Ps meters malfunction periodically and still test normal.

CL&P insists they can’t, but I wrote about three cases last year where there seems to be no logical reasons on why there were periodic high readings. In two of the cases CL&P gave goodwill payments to customers but continued to insist that nothing was wrong.

When pressed about his promise to investigate erratic meter claims, Blumenthal said he has done all he can do: He helped convince state public regulators to actually regulate CL&P, to require independent testing of meters when customers demand it, and to provide goodwill payments in cases where there is no reasonable explanation on why the meter reading appear to be abnormal.

So, he says, his investigation will remain open on that issue and his office will pursue new complaints.

The following are motions filed by Blumenthal in his appeal:

2010-02-08 cpc mem support mo reduce verdict

2010-02-08 cpc mo to reduce verdict

2010-02-08 cpc motion set aside ev

2010-02-08 regan v cpc mis of mtn to set aside verd jug liberty int

2010-02-08 regan v cpc mtn to dismiss defs due process countrclm

2010-02-08 regan v cpc mtn to set aside verdict miss witness rule

Share

9 Comments on "Conn Atty Gen Blumenthal – Loves To Announce Investigations, Slower To Announce Results"

  1. George,

    “And the only interview he would grant was a limited telephone interview with him on a loudspeaker, surrounded by his top deputies and two media staffers listening, prepared to jump in to help their boss for some of the rougher questioning.”

    I sent your piece to the lawyer who is defending Valerie Hoffman and the two owners of New England Pellet.

    His response was joyous, if brief: “Wow! What a change! What would he say about NEP or Hoffman? What would he say about false affidavits made by assistant AG’s who have no personal knowledge of what they swear to?”

    I told him I didn’t know but would find out.

    I sent your piece as well to Martha Dean, who as you may know is running this year for attorney general on the Republican ticket. She ran against Attorney General Blumenthal in 2002 and lost.

    It’s always a hard revelation when Janus turns his second face to you and you begin to see a disturbing polarity. Which is the real face?

    Here is an account of the NEP and Hoffman case: http://donpesci.blogspot.com/2010/01/blumenthal-devil-and-details.html

    And here is a list of companies Blumenthal has sued: http://donpesci.blogspot.com/search?q=hoffman

    Not too pretty.

    Jim Oliver, Mrs. Hoffman’s lawyer, has been waiting a half dozen years for some digger in the media to unearth the facts that tell against Blumenthal, buried in plain sight for all to see is court documents that one consults; for, of course, the cases Blumenthal opens do not end with one of his press releases, which are as fraudulent as his affidavits.

    I welcome your exposure; that really was a courageous piece. But (isn’t there always a “but?”) having begun a story, it is the responsibility of the journalist, not the attorney general, to follow it through its various permutations.

    Had you done this with the Hoffman case or the NEP case, you would have clearly seen that Blumenthal has been successful in many of his cases for the same reason that card sharpers are successful – they cheat.

    The card sharp wants your money or your life. Blumenthal, as you would undoubtedly gather from anyone he has cheated – by, for example, presenting fatally defective affidavits to unsuspecting judges who then, in ex parte proceedings, vest him with the authority to steal their property – just wants your life.

    Glad you’re catching on.

    By the way, Blumenthal walked away from the NEP case. It’s only a matter of time before he announced in one of his many press releases that the case has been settled and refunds may now begin to flow to the victims of NEP. None of it will be true. The Hoffman case is due for a very important presentation in Hartford Supreme Court at 11:00 this Thursday, the 18th.
    You are cordially invited to attend.

    Don

    • George Gombossy | March 14, 2010 at 11:10 am |

      Don: thank you for your support and for taking the time to read my column and to respond. My column should not be taken as an indication that I object to his investigations. It should be clear that I support the vast majority – if not all – of Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s investigations. My issues is with his policies on keeping the public informed AFTER he starts an investigation. This is not the first time I have written a critical column about our Attorney General. Infact on the issue you mention, I took Blumenthal to task for failing to be more active to protect the herbal company’s customers. And I have written many columns about how pellet stove owners were ripped off by the now bankrupt pellet company which collected deposits and pocketed the money instead of making good on all its promises.
      George

    • Oh God, would I be so lucky if one of his AAG’s would swear to any of the fibs they are telling regarding a certain matter I know of. My God, would that be diving on their swords.

  2. cyril masse | March 14, 2010 at 4:50 pm |

    The Sec of State, Byceewitz, like the politician for life, Blumie, has other people talking for her and will not allow reporters to question her. Blumie is protecting his turf, make no mistake about it. Who appointed him US Atty way back when?
    All Career lifetime Politicians act the same way. Dodd never made public all those mortgage papers and never answered with the proof. Time for a housecleaning of career lifetime politicians.

  3. Donna Ploss | March 15, 2010 at 1:43 pm |

    I wrote to Blumenthal back in October about Rell stealing funds from the “Caring for Pets” license program. He never even acknowledged it. If that’s the way he is now, who’s to say what he’ll be like if elected Governor.

  4. Oh God, would I be so lucky if one of his AAG’s would swear to any of the fibs they are telling regarding a certain matter I know of. My God, would that be diving on their swords.

  5. Appears to be part of political moves 101— never admit to wrong doing – If such occurs—- delay as long as possible.
    I am the whistle blower who revealed corruption at the DMV that allowed thousands of teen drivers out on our roads without the proper training. They did not get the required hours of training. They were trained by under trained instructors and tested by under trained DMV employees who had no clear road test standards. All with full knowledge of DMV management.
    Commissioner Ward stalled the original investigation. Results were— the largest Driving School in the State was closed for life. Ward will not release the completed internal investigation until Attny. General completes his Investigation into 27 years of DMV mismanagement, (on going now for two years).
    My problem is I can’t get an answer from the Attny. Generals office if the investigation will be done in a few weeks or Months from now—allowing Ward to escape any responsibility. Ward has already stated that only minor wrong doing was found. If you can conclude that two ½ years of documented reports (that were ignored by DMV management) is minor wrong doing, then it will be impossible to have a department that has interest in the public’s safety.

  6. I wish that the atty. gen. would investigate why Conn. has an outragous Entity Tax that is levied on EVERY BUSINESS in Conn. this tax is very unfair to every small business’s that are trying to make a living in this tax laden state. We get absolutely NOTHING out of this tax.other than a lot of aggravation being forced to pay this stupid unfair TAX.

Comments are closed.