DTEK stopped supplying electricity to a Kyiv resident's apartment despite overpayment. Here’s the court's decision on the matter.

The man is dissatisfied with the cessation of electricity supply to his apartment. DTEK has issued a debt notice However, he asserts that he has a surplus payment for the electricity consumed amounting to 74 hryvnias. This is stated in the decision of the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv, published on May 29, 2024.

On October 13, 2020, the man discovered the absence of electricity in his apartment. In an effort to resolve the issue of restoring electricity to the building, he repeatedly called and visited DTEK, but was denied each time due to the alleged debt. In a letter dated August 24, 2023, DTEK indicated that as of January 1, 2019, there was a surplus payment for consumed electricity amounting to 74 hryvnias based on a reading of 6515 kWh in the records of DTEK "Kyiv Electric Networks." However, in a letter dated December 8, 2021, it was stated that as of January 1, 2019, the meter readings of 2338 kWh, calculated automatically in accordance with the requirements of the Electricity Consumption Rules, resulted in a debt of 6,437 hryvnias due to the lack of actual meter readings as of January 1, 2019. Thus, DTEK acknowledges that there was no debt as of January 1, 2019, implying that the apartment was disconnected from power supply without justification.

“Since July 15, 2008, specialists have not been granted access to the electricity meter installed in the building for conducting inspections, technical checks, and replacing the meter due to the expiration of the verification interval, for which corresponding acts of non-access were drawn up (specifically on May 31, 2017, October 13, 2017, March 22, 2018, November 9, 2018, February 4, 2019, and April 26, 2019). Charges for consumed electricity were made based on calculated readings determined in accordance with the requirements of the electricity usage rules (which were in effect until June 26, 2018), KKOEE, and PRREE (which have been in effect since June 26, 2018). As of January 1, 2019, based on the meter reading of 2338 kWh, which was calculated automatically according to KKOEE due to the absence of actual meter data as of January 1, 2019, DTEK "Kyiv Electric Networks" recorded a debt for consumed electricity in the amount of 6,437 hryvnias at the specified address. Since the residents of the apartment at that address did not provide the company’s representatives with receipts confirming payment of the debt for consumed electricity, and funds were not credited to the account, electricity supply to the premises was first interrupted on March 11, 2019, at the floor distribution board, according to permit order No. 6910. DTEK "Kyiv Electric Networks" has repeatedly conducted disconnections of electricity supply to the premises at the floor distribution board, as confirmed by the company’s internal documents, notably on August 20, 2021, March 8, 2023, April 13, 2023, and April 21, 2023,” - stated DTEK.

What was the court's ruling?

The court granted the man's claim. The private joint-stock company “DTEK Kyiv Electric Networks” was ordered to restore electricity supply to his apartment.

“Since the debt has not been settled, the employees of DTEK "Kyiv Electric Networks" disconnected the apartment where the man resides from the electricity supply. The representative of the defendant noted in the response that as of January 1, 2019, based on the meter reading of 2338 kWh, calculated automatically, there was a debt for consumed electricity in the amount of 6,437 hryvnias. At the same time, in its letter No. 1/3/012/27261 dated August 24, 2023, DTEK "Kyiv Electric Networks" indicated that as of January 1, 2019, based on the calculated reading of 6415 kWh, there was a surplus payment for consumed electricity amounting to 74 hryvnias, which was transferred to LLC "Kyiv Energy Services" for accounting in calculations after January 1, 2019. The court, evaluating the relevance, admissibility, credibility, and sufficiency of each piece of evidence individually, as well as the sufficiency and interrelationship of their totality based on its internal conviction, founded on a comprehensive, complete, objective, and direct examination of the evidence in the case, concludes that the claim should be granted,” - emphasized the court.