Stakeholders as well as electricity consumers have decried electricity distribution companies’ (Discos) appropriation of consumers’ infrastructure without refund.
According to investigation, electricity consumers invest heavily in distribution networks and distribution infrastructure in form of line materials, transformers, insulators, which the 11 Discos signed to do when they took over assets of the defunct Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN).
This was part of what they signed to do when they took over but have reneged blaming it on lack of reflective cost tariff, the stakeholders state.
The Discos should have invested in this infrastructure through their capital expenditure (CAPEX) but they have refused to do anything, hiding under lack of reflective tariff, they say.
Electricity consumers, because of their desperation to have power supply, quickly rally round themselves to get those infrastructures fixed and after they were fixed the Discos take ownership of them and still give consumers an estimated bill or other forms of billing.
Yet, consumers don’t get a refund for their investments because such transaction has no contractual agreement binding on both parties, they note.
According to Ayodami Oladosu, a general contractor, if such agreement is to be in place it would have been explicit what is expected from both parties. He regrets that many of the infrastructures put in place by the consumers have been taken over by the Discos and no compensations paid for ownership them.
Read also: With electricity tariff increase imminent, NERC toughens DisCos obligations
Kunle Kola Olubiyo, president, Nigeria Consumer Protection Network, says it is a negation of globally acceptable principle of “Freewill Consensus ad idem,” when a distribution company refuses to provide necessary investment to fund the much needed technical investments in its distribution network in any given community or forced communities to write an undertaken under undue influence or forced electricity consumers to enter into an undertaken that investment made by the consumers are voluntary donations.
He says in terms of meeting of the minds for consensus ad idem, the parties entering agreement are expected to be at par and not one party to the contract forcing the other under duress and undue influence.
In Nigeria situations, he notes, electricity distribution companies’ watch communities invest in distribution network, buy transformers, concrete poles, feeder pillars, aluminium conductors, insulators, and also do earthen.
“At times, investments in the region of N5 million – N20 million could be undertaken to designed a distribution network while the only thing the electricity distribution company will do is to energised the Network and then it over,” he says.
In many cases, consumers are compelled to agree that the infrastructure provided are donations made free of charge if not they would not be energise to supply electricity to them.
According to Olubiyo, such unfortunate scenario and undertaken are akin to commando-like arm twisting of electricity consumers under duress and undue influences, which is devoid of “Consensus ad idem.”
The Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) has also not help matter as it often says the consumers did not follow due processes in doing such investments.
It says it is not incumbent on it to make sure electricity distribution companies are made to refund such investment through electricity bills sent to consumers the moment the distribution companies start using such Network for revenue collections and billing.
