The Energy Regulatory Commission imposed a P19-million fine on Manila Electric Co., the country’s biggest power distributor, for allegedly violating the advisories the agency issued during the community quarantine period from March to July.
It said in a decision dated Aug. 20 Meralco failed to clearly indicate that the bills were estimated and failed to comply with the mandated installment payment arrangement.
The agency said based on its evaluation, Meralco incurred a total number of 190 days of violation.
Meralco head of regulatory management Jose Valles said the company would study the order and “file the appropriate pleading after consultation with our lawyers.”
The ERC also directed Meralco to set to zero the distribution, supply and metering charges of lifeline consumers whose monthly energy consumption does not exceed 100 kilowatt-hours for one month effective the next billing cycle immediately upon receipt of the subject ERC decision.
It said the retail rate discount would provide temporary economic relief to more than two million lifeline consumers and their family members for at least a month. The DSM comprised 22.4 percent of the total retail rate.
The total discount to be provided to all lifeline consumers was estimated to be around P200 million, which should not be charged to the non-lifeline consumers.
“Meralco’s neglect to provide accurate and timely information especially during this time of pandemic has created chaos and confusion to most of the electricity consuming public. The commission issued the relevant advisories with the intention of alleviating the financial burden of the electricity consumers who were mostly adversely affected by the community quarantine measures implemented by the government. This serious neglect by Meralco resulted to a multitude of complaints filed by its consumers to this Commission,” ERC chairperson Agnes Devanadera said.
The regulator said that under the circumstances, prudence dictates that Meralco, in the presentation of information to the consumers should always account the normal behavior of consumers.
ERC issued an order dated May 29 asking Meralco to submit its explanation on why it should not be held liable for its alleged violations of the ERC’s directives.
