“We felt the political aspect in the first instance (courts – ELTA). Risk management of electricity fixed price contracts is a very specific matter. I understand that it is difficult for the judges to go into. They turn to the regulator (State Energy Regulatory Council – ELTA) for opinions. His current opinion is that we cannot do that,” said V. Koryzna in an interview with VŽ.
“However, it is not a lost battle. We applied to the LAT, which accepts only a small part of the applications for consideration, but in our case, when small companies and household consumers are affected, the court accepted it for consideration,” he added.
Since June 1 of last year a new provision of the Law on Electricity is in force, by which suppliers are prohibited from demanding cesses or other fees from household consumers and very small and small companies that have unilaterally terminated contracts.
However, as VERT chairman Renatas Pocius has said, the regulator is of the opinion that independent suppliers had no right to require consumers to pay for contracts concluded before 2023. June 1
R. Pocius spoke about the fact that the council participates in court cases in which it defends the interests of consumers affected by illegally deducted taxes back in mid-March.
VERT’s opinion on the non-application of non-laws follows discussions with the European Commission (EC) on the interpretation of the provision of the European directive – it was adopted in the community in 2019, transferred to national legislation in 2021.
According to the head of “Enefit”, the companies can compensate for the risks they face with higher prices, if the law provides the opportunity for some consumers to make a completely free decision about changing the supplier.
In addition, according to V. Koryzna, suppliers observe the desire of some larger companies to “tighten” themselves to the category of small companies defined by the law, which is subject to tax exemption.
“Private customers may not be fully informed and may not know the nuances of those contracts, but the situation is different when it comes to large electricity consumers, some of which have become small businesses by definition. (…) Certain groups of companies are trying to tighten themselves on those small companies, even though they have all the information, energy experts and lawyers appointed for that purpose. They compare the terms of the contract. Sometimes the price is lower, but the obligations are higher, or vice versa. This is where the real competition is,” said the head of Enefit.
In the last session of the Seimas, it was also planned to present a draft law by which the State Energy Regulatory Council (VERT) could oblige independent electricity suppliers to coordinate or change contracts that do not comply with the legislation, which consumers are subject to fees for switching suppliers and non-compliance.
As proposed by the Parliament’s Economic Committee, this procedure should be applied not only to household consumers, but also to small, medium and larger companies, terminating fixed-term fixed-price contracts with suppliers.
According to the parliamentarians, in this way independent suppliers could apply to businesses only the direct economic losses they will suffer due to non-fulfillment of the contract and its premature termination.
2024-09-09 18:13:26