Tenants face Rp 411m water bills

Tenants face Rp 411m water bills

Zakki Hakim, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

About 6,000 tenants in low-cost apartments in Klender, East
Jakarta, face the likelihood of being without water unless the
company that manages the apartments pays Rp 411 million
(US$47,400) in outstanding water bills within 30 days.

The tenants said they were surprised to learn that water
operator PT Thames PAM Jaya (TPJ) had not received their payments
as they had paid the money to the apartments' agent, who was
supposed to deliver the cash to the company.

Negotiations between tenants and TPJ, however, have not
produced results, and the residents may have to pay the arrears
to TPJ themselves instead of the agent.

TPJ, the water supplier to the apartments, announced on
Wednesday that it would turn off the water supply to the
apartments next month if the agent, PPRSK, failed to settle the
debt, which has been outstanding since August 2000.

Berton Tobing, a 50-year-old apartment resident, told The
Jakarta Post on Thursday that he always paid his water bills to
PPRSK on time, and was concerned about TPJ's ultimatum.

"It is not our fault, we always pay our bills on time. Why
should we be punished?" he said.

Mia Korompis, a TPJ spokeswoman, told the Post that her
company realized that making the residents take the
responsibility would not be fair, because the party responsible
was PPRSK, which had not appeared serious about paying the
arrears.

According to her, TPJ had evidence that PPRSK had been
invoicing residents at significantly higher rates for their water
consumption, but had failed to deliver the payment to TPJ.

Technically, the Klender apartments are classified as being on
one "big meter", and therefore TPJ cannot charge the residents
individually, but only through PPRSK, which is supposed to
forward the tenants' payments to the company, she said.

"Our action may cause inconvenience to the tenants, but we are
left with no workable solution," she said.

She said that TPJ hoped the ultimatum would prompt the tenants
to put pressure on PPRSK to take responsibility.

She also suggested that the tenants had the option of
reporting PPRSK to the police and taking the matter to court.

Either way, she said, a slight clarification of possible
settlements in the case would be enough to forestall
disconnection, considering the goodwill displayed by the tenants.

Nur, a PPRSK administrator, denied that his party had any
outstanding debts with TPJ and claimed that the money collected
was not owed to TPJ, but was used to maintain the water supply
infrastructure and none of the money went to either him or his
colleagues as individuals.

"Before August 2000, TPJ collected money directly from the
tenants, but irregularities occurred and a big chunk amounting to
Rp 520 million was PPRSK's right," he said.

Korompis said that from April 1998 to August 2000, TPJ did
collect payments directly and charged tenants at the regular
household rate of about Rp 1,300 per cubic meter. After August
2000, payments were collected through PPRSK, and a lower rate of
Rp 375 per cubic meter for low-cost housing was charged.

"I presumed PPRSK is claiming the difference between the
regular rate and the lower rate within that period," she said.

TPJ has a 25-year partnership contract with PAM Jaya to
operate, maintain and improve the water distribution system in
eastern Jakarta.

TPJ and other water operators in Jakarta have been criticized
for increasing water rates, and they have been advised to focus
on reducing water leakages and other losses in order to curb high
operational costs rather than burdening customers with rate
increases.