COLUMBUS, Ohio – Northeast Ohioans who won class action lawsuit settlement awards in connection with a massive political bribery scheme say their $10 to $20 winnings are effectively stranded in “digital payment” form.

Instead of checks or credits on their electric bills, the class members received their money via an email from a third party that many found suspicious. The lawsuit closely followed the now-substantiated criminal allegation that FirstEnergy bribed ex-Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder to pass legislation that bailed out nuclear plants owned at the time by a company subsidiary.

Since Cleveland.com and The Plain Dealer wrote about the first funds from the $49 million settlement flowing out the door, several readers have reached out to say their money is stuck in purgatory. Most received around $8. Because many online vendors won’t allow users to split a bill over multiple forms of payment, the plaintiffs can’t buy much online that costs less than your average burrito.

Others noted that the award came from email domains affiliated with Tremendous, a company administering the settlement, making them think it was a scam. The suspicion grew widespread enough that the Better Business Bureau issued a public notice that the emails are not a scam but the real deal.

Dennis Murray Jr., counsel for the plaintiffs, said class members will be notified if they have not drawn down their funds in a month or so, and once more after that. He said the overseeing lawyers are also “looking at” changing the email and sender to make it feel less spammy.

The digital payment format, he said was the product of compromise. FirstEnergy “adamantly refused” to apply the money as credits to bills, as it would have required them to file a new rate case at the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, which would have caused more delay. Cutting checks instead of offering digital payments would have eaten into the settlement distributions, he said.

“The challenge with smaller distributions is that small checks are often ignored and it costs something like $1.50 to get a check cut and mailed,” he wrote in an email. “With 2 million class members, that is a lot of money that could be going to the class instead. The experience of my co-counsel and the class administrator is that we ultimately will get more money to more class members using digital payments than we would checks.”

“There is an option to receive an alternative form of payment at the bottom of the email. The simplest way to use these funds is to add them to a prepaid card such as at Amazon or to use Apple Pay. You are right, most on-line retailers don’t accept split payments, just as some stores don’t but more stores do that online retailers.”

Jennifer Young, a FirstEnergy spokeswoman, declined to comment directly on the claim that the company ‘adamantly refused’ to apply the money to bill credits.

“While the plaintiffs’ lawyer is not able to access customer bills to apply credits, it is otherwise their discretion how to implement the settlement funds,” he said.

PUCO spokesman Matt Schilling said if a given utility company wanted to apply credits to customers’ bills, it would need permission from the regulators. However, the process is much simpler than a rate case, as commissioners only would need to determine if the decreased rates are “just and reasonable.”

FirstEnergy paid $37.5 million to settle the case, with Energy Harbor (formerly a subsidiary of FirstEnergy) paying $11.5 million. Of that sum, plaintiffs attorneys took home more than $13 million.

Plaintiffs had sued FirstEnergy days after federal prosecutors accused ex-Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and four conspirators in connection with a bribery scheme bankrolled by FirstEnergy. The class plaintiffs alleged they overpaid on their bills to fund a $60 million racketeering scheme deployed to pass House Bill 6, which was worth about $1.3 billion to the company.

Several readers have reached out voicing frustrations with the settlement, including Carla Vondrak.

“I got $7.89. Must be used for online purchase and must pay purchase in full. Cannot be combined. That will be difficult,” she said in an email. “How about the people with $1? I would have preferred a statement credit to my FirstEnergy bill. Bottom line, very few people will be able to use their settlement.”

Vincent Fiordalis, a self-identified “senior citizen [who’s] not too computer savvy,” said he doesn’t know why his $7.29 wouldn’t just be credited to his FirstEnergy bill.

“It seems to me that that would be the way to do it,” he said. “Who thinks up these email refund notifications?

Michael O’Boyle, a retired community college professor, wondered where his check is.

“My question: where is the email that I am supposed to be receiving from the settlement? And is the amount (paltry as it may be) going to be somehow embedded in that email? Or sent by another means?” he said. “I hope that you stay on this case so that we poor residential customers can get some answers to these questions.”

Jake Zuckerman covers state politics and policy for Cleveland.com and The Plain Dealer.