Homeowners refuse to pay DTEK a debt of 270,654 hryvnias – here's the court's decision.

Employees of DTEK discovered a violation at the address involving unauthorized connection. The homeowners are being asked to pay 270,654 hryvnias for unaccounted electricity, but they refuse. This is stated in the decision of the Kryvyi Rih District Court of Dnipropetrovsk (the legal name of the court), published on December 19, 2024.

The joint-stock company "DTEK Dnipro Electric Networks" is requesting that a man and woman be ordered to pay 270,654 hryvnias for unaccounted electricity based on the violation act dated January 23, 2023. During a raid inspection of the electrical metering devices and installations at their address on January 23, 2023, violations were identified in accordance with p. 2.3.3 of the PRREE, which corresponds to p. 8.4.2 of the PRREE. The unauthorized connection of electrical installations, current receivers, and wiring to the DTEK Dnipro Electric Networks grid was identified as a violation of the accounting scheme. When the load was applied, the impulses were absent, the electricity meter did not record, and electricity was consumed without accounting.

On July 18, 2023, a response to the lawsuit was submitted to the court, in which the man requested that the claim be denied in full. Upon receiving the violation act dated January 23, 2023, he learned that the recorded violations "were established with the participation of the consumer"; however, he does not know who that is and is unclear why and on what grounds DTEK employees consider him to be the electricity consumer at that address based on his driver's license. The amount the company is asking to recover from them exceeds one hundred times the minimum subsistence level for working-age individuals, which is significant for him.

The woman filed a counterclaim against the joint-stock company "DTEK Dnipro Electric Networks," requesting that the commission's decision regarding the violation act dated January 23, 2023, be deemed unlawful and annulled. An unknown individual was indicated as the consumer's representative in the act, who allowed DTEK employees onto the consumer's property, with their identity established based on a driver's license. On March 2, 2023, the commission reviewed the act dated January 23, 2023, and calculated an additional debt of 270,654 hryvnias. The violation described in the act dated January 23, 2023, actually occurred on the consumer's land plot on Raketoystroiteley Street. This land plot was not connected to the grid at the time the violation act was compiled, as it only contained one unfinished and uncommissioned building. The mentioned building was connected to the electricity networks of the neighboring property. All consumed electricity was accounted for by the meter of that neighboring property. She believes the procedure for compiling the violation act was violated. The employees of the OSR entered the territory independently without notifying or involving the consumer, without any outside assistance. Furthermore, the calculation period cannot exceed 6 months and must begin on the day of the last inspection.

What did the court decide?

The court granted the claim. The man and woman will be jointly liable to pay the joint-stock company "DTEK Dnipro Electric Networks" the amount of 270,654 hryvnias for unaccounted electricity.

"The arguments of the plaintiff in the counterclaim regarding the fact that OSR employees independently entered the specified territory without notifying and involving the consumer were not substantiated and were refuted by the evidence examined during the court session. The calculation provided by the joint-stock company 'DTEK Dnipro Electric Networks' regarding the amount of damages caused was performed correctly. The mere fact of disagreement with the disputed decision of the commission for reviewing violation acts of the Dnipro Calculation Center of the joint-stock company 'DTEK Dnipro Electric Networks' concerning the violation act dated January 23, 2023, does not indicate the validity of the counterclaim. The court also considers that the act and protocol of violations compiled by the employees of the electricity supply organization simply record such violations discovered during the inspection of compliance with these rules, do not impose any obligations on the consumer, and represent a form of claim, thus the court concludes that the plaintiff's chosen method of protecting rights by annulling the protocol regarding the violation act and declaring the commission's actions regarding the specified act unlawful does not effectively restore the violated right, and therefore, such claims cannot be satisfied," the court emphasized.