Meralco to explain surge in charges to consumers

MANILA, Philippines — Communicating clearly the surge in charges during the lockdown is a skill that has so far evaded Manila Electric Co. (Meralco).

After senators on Monday slammed Meralco for failing to explain the estimated and actual consumption of electricity on bills during the community quarantine (ECQ), customers could expect to receive a letter from the company explaining how they had been charged during the months when no meter readings were conducted,

Meralco president Ray Espinosa apologized and said the firm would send letters to customers to clarify the charges even as he maintained that it was only collecting for amounts they had actually consumed.

Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian, chair of the energy committee, said he himself found it hard to understand his Meralco bills, which he said contained “overestimated” amounts.

Failure to clarify

“In relation to your specific bill and with respect to all similar cases, I believe, as you have clearly pointed out, there has been basically a failure on our part to clarify to our customers what is actual and what is estimated, and that I wish to apologize to you and to all similarly situated customers,” Espinosa said at a Senate hearing.

He said Meralco, the power distributor in Metro Manila and nearby provinces, would send customers in the same situation a “separate clarificatory letter” that would show the previous meter reading as of February and the meter reading as of May or June.

It would then explain that the estimated consumption in March, April and May had been actually accounted for and that they were not being billed in addition to what they had consumed.

“It is not Meralco’s business to charge our customers beyond what they’ve actually consumed,” Espinosa said.

‘Bill shock’

Many had ranted against “bill shock” when they received their bills following the lifting of the ECQ, during which no meters were read.

This issue was among the subjects of the 47,000 complaints that the Energy Regulatory Commission had received, according to its chair, Agnes Devanadera.

Gatchalian said he received a bill for March that included an amount for April and May. His bill for May, when an actual meter reading was conducted, takes into account the last reading for February and the last reading for May, which is supposed to reflect as well his consumption for March and April.

The senator said he only stayed in a condominium unit for less than 17 days from March to May, so his March and April bills that were more than P10,000 each were “overestimates.” His bill for May was a little over P3,000. The bill did not indicate a refund for the overestimate, he said.

No overcharge

Victor Genuino, first vice president and head of Meralco’s Customer Retail Services and Corporate Communications unit, maintained that Gatchalian was not overcharged.

Genuino said the bill based on the February meter reading added the estimates for March and April.

When actual meter reading was done in May, Meralco subtracted the May actual reading with the previous reading which includes February and the estimated March and April consumption, he said.

The net amount was what was charged to Gatchalian for May, said Genuino.

“So there’s no overcharging for your bill because your May [bill] already reflected your consumption based on that reading that we did,” he said.

Anything that was “overly overestimated” in March and April was adjusted in the May consumption, he added.

‘They can’t understand it’

But Gatchalian said this was not explained anywhere in customers’ bills, hence the confusion.

“You expect me to just blindly trust Meralco,” he said. “I cannot blame consumers for crying and complaining because they can’t understand it. If the chairman of the energy committee could not understand it, how could the others?” he added.

Genuino said it was Meralco’s obligation and responsibility to educate customers on how their bill was properly computed.

Sen. Risa Hontiveros said that aside from confusing bills, customers seeking an explanation were faced with long lines at Meralco centers and hotlines that could not be reached.

‘Kept in the dark’

“Amid this dark time, Meralco further kept Filipinos in the dark instead of providing light. Meralco, instead of standing with us, has decided to put profitability and its corporate interests first,” Hontiveros said.

She also said there was also confusion about charges that customers could pay in installments.

The bills incurred during the ECQ could be paid in several tranches, but some had paid these in full because of lack of clarity in the Meralco bills, she pointed out.

Espinosa said those who were entitled to installment plans but had paid the full amount could seek a refund and would then receive separate bills for the installment payments.