Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited illegally collects fees.

(Baonghean Newspaper) - The Nghe An Newspaper received a complaint from Mr. Tran Xuan Quang (Vinh Phuc block, Hung Phuc ward, Vinh City) accusing the Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited of abusing its monopoly and forcing customers to sign illegal contracts to gain illicit profits. After verification, Mr. Quang's complaint was found to be well-founded; relevant authorities need to promptly investigate the matter and take timely corrective measures.

In his petition, Mr. Quang stated: In 2007, he and many other households in the North Canal Food Store residential area had a water supply contract with Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the company). By 2014, the company repeatedly sent notices requesting households to pay for new water meters to replace old, expired meters. However, his family repeatedly protested and refused to comply with the company's request.

On the night of October 11, 2015, Mr. Quang's family's water meter suddenly caught fire. A few days later, company officials came to document the incident and continued to demand that his family pay for a new meter, but his family still refused. On October 19, Mr. Quang's family received a notice from the company that they would stop supplying water, and on October 21, the company cut off their water supply. Because they had no water, Mr. Quang's family agreed to pay for a new meter as requested by the company.

Mr. Quang's family's water meter suddenly burst into flames in the middle of the night.

Mr. Quang is upset that his family's water meter is still functioning normally. The company claims the meter has expired but refuses to have it inspected for quality, instead repeatedly demanding that his family purchase a new one. Mr. Quang argues that, according to regulations, water prices already fully reflect production factors and reasonable costs in the production and distribution of clean water, including connection maintenance costs. Therefore, the water company's demand for his family to pay for a new meter is against regulations. "The company is exploiting its monopoly in the water business to pressure people. When my family protested, the company repeatedly used pressure, culminating in cutting off our water supply. Furthermore, the water purchase contract requires customers to manage and protect the meter, which is installed outside the family's jurisdiction, which is incorrect," Mr. Quang said angrily.

Based on the information provided by Mr. Quang, it was learned that many other households in the area had to pay to be connected to the company's water pipeline.

According to Mr. Nguyen Van Minh, head of residential group No. 2 (Vinh Phuc block, Hung Phuc ward), the households paid for water connection in 2004, not 2007, because he was one of the 10 families involved. Regarding the exact amount paid and whether there was a contract with the water plant, he couldn't remember because it was so long ago. During the conversation, Mr. Minh's family also recently had their water meter replaced by the company, and he had to pay nearly 500,000 VND but received no receipt.

What angered Mr. Minh was that on many occasions, trucks driving on the road damaged the water meters. When residents reported this to the company, the company demanded that they pay for the materials and hire workers to fix the problem. "Nobody agreed, but in the end, we still had to pay. Because if it wasn't repaired, we wouldn't have water, and the people couldn't stand it," Mr. Minh said.

Not only Mr. Quang and Mr. Minh's families, but many other families in the area had to pay when the company replaced their water meters. The amount paid varied; some households received receipts, others did not. Mr. Nguyen Hong Minh, house number 161, Hercman Street, said that the company sent an invitation for his family to come and complete the procedures for replacing the meter, but they did not go. “I and Mr. Quang have protested many times, but they insisted on collecting the money. Around the beginning of October 2015, they inspected my family's meter and announced that the seal was missing, so the meter had to be replaced, otherwise the water supply would be cut off. My family had to accept paying 470,000 VND to replace the meter. When paying, I requested a receipt, but the company's accounting department did not give me one,” Mr. Minh said.

Because the meter was damaged by fire, the Water Supply Company replaced it for the customer but charged for the service, contrary to Decree 117.

Speaking with reporters, Mr. Nguyen Quang Duyen, Deputy Director of Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited, acknowledged the incident of charging Mr. Quang and many other families for meter replacement. He stated that this is not in accordance with Government Decree 117/2007/ND-CP dated July 11, 2007, on the production, supply, and consumption of clean water. Currently, the new water price only includes a very small portion of maintenance and connection costs, making it difficult to comply with Decree 117. The company hopes customers will share the difficulties so that both sides can work together to improve the production and supply of clean water.”

Regarding Mr. Quang's complaint, the water supply service contract between the company and the customer contains an unreasonable clause. Specifically, Clause 3, Article 11 of the contract states: Party B (the customer) is responsible for managing and protecting the installed water meter. If the meter is damaged or lost, Party B must bear the cost of repair or purchase a new replacement meter (except in cases where the damage is due to a manufacturing defect and is within the 6-month warranty period from the date of installation and commissioning).

According to Mr. Quang, the company has moved the water meter's installation location outside his family's fence, making it impossible for the family to monitor it 24/7. According to Clause 4, Article 49 of Government Decree 117 on the production, supply, and consumption of clean water, customers are only responsible for protecting the water meter within their managed area; outside the customer's managed area, the water supply company is responsible for its management. When questioned about this, Mr. Nguyen Quang Duyen was unable to explain and gave evasive answers, continuing to blame the customer.

The invitations, receipts, and water cut-off orders from Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited were sent to Mr. Quang's family.

Regarding Mr. Quang's accusation that the company abused its monopoly to pressure customers and suspected that the company intentionally sabotaged customers' meters, there is no basis to confirm this. However, based on the information gathered, the company's repeated sending of invitations to residents to come to the company to purchase new meters for replacement, threatening to temporarily suspend water supply if they did not comply, shows a lack of respect for customers. Replacing meters is the company's responsibility, and it is unacceptable to threaten to cut off water supply simply because a customer did not come.

Regarding this issue, Mr. Duyen stated that he would review customer feedback on the staff's attitude and require the relevant units to seriously learn from this experience. In the future, the company will remind staff to enhance their service responsibility when interacting with customers, explaining clearly so that customers understand and agree with the company's actions. This will ensure efficient water supply, access to clean water for residents, urban civility, and revenue for the company's reinvestment and business operations.

Since the water meter was installed outside the family's managed area, Mr. Quang argued that the company's requirement for customers to protect and repair it in case of damage or loss was incorrect.

Therefore, most of Mr. Quang's concerns are valid. The response from Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited is unconvincing. According to our investigation, not only Mr. Quang but also many other households among the company's 100,000 customers have to pay for water meters, which violates Government Decrees 117 and 124. Therefore, relevant authorities need to investigate the matter thoroughly to find a solution that ensures the legitimate rights of both customers and the company.

Pham Bang