WHAT has the disenfranchised Panay Electric Co. (PECO) to gain from weaving “fake news” aimed at besmirching the reputation of MORE Electric and Power Corp. (MORE Power)?
Whoever swallows that news is said to be, in local lingo, “nakuryente” – deceived, that is.
Why has PECO slid down from being distributor of true kuryente (electricity) to purveyor of fake kuryente? It does not make sense because it would profit them nothing.
The heirs of the original owners who are among the living incorporators of this 96-year-old former distribution utility in Iloilo City should have exercised sportsmanship in playing the game it lost to MORE Power. Ninety-six years of glory is no peanuts, after all.
The undisputed fact is that while its franchise expired on Jan. 19, 2019, PECO has held on for one year and one month more through a legal case questioning the “constitutionality” of the law (Republic Act 11212) – signed by President Rodrigo Duterte on Feb. 14, 2019 – granting MORE Power the next 25-year power-distribution franchise.
A recent fake news issued by PECO alluded to unspecified “defects” in the GE I-120 electric meters that MORE Power had installed, alleging that the use of the said model could trigger higher monthly bills.
To support his contention, PECO’s administrative manager Marcelo Cacho cited a case filed in the United States, where the Central Maine Power Co. (CMP) was allegedly fined US$10 million for using the same GE model that generated erroneous bills for its consumers.
Cacho cited the case of Rob Du Paul — a small business owner from Maine — who complained that his bill had jumped from US $100 to US $1,500 without tracing the jump to a change in meter brand.
Aclara Meters Philippines, local distributor of the Aclara brand (formerly GE), could not take the fake news hands-down. In an official statement dated March 21, 2020, Aclara disputed Cacho’s claim with a clarification that the inaccurate meter was not a GE I-120.
But with Cacho himself admitting that MORE Power’s GE I-120 meter had been accredited by the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) after passing the agency’s test and calibration, was he also accusing ERC of being remiss in protecting the interest of consumers?
It would therefore be foolhardy for PECO to cite the famous GE brand in its desperate attempt to win back the certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) that the ERC had already issued to MORE Power.
Moreover, records at the ERC indicate that it was PECO that had many times been guilty of overcharging customers and non-refunding bill deposits.
Two consumer groups, i-Konsumidor and Panay Consumers Alliance, seek to recover refunds that PECO owes power consumers. According to Ted Aldwin Ong, chairman of i-Konsumidor, the ERC had ordered PECO to refund the P631 million it had overcharged customers. PECO responded by promising to pay in “installment.”
It was not uncommon for customers to be billed P10,000 when they used to pay only P1,000. Instead of correcting the error, PECO asked its “victims” to pay on installment.
What could have compelled the House of Representatives to reject PECO’s application for renewal of franchise submitted in 2017 and to approve MORE Power’s subsequent application in 2018?
In the years 2017 and 2018, consumers’ complaints about overbilling deluged the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Iloilo City, which in turn, forwarded them to the House.
In fairness, Cacho could be right, as he was in saying, “Ilonggos deserve the best.” Definitely, however, it’s not PECO.
The Ilonggos also deserve to know the truth, not pekeng balita. (hvego31@gmail.com/PN)