Leaks at Arun’s* property led to high gas bills and missing pay-on-time discounts.
The issue
Arun found a leak at his meter after he got a very high gas bill in March. He told his gas company and thought it would fix the leak. However, in July Arun learnt that the leak hadn’t been fixed. His distributor, the company that owns and manages the meters and pipes, told him this when it came to his property to replace the meter.
Arun got his own plumber to look into the problem the next day. His gas company told him the bills were correct and needed to be paid in full. Although he didn’t agree, he paid the $800 bill for the period of April to June. But Arun didn’t pay the bills from June to October, which totalled nearly $1,800. This meant he didn’t get the pay-on-time discount.
When Arun contacted EWOV in December, he wanted his gas company to halve the April to June bill. He also wanted it to apply the pay-on-time discount to the unpaid bills.
The investigation
Arun told us he wasn’t happy with the gas company’s response to the case we raised, so we opened an Investigation. This means we review relevant information from both the customer and the company. We work with both sides to reach a fair and reasonable outcome.
The gas company said there were two leaks. It said the leak discovered in March was on Arun’s side of the meter, which meant he was responsible for the high bills. It said the other leak, discovered in July, was on the distributor’s side.
Arun said the leak he reported in March simply had not been fixed. The distributor confirmed it went to Arun’s property in July, and not earlier. There was nothing to show there were two leaks. Arun gave us his plumber’s invoice which showed he went to the property the day after Arun contacted the gas company in July.
The outcome
To resolve the dispute, the gas company gave Arun a $700 credit, and more than $420 in pay-on-time discounts. It agreed to discuss a payment plan with Arun on the overdue amount and gave him a direct contact for any further issues. Arun was happy with the outcome and we closed the case.
Case number: 2016/28715
*Names have been changed