Supply AKELCO Losses P211,767.50
By Ambrosio R. Villorente
“The court finds that the preponderance of evidence tilts in favor of the petitioner and judgment is hereby rendered ordering the respondent to pay petitioner: a) the sum of P5,000.00 as actual damages, b) the sum of P100,000.00 as moral damages, c) the sum of P30,000.00 as attorney’s fees, d) the sum of P75,000.00 as exemplary damages, and e) the sum of 1,767.50 for filing and docket fees, and cost of the suit.”
This is the decision of Hon. Dean R. Telan, presiding judge of Branch 9, Regional Trial Court, Kalibo, Aklan, on Civil Case No. 6850 with Ms. Helen Tilano, plaintiff versus AKELCO, represented by Mr. Erico O. Bucoy, defendant.
The case started after AKELCO cut off electric power connection to the house of Ms. Helen Tilano in Linabuan Sur, Banga, Aklan in the morning of May 20, 2003. At 9:00 o’clock in the morning. It was 9:00 o’clock in the morning that day, Tilano was at work in New Washington, Aklan when some employees of AKELCO arrived. They looked for Helen Tilano. Mona Gañaca, a niece and a neighbor of Tilano asked them why? The AKELCO employees then informed Gañaca that Tilano has not paid her electric bills for October to November 2002 and therefore they are there to cut off her supply of electricity. Gañaca told the AKELCO personnel to wait for Tilano but inspite of it, AKELCO personnel cut off the drop wire of Helen’s electricity. Before leaving, they told Gañaca to just tell Tilano to pay her bills in Banga AKELCO office.”
Tilano arrived in her house at 6:00 o’clock in the evening of that same day and found her electricity supply was cut-off. Gañaca informed her of what happened while she (Tilano) was out, that her electricity was cut off because she has not paid her October to November 2002 power bills.
Due to the disconnection, Tilano’s perishable goods and medicine stored inside her refrigerator valued at about P5,000.00 were damaged. She also felt embarrassed, shame and felt discomfort which if quantified in terms of money is valued about P125,000.00. She was also compelled to litigate and agreed to pay her legal counsel P50,000.00 as Attorney’s fees and spent P1,767.50 for filing and docket fees.
In the course of the hearing, AKELCO presented a “Disconnection Order“ dated May 20, 2003 issued by Alejandro Arceño, area supervisor of AKELCO, Banga, Aklan. The said order was given to Jesus Rivas on the same day who immediately implemented it as April 2003 bill of Ramon Tilano, father of the plaintiff Helen Tilano in whose name the house was registered, was not paid on its due date which was May 15 and so, they made the disconnection on May 20.
Moreover, defendant Bucoy pointed out that “the 10 days grace period granted to the consumer to pay as it appearing at the back side of the bill, starts from the receipt of the bill and not from its due date. Since the bill of Ramon Tilano must have been delivered to his house on April 29, 2003, the 10 day period would be until May 9 within which to pay the bill. Failing to pay it on or before May 9, respondent was well within its right to effect the disconnection on May 20, 2003. Petitioner paid the bill only on May 22, 2003.
In the testimonies of Mona Gañaca, she said the Akelco employees arrived in the morning of May 20 2003, looked for the electric meter of Helen Tilano and told her “they are going to cut off Tilano’s supply of electricity because she has not paid her electric bills for October to November 2002.”
While AKELCO admitted disconnection order was issued, it was not for the October to November 2002 power bills but for Helen Tilano’s failure to pay her April 2003 power bills.
It should be noted that Helen Tilano exhibited her receipt showing that she has fully paid her October to November 2002 power bills. But AKELCO showed the Disconnection Order dated May 17, 2003 showing that the two power bills of October to November 2002 and March 20 to April 21, 2003 were not yet paid and therefore the basis of disconnection.
Considering that the October to November 2002 was already paid, Bucoy maintained that the disconnection is for the failure to pay the March 20-April 21, 2003 bill. However, Tilano argued that even if she has not aid the March–April 2003 power bill, the disconnection was still illegal. She argued that the customer/member of respondent cooperative is granted a grace period of ten (10) days from the due date within which to settle their bills and the disconnection must be done with the presence of the petitioner. Hence, the disconnection done to her violated the cooperative policy.
Ttilano cited the notice to the “valued members” printed in Aklanon language at the back side of the power bill granting a period of ten (10) days to pay the bill. The notice does not say when will the 10 days start.
Bucoy interpreted the notice at the back of the power bill to start when the bill should have been delivered. Hence, the bill should have been paid on May 9 as it was delivered on April 29, 2003. AKELCO could have cut off electricity on May 10, 2003.
But Tilano found this AKELCO interpretation absurd. She believes that the 10 day grace period must start from the due day of the bill which is May 15, hence the 10 day grace period started on May 16 up to May 25. AKELCO could not cut off electricity before May 25. The disconnection done on May 20, 2003 was premature and illegal as the due date was May 15. May 16 to May 20 is not 10 days but five (5) days only.
Hon. Dean R. Telan, in his decision dated September 16, 2005 wrote: it appearing now…the respondent had no legal right or authority whatsoever to cut off petitioner’s supply of electricity, the disconnection made by them is already illegal.., it should be made to pay the damages sustained by the petitioner by reason of the wrongful act of the respondent.”
Hence, AKELCO through Mr. Erico O. Bucoy, “in order to deter others of similar ilk and bent in recklessly, hastily and illegally cutting off the supply of electricity to the public …must be made to pay exemplary damages in the amount prayed for.” /MP mailto:madyaas_pen@yahoo.com
By Ambrosio R. Villorente
“The court finds that the preponderance of evidence tilts in favor of the petitioner and judgment is hereby rendered ordering the respondent to pay petitioner: a) the sum of P5,000.00 as actual damages, b) the sum of P100,000.00 as moral damages, c) the sum of P30,000.00 as attorney’s fees, d) the sum of P75,000.00 as exemplary damages, and e) the sum of 1,767.50 for filing and docket fees, and cost of the suit.”
This is the decision of Hon. Dean R. Telan, presiding judge of Branch 9, Regional Trial Court, Kalibo, Aklan, on Civil Case No. 6850 with Ms. Helen Tilano, plaintiff versus AKELCO, represented by Mr. Erico O. Bucoy, defendant.
The case started after AKELCO cut off electric power connection to the house of Ms. Helen Tilano in Linabuan Sur, Banga, Aklan in the morning of May 20, 2003. At 9:00 o’clock in the morning. It was 9:00 o’clock in the morning that day, Tilano was at work in New Washington, Aklan when some employees of AKELCO arrived. They looked for Helen Tilano. Mona Gañaca, a niece and a neighbor of Tilano asked them why? The AKELCO employees then informed Gañaca that Tilano has not paid her electric bills for October to November 2002 and therefore they are there to cut off her supply of electricity. Gañaca told the AKELCO personnel to wait for Tilano but inspite of it, AKELCO personnel cut off the drop wire of Helen’s electricity. Before leaving, they told Gañaca to just tell Tilano to pay her bills in Banga AKELCO office.”
Tilano arrived in her house at 6:00 o’clock in the evening of that same day and found her electricity supply was cut-off. Gañaca informed her of what happened while she (Tilano) was out, that her electricity was cut off because she has not paid her October to November 2002 power bills.
Due to the disconnection, Tilano’s perishable goods and medicine stored inside her refrigerator valued at about P5,000.00 were damaged. She also felt embarrassed, shame and felt discomfort which if quantified in terms of money is valued about P125,000.00. She was also compelled to litigate and agreed to pay her legal counsel P50,000.00 as Attorney’s fees and spent P1,767.50 for filing and docket fees.
In the course of the hearing, AKELCO presented a “Disconnection Order“ dated May 20, 2003 issued by Alejandro Arceño, area supervisor of AKELCO, Banga, Aklan. The said order was given to Jesus Rivas on the same day who immediately implemented it as April 2003 bill of Ramon Tilano, father of the plaintiff Helen Tilano in whose name the house was registered, was not paid on its due date which was May 15 and so, they made the disconnection on May 20.
Moreover, defendant Bucoy pointed out that “the 10 days grace period granted to the consumer to pay as it appearing at the back side of the bill, starts from the receipt of the bill and not from its due date. Since the bill of Ramon Tilano must have been delivered to his house on April 29, 2003, the 10 day period would be until May 9 within which to pay the bill. Failing to pay it on or before May 9, respondent was well within its right to effect the disconnection on May 20, 2003. Petitioner paid the bill only on May 22, 2003.
In the testimonies of Mona Gañaca, she said the Akelco employees arrived in the morning of May 20 2003, looked for the electric meter of Helen Tilano and told her “they are going to cut off Tilano’s supply of electricity because she has not paid her electric bills for October to November 2002.”
While AKELCO admitted disconnection order was issued, it was not for the October to November 2002 power bills but for Helen Tilano’s failure to pay her April 2003 power bills.
It should be noted that Helen Tilano exhibited her receipt showing that she has fully paid her October to November 2002 power bills. But AKELCO showed the Disconnection Order dated May 17, 2003 showing that the two power bills of October to November 2002 and March 20 to April 21, 2003 were not yet paid and therefore the basis of disconnection.
Considering that the October to November 2002 was already paid, Bucoy maintained that the disconnection is for the failure to pay the March 20-April 21, 2003 bill. However, Tilano argued that even if she has not aid the March–April 2003 power bill, the disconnection was still illegal. She argued that the customer/member of respondent cooperative is granted a grace period of ten (10) days from the due date within which to settle their bills and the disconnection must be done with the presence of the petitioner. Hence, the disconnection done to her violated the cooperative policy.
Ttilano cited the notice to the “valued members” printed in Aklanon language at the back side of the power bill granting a period of ten (10) days to pay the bill. The notice does not say when will the 10 days start.
Bucoy interpreted the notice at the back of the power bill to start when the bill should have been delivered. Hence, the bill should have been paid on May 9 as it was delivered on April 29, 2003. AKELCO could have cut off electricity on May 10, 2003.
But Tilano found this AKELCO interpretation absurd. She believes that the 10 day grace period must start from the due day of the bill which is May 15, hence the 10 day grace period started on May 16 up to May 25. AKELCO could not cut off electricity before May 25. The disconnection done on May 20, 2003 was premature and illegal as the due date was May 15. May 16 to May 20 is not 10 days but five (5) days only.
Hon. Dean R. Telan, in his decision dated September 16, 2005 wrote: it appearing now…the respondent had no legal right or authority whatsoever to cut off petitioner’s supply of electricity, the disconnection made by them is already illegal.., it should be made to pay the damages sustained by the petitioner by reason of the wrongful act of the respondent.”
Hence, AKELCO through Mr. Erico O. Bucoy, “in order to deter others of similar ilk and bent in recklessly, hastily and illegally cutting off the supply of electricity to the public …must be made to pay exemplary damages in the amount prayed for.” /MP mailto:madyaas_pen@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment