No joy for bakery owner in meter dispute

Two years ago Msukaligwa Local Municipality removed amp meters from various businesses in town and replaced them with Kilowatt meters, which resulted in astronomical electricity bills and, in some cases, electricity cut-offs.
These installations took place without consultation with the business owners and some of them resorted to taking the matter to the Ermelo Business Association (EBA) who in turn took the matter to the High Court.
Mr Hein Lamprecht from Bora-Bora Bakery elected to resolve this matter with the municipality directly and was not included in the list of members represented by the EBA.
After the meters were installed, Mr Lamprecht lodged a formal dispute (the first of many) with the municipality. Among others, he complained that the municipality had exchanged the meters unilaterally with no agreement or notice to inform him of the financial impact it would have on his business.
Unable to pay the high electricity bill, Mr Lamprecht had to cope with regular electricity cut-offs that resulted in an estimated direct loss of R300 000.
After failing to resolve this matter with the municipality, Mr Lamprecht referred the matter to the Office of the Public Protector.
A meeting between Mr Lamprecht, the municipality and an investigator from the Office of the Public Protector took place on 17 March this year.
According to Mr Lamprecht, the investigator ordered that the new meter be replaced with an amp meter, the excess debt be written off and no more cut-offs until the matter was resolved.
Mr Lamprecht said no official letter of the findings of the investigator was ever sent to him or the municipality.
It is three months later and the matter has still not been resolved.
According to Mr Lamprecht, his electricity has been cut since the meeting and municipal employees made a futile attempt to replace a breaker without producing any proof of identification or an official order from the municipality.
An enquiry from the Highvelder to the Public Protector regarding an official letter stating their findings resulted in a letter being sent to Mr Lamprecht.
In this letter the investigator states that “the municipality will remove the electrical equipment that was installed illegally at your convenience.” It also stated that the communication served as a letter of authority ordering the municipality to replace the electrical equipment, but by the time of going to print the municipality had made no effort to do so.
The investigator concluded that they considered the matter to be finalised and that there was no reason to pursue the investigation.
Although relieved by the official letter, Mr Lamprecht doubts that the matter can be considered to be finalised if there is no mention of the excess debt, electricity cut-offs or any form of compensation for income lost during electricity cut-offs during the past two years since the illegal installation.
An enquiry regarding this matter was again sent to the office of the Public Protector on 11 July, with no response by the time of going to print.