LETTER OF THE DAY - JPS and its customers

THE EDITOR, Sir:

I VISITED a prominent lawyer's office in the Half-Way Tree area one morning recently, and found an embarrassing situation at the multi-business office. The electricity had just been cut off and the place was in darkness as the bill had not been paid. We had to conduct our business in the entrance foyer. My enquiry elicited the following information:

An offer to pay the bill on the spot was refused.

The attorney's name on the bill had a good payment record and there had been an office error in not sending the cheque to the JPS for payment.

JPS sent no warning to the customer.

My enquiry at the JPS head office on why the customer had not received a warning call elicited the following information: JPS may have some customers' information such as cellular phone number or email address which could be used for contact and warning. Office numbers are not yet in place.

Clearly, the JPS needs to become a lot more humane in its practices with its customers. How can this be?

The humane approach

First, the payment should be accepted (and this was refused) at the turn-off time and not with the current practice of insisting that the electricity should be cut off. If necessary, a small penalty charge could be incurred. The National Water Commission (NWC) does this.

Second, a warning system should be initiated for customers who are in delay. The Telephone Company (Cable and Wireless/LIME) does call and warns of possible disconnection. JPS needs to develop its customer information data base.

The avoidance of disconnection will save the JPS time and money for the disconnection/reconnection effort and will build a better relationship with customers.

After all, it is the customers like my lawyer friend who normally pay their bills on time who are subsidising the thousands of non-paying thieves, both large and small, who contribute to the high level of operating inefficiency of the JPS.

The other issue I want to address is the OUR's recent tariff adjustment. There was not surprising a general public outcry at the recent Office of Utility Regulation (OUR)-allowed rate increase. The large newspaper ads which the JPS was at pains to put out when the rate increase was given, comparing electricity rates across the Caribbean, do not address the issue of operating-efficiency levels. There has been the usual debate about return on investment as against legally agreed review and adjustment. Whatever the argument, the decision now by the OUR was is ill-timed and ill-advised .

The decision should have been delayed by the OUR to allow the JPS to do two things which will significantly improved its operating efficiency.

The first is the use of technology to detect and stop the theft. JPS has a large investment in this area and is in the process of implementing this technology.

The second is that with the recent opening up of don-controlled inner-city areas which traditionally paid no utilities, the paradigm has changed and these communities can no longer freeload on the honest customers. Perhaps an OUR proposal some years ago for a flat charge rather than a flat rate for certain inner-city communities might be re-examined.

A period of delay by the OUR would have given the JPS and the OUR time to evaluate the ongoing efficiency improvement of the JPS. This might have even led to no rate increases at all.

I am, etc.,

A.W. SANGSTER

Kingston