THE EDITOR, Sir:
IT WOULD appear that either the legislation empowering the Office of Utilities Regulation (OUR) is inadequate or the staff is uncertain of its role. As a consequence, the utility companies, and the Jamaica Public Service (JPS) in particular, seem disposed to do as they like with consumers.A few weeks ago, J. Paul Morgan of the OUR admitted that it had been brought to his attention that Bill Express was making extra charges to JPS customers who pay their bills through that collection agency. He advised that the tariff under which the JPS operates, allows it to make a charge for customer service on its monthly bills to consumers. Mr Morgan went on to say that the JPS needed to clarify its relationship with its collection agencies.
A week or two after Mr Morgan's statement, Mrs Audrey Marks of Paymaster, another JPS authorised collection agency, said on the popular radio programme, Nationwide, that Paymaster had not yet begun charging JPS customers fees for making payments through her agency. A short while after Mrs Marks' statement, Ms Winsome Callum of the JPS appeared on the talk show programme, Laing and Company. She announced that JPS customers were not required to pay any additional customer service fees when they go to pay their bills in a JPS office.
Ms. Callum was being less than candid, because she would have been aware that the contention was not about customers being ripped off when they make payments in JPS offices. The complaint had to do with when customers visit those of its authorised agents including those of Bill Express. Is Ms. Callum advising that receipts issued by Bill Express to JPS customers are not recognised or acknowledged as payments to the JPS?
Nor did I find it consoling as a JPS customer, when Ms. Callum advised that we should use our 'customer power'. She contended that there were other available options such as the banks and online.
On April 20, a radio newscast carried a statement purportedly issued by the OUR. The OUR was appealing to Bill Express to desist from charging JPS customers $35.00 per transaction. It claimed that the extra charge would result in hardship particularly to the poor. Such a statement is as feeble as previous ones associated with the OUR. It was a deliberate attempt to evade the real issue as indicated in (4) below.
The OUR has ignored a number of pertinent points.
1) Bill Express cannot legally collect JPS money without proper authorisation from the light and power monopoly. There is a principal/agent relationship between the two - Bill Express is a JPS agent.
2) JPS includes on its monthly bills a charge for customers service. On my March bill the charge was $72.00.
3) JPS customers and the JPS collection agencies had no contractual arrangement. In fact, it is no secret that the JPS has been closing some of its own offices or allowing its collection agencies to operate them with the implied invitation to its customers to make payments to those collection agencies.
4) It cannot be legal for the JPS to continue making a charge for customers service on its monthly bills and at the same time allowing its collection agencies to make extra charges when customers visit those offices. This point would also apply to Cable&Wireless and National Water Commission bills.
The OUR needs to be assertive and decisive rather than hiding behind ambiguous statements. It must make a definitive statement as to whether the JPS or its authorised collection agencies can legally make additional charges on consumers of electricity without its (OUR) approval. It cannot escape responsibility for the present situation and what otherwise appears to be the undermining of its authority.
I am, etc.,
LIONEL RUSSELL
Ensom City, St. Catherine
