2011 Annual Report - The Commerce Commission

Table 6: Cases Successfully Disposed Of - Northern DivisionCases Resolved in 2011Case Number Case Name Case Details2011/01/26 –FTDN72011/02/07 –FTDN82011/02/16–FTDN10Consumer Tvs. CompanyAConsumer Uvs. CompanyBConsumer Vvs. CompanyCOn 26 th January, 2011, Consumer T lodged a complaint against Company Afor an increased Company A Bill. The case was resolved upon reviewing theCompany A Bill since a normal reading was taken by Company A indetermining the bill. Consumer T was advised if her monthly usage wasmore than 75 units, then her bill would be computed at $0.3484 per kwh. Awritten response was provided to Consumer T.On 7 th February, 2011, Consumer U lodged a complaint against Company Bfor being charged $0.3484 for zero kwh and imposed a domestic minimumcharge of $3.43. Discussions with Company B’s Labasa Branch revealedthat if the customer was not using the power supply, then the customercould inform Company B and Company B could disconnect the powersupply. The Complainant was informed of the reasons why Company B waslaying out Domestic Minimum charges for the non-use of power supply.On 16 th February, 2011, Consumer V lodged a complaint against CompanyC (a survey technician) for not surveying his land although Consumer V hadmade all the necessary payments.Company C confirmed to the Commission that he was willing to do the job;however he stated he could not specify a timeframe. The survey job asreported by Company C was under progress. The Case has been mediatedand closed.Provisions ofCCD2010ConsumerProtection &UnfairPracticeConsumerProtection &UnfairPracticeConsumerProtection &UnfairPracticeSectionsBreachedSection 76 & 84Section 76 & 84Section 76 & 84Page144of236