#26183
deesee2304
Flatchatter
Chat-starter

    Thank you everybody for your replies thus far – very useful for us.  I can answer some of the questions made to the past two posts to add some clarification:

    *The tank is owned/leased from Elgas, The pipes/meters to each lot are owned by common property I think.  The Tank is located on common property

    *The Property managers pay for the bulk supply as the tank is filled by Elgas and then bill each lot holder accordingly on usage.  The gas bills are made out under the business name of the property managers.  It is the property managers who are profiting from this as part of their portfolio in the community.

    * The property managers are owners of two lots in the scheme and represent one position in the EC.  Their role is twofold – managing the grounds and they also run the accommodation letting business – 35/43 lots are managed as holiday houses as we’re in a coastal location.

    *Whether this is legal or not is my deepest concern, the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) states that any business or person on selling energy like this example must have a retail exemption registered: see https://www.aer.gov.au/retail-markets/retail-exemptions 

    I have looked closely on this site, they are not listed on the register as an exempt retailer and there is very little compliance to the rules set out in the guidelines.  There are 3 main points in the AER guidelines which I have pointed out the the property managers and the EC to which the response is silent:

                Page 6: Under the Retail Law, anyone who sells energy to people for               use at premises must have either a retailer authorisation, or a retail                 exemption.  

                Page 22: Choice of retailer

                Section 114(1)(b) of the Retail Law states that ‘exempt customers                 should, as far as practicable, be afforded the right to a choice of                     retailer in the same way as comparable retail customers in the same               jurisdiction have that right’. In principle, all customers should be able               to choose their energy retailer. We therefore do not support the                     creation of infrastructure that deliberately reduces a customer’s ability             to exercise choice.

                Page 25 “Exempt sellers who are selling to small, commercial or retail             customers in embedded networks who do not have cost-effective                   access to choice of retailer are also not permitted to charge those                   customers more than the local area retailer’s standing offer.”

    The EC have maintained that they are agreeable to us separating from the existing network and gaining our own supply provided that we foot the bill of getting a By-Law drafted about it.  We’re deeply concerned at the costs of what this could come to as they insist on choosing the Lawyer to do the work and are quite unclear about the parameters of what they want the By-Law to entail other than things around the location of tanks on the lot, visual changes, truck access etc.  All these aspects were provided to them by us in our original submission, there was agreement that there would be no changes to the visual aspects as they will be installed hidden in a utility area where skip bins are already stored.  The only other part of the by-law they intend to include from our knowledge is that no other owners would be permitted to change to their own supply should they intend on doing so.

    In the last communication made to the EC, I mentioned that if we cannot come to an amicable resolution then we would have no option but to proceed to NCAT to have the matter heard.  The response was that we have a right to do so and suggested that NCAT would most likely back their side and they now intend to contact the insurers of the community title of our intentions and notify all owners in the scheme.

    Cheers

    D