Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited collects money against regulations

(Baonghean) - Nghe An Newspaper received a petition from Mr. Tran Xuan Quang (Vinh Phuc block, Hung Phuc ward, Vinh city) accusing Nghe An Water Supply Company of abusing its monopoly, forcing customers to sign illegal contracts to gain illegal profits,... Through verification, the incident that Mr. Quang reported is well-founded; the authorities need to clarify the incident soon and have timely corrective solutions.

In the petition, Mr. Quang stated: In 2007, he and many other households in the Kenh Bac Food Store residential group had a water usage contract with Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the company). By 2014, the company had continuously sent invitations requesting households to pay money to buy new meters to replace old meters that had expired. However, his family repeatedly objected and did not comply with the company's request.

On the night of October 11, 2015, his family's water meter suddenly caught fire. A few days later, the company's staff came to make a record of the incident and continued to ask his family to pay for the meter, but his family still objected. On October 19, Mr. Quang's family received a notice from the company that the water supply would be stopped, and on October 21, the company cut off the family's water. Because there was no water for daily use, Mr. Quang's family agreed to pay for a new meter as requested by the company.

Mr. Quang's family's water meter suddenly caught fire in the middle of the night.

What Mr. Quang was upset about was that his family's water meter was still working normally. The company said the meter had expired but did not send the meter for quality inspection and repeatedly asked the family to buy a new meter. Mr. Quang said that according to regulations, the water price had fully taken into account production factors, reasonable production costs in the process of producing and distributing clean water, including connection maintenance costs. Therefore, the water supply company's request for the family to pay to replace the meter was not in accordance with regulations. "The company took advantage of its monopoly in the water business to pressure the people. When the family protested, the company continuously used pressure, culminating in cutting off the family's water. Furthermore, in the water purchase contract, the company required the customer to manage and protect the meter installed outside the family's management area, which was not correct," Mr. Quang was upset.

From the content Mr. Quang provided, it is known that in the area, many other households have to pay money to buy water pipes from the company.

According to Mr. Nguyen Van Minh, head of residential group No. 2 (Vinh Phuc block, Hung Phuc ward), the households paid money to have the company supply water in 2004, not 2007 because he was one of those 10 families. As for the amount of money paid and whether there was a contract with the water plant or not, he did not remember because it had been a long time. Through discussion, Mr. Minh's family had just had the company replace the water meter and he had to pay nearly 500,000 VND but there was no receipt.

What upset Mr. Minh was that many times, trucks running on the road damaged the meters. When people reported it to the company, the company asked people to spend money to buy materials and hire workers to fix it. "No one agreed, but in the end, they still had to spend money. Because if they didn't fix it, there would be no water to use, and people couldn't bear it," Mr. Minh said.

Not only Mr. Quang and Mr. Minh's families, but also many other families in the area, when the company replaced their water meters, had to pay. The amount of money paid was different, some households had receipts, some did not. Mr. Nguyen Hong Minh, house number 161, Hercman Street, said that the company sent a notice inviting the family to come and do the procedures to replace the meter, but the family did not go. "Mr. Quang and I have protested many times, but they still insisted on collecting the money. Around the beginning of October 2015, they checked my family's meter and informed me that the lead seal had been lost, so we had to replace the meter, otherwise the water supply would be cut off. The family had to pay 470,000 VND to replace the new meter. When I paid, I asked for a receipt, but the company's accounting department did not give it to me," said Mr. Minh.

Because the meter was burned, the Water Supply Company Limited replaced the meter for the customer but collected money, contrary to Decree 117.

Working with reporters, Mr. Nguyen Quang Duyen - Deputy Director of Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited admitted that there was an incident of collecting money to replace Mr. Quang's meter as well as many other families. That is not in accordance with the provisions of Decree 117/2007/ND-CP dated July 11, 2007 of the Government on the production, supply and consumption of clean water. Currently, the water price only includes a very small amount of maintenance and connection costs, so it is very difficult to comply with Decree 117. The company hopes that customers will share the difficulties with the company so that both sides can better implement the issue of clean water production and supply.

Regarding Mr. Quang's reflection, there is an unreasonable clause in the water supply service contract between the company and the customer. Specifically, in Clause 3, Article 11, the contract states: Party B (customer - PV) is responsible for managing and protecting the installed water meter. When the meter is damaged or lost, Party B must bear the cost of repairing or purchasing a new meter to replace it (except in cases where the damage is caused by a manufacturer's fault and is under a 6-month warranty period from the date of installation and commissioning).

According to Mr. Quang, the installation location has been moved by the company outside the family's fence, so the family cannot manage it 24/7. According to Clause 4, Article 49 of Decree 117 regulating the production, supply and consumption of clean water of the Government, customers are only responsible for protecting the water meter in their management area; outside the customer's management area, the water supply unit must be responsible for management. When the reporter questioned this content, Mr. Nguyen Quang Duyen could not explain and answered in a roundabout way, continuing to blame the customer.

Invitations, receipts, and water cut-off orders sent to Mr. Quang's family by Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited.

Regarding the content of Mr. Quang's accusation that the company took advantage of its monopoly to pressure customers, and suspected that the company intentionally sabotaged customers' meters, there is no basis to confirm. However, through grasping the information, it is seen that the company's continuous sending of invitations to people to the company to complete procedures to buy new meters to replace them, otherwise the company will temporarily stop supplying water, is a demonstration of disrespect to customers. Because replacing meters is the company's responsibility and it cannot "threaten" to stop supplying water to customers just because customers do not come.

Regarding this issue, Mr. Duyen said that he would review customer feedback on the attitude of the staff, and at the same time, request the units to seriously learn from their experiences. In the coming time, the company will remind the staff when contacting customers to improve their service responsibilities, explain clearly so that customers understand and agree with the company to ensure effective water supply, people can use clean water, ensure urban civilization, at the same time, the company also has revenue to reinvest and do business.

The location of the water meter is outside the family's management area, so Mr. Quang thinks that the company's requirement that customers must protect and repair damage or loss is incorrect.

Thus, Mr. Quang's reflections are mostly correct. The response of Nghe An Water Supply Company Limited as above is not convincing. Because according to the investigation, not only Mr. Quang but also many households in the company's 100,000 customers have to pay for the meter, which is contrary to Decree 117 and Decree 124 of the Government. Therefore, all levels and sectors need to get involved to clarify the matter in order to soon have solutions to ensure the legitimate rights of customers and the company itself.

Pham Bang