Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Energy Management Systems's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Energy Management Systems has 4 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  Energy Management Systems

  801 Springdale Dr Ste 101 Exton, PA 19341-2866

• 

  Energy Management Systems

  PO Box 646 Exton, PA 19341-0646

• 

  Energy Management Systems

  PO Box 538 Department 0554 Malvern, PA 19355-0538

• 

  Energy Management Systems

  325 Central Ave Malvern, PA 19355-3265

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/20/2025

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  In April 2025, after a pause in water billing due to a transition to Energy Management Systems **** (EMS), I received a water bill covering October 1, 2024 to March 1, 2025. The total charges were more than double our historical usage-based bills, prompting me to request a detailed breakdown. My requests to both NAM (my ************ and EMS were repeatedly deflected, with each claiming the other was responsible for providing the information.Despite being told the board had approved the charges after a review, no unit-level billing statement was provided until mid-June 2025 after months of requests and ************ that the statements have been released, I can confirm the following:-The March 2025 statement reflects a correct per-gallon rate of $0.0118181, consistent with City of Milpitas water rates.-However, the October 2024February 2025 statement shows a doubled rate of $0.0236363 per gallon. As a result, I was overcharged for $343.15 in water charge.-When I confronted EMS and NAM about this discrepancy, I was told that the rate was doubled intentionally because it was a "multi-period bill" an explanation that makes no financial or regulatory sense and artificially inflates the water charges for that period.This rate manipulation is unjustified, and to my knowledge, no city or utility authority allows for a water rate to be arbitrarily doubled based on billing timeframes. Customers should be billed according to consumption and the actual approved rate not based on how long it took the company to issue a statement.Meanwhile, I have continued paying my monthly *** assessments in full. I withheld payment on the disputed water bill due to the unresolved overcharge. I was told by the *** that the water bill deadline was extended to July 31, 2025, yet as of June 16, a $39.08 delinquency fee was applied to my account further compounding the problem, and penalizing me while I am actively disputing an incorrect charge.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/01/2025

  I would like to inform you that EMS responded on June 26 admitting they made a mistake on my bill. They said they have notified my management company but my bill is still incorrect in the system as of this moment. I have sent an email to NAM today as a follow up to see when they will actually correct the bill in their system.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/02/2025

  Please see Energy Management Systems, Inc.'s Response to Complaint ID ******* attached.
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/02/2025

  [A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
  
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. 
  
  Regards,
  
  ***** ***
  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:10/25/2022

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  This company Energy Management Systems Inc. has ben falsely reporting electrical meter readings for the months of August, September and October. I have contacted customer service by email and they have admitted in not capturing actual meter readings for those months. My bills for those months compared to last year has more than tripled. Also I have a HVAC unit downstairs that have not been on for the whole year and they are reporting as being on which is false. I have proof of last years billing showing there was no activity for the downstairs HVAC unit. This is not the first time this company have been falsifying meter readings. There has been multiple complaints from current and past tenants about this company. I have attached the email that customer service have provided and past billings to show how this company is falsifying meter readings. Also they are giving me the run around. They are the ones who are providing the bill and should be the ones to fix it.

  Business Response

  Date: 11/10/2022

  EMS is the utility submeter reading and billing vendor retained by the owner of the building where ****************** resides.  EMS is contracted to read the metering systems at the property each billing period, calculate the charges for utility consumption based upon the data reported by those systems and send bills to the tenants of the building.  Reading the meters, calculating charges and generating bills to tenants is the full scope of EMSs engagement at this property.  EMS does not collect tenant payments.  Rather, tenants remit their payments directly to the building owner as is inidicated on the bills. 

  ****************** is looking for a refund for the utility bills she paid to the building owner for the months of August, September and October for which she believes she was billed "fraudently".  For those months, because the meter reading system was not generating reads for her unit, EMS calculated bills using estimated reads.  The estimates were based on data from the same or similar period for the prior year and/or using data from the preceding period. Calculating estimated reads in this manner under the circumstances presented does not consititute fraudulent billing as alleged by *******************  Indeed, public utilities utilize estimates in these same circumstances, the practice is widely accepted in the tenant billing industry and, in fact, is the manner that Maryland law dicates estimates be calculated when data is not available.
  
  That said, EMS has reached out to the building owner in this intance to advise of the circumstances and the building owner has agreed to issue ****************** a credit for all utility bills that were based upon estimates.  I am hopeful that this information and the offer of the full credit for the months ****************** questioned will satisfy her concerns.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/27/2022

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  EMS3 is falsely reporting electricity readings in the building where I live at *************************. My neighbors and I have noticed our bills have doubled and tripled for the month of August and September. One of my neighbors contacted EMS3 and the representative admitted of not taking accurate reading of the meters. This is false reporting and criminal. I have 6 months of billing proof that shows how EMS3 are falsifying meter readings. There is clearly a huge discrepancy from previous billing months and out of nowhere month of August and September the bill DOUBLED and TRIPLED!! EMS3 need to correct this and refund our money. EMS3 has the habit of falsifying meter records according to the neighbors who have been living at this building for some time. EMS3 would apologize and "fix" the problem and they never do.

  Business Response

  Date: 11/10/2022

  EMS is the utility submeter reading and billing vendor retained by the owner of the building where *** ******* resides.  EMS is contracted to read the metering systems at the property each billing period, calculate the charges for utility consumption based upon the data reported by those systems and send bills to the tenants of the building.  Reading the meters, calculating charges and generating bills to tenants is the full scope of EMS’s engagement at this property.  EMS does not collect tenant payments.  Rather, tenants remit their payments directly to the building owner as is inidicated on the bills. 

  *** ******* is looking for a refund for the utility bills she paid to the building owner for the months of August and September for which she believes she was billed "fraudently".  For those months, because the meter reading system was not generating reads for her unit, EMS calculated bills using estimated reads.  The estimates were based on data from the same or similar period for the prior year and/or using data from the preceding period. Calculating estimated reads in this manner under the circumstances presented does not consititute “fraudulent billing” as alleged by *** *******.  Indeed, public utilities utilize estimates in these same circumstances, the practice is widely accepted in the tenant billing industry and, in fact, is the manner that Maryland law dicates estimates be calculated when data is not available.
  
  That said, EMS has reached out to the building owner in this intance to advise of the circumstances and the building owner has agreed to issue *** ******* a credit for all utility bills that were based upon estimates.  I am hopeful that  this information and the offer of the full credit for the months *** ******* questioned will satisfy her concerns.