Letter of the Day | NWC service charge unjust
THE EDITOR, Sir:
Gordon Brown, writing in your newspaper as public affairs coordinator of the Office of Utilities Regulation (OUR), attempted, in Saturday's edition, to answer my letter complaining about being asked to pay 'service' and other charges on a National Water Commission bill when no water was used.
But Mr Brown has not dealt with my questions as to WHY a customer should be asked to pay service charges when no service was given. The service charges, I contended, should only be due if a service had been provided. The person who read the meter would have performed a service to the NWC, but he had not performed any service to me, the customer, since I had used NO WATER.
Since all the other charges were percentages of the service charge, these also should not be legally due if no water was used.
That is why I suggested that the political ombudsman should take a look at this matter. Multitudes of Jamaican citizens have been shown complaining on our newscasts, in the past, of the same matter: being sent bills for water when they had received no water for extended periods. The official explanation of the OUR may be based on the policies laid down. But they certainly do not represent justice due to the consumer: they only benefit the monopoly.
Mr Brown's response has only explained the guidelines that have been set, but he is not really defending us, the consumers. These monopolies should not be charging for services that they do not provide, or when consumers do not use their offered services.
LLOYD A. COOKE
Box 642, Mandeville PO