The structures of the Malta Resources Authority should be strengthened so that it would be able to identify liability for damages claimed by consumers from Enemalta, the Ombudsman has said.

He made the conclusion in a report on a claim for compensation from Enemalta for damages he suffered as a direct result of a power outage last June that seriously damaged the electrical installation in his residence and for which Enemalta is disclaiming any responsibility.

The Ombudsman said this was only one of a number of cases received by his Office claiming compensation from Enemalta for damages sustained as a result of power cuts, mostly to household electrical appliances and electronic equipment.

In this case, when power was restored following the second power blackout in June, the surge was so overpowering that it melted half the circuit cable of complainant’s residence welding it to the piping system.

Repairing the damage involved considerable expense because immediate action entailed breaking up the tile works or bypassing to install a new cable.

When the complainant requested form of compensation, he was informed by Enemalta that the corporation was unable to accept liability for any damage because “that power cut on that date was totally beyond our control”.

Ombudsman Joseph Said Pullicino said that the MRA had the technical know-how and competence to identify whether Enemalta had to assume liability for damages claimed by the consumer.

“It is incumbent on the corporation to declare its readiness to accept, as a matter of principle, the reasoned decision of the Malta Resources Authority on whether a consumer’s claim that the service provider was responsible for the damages he suffered is justified.

“If, following that decision, the consumer and Enemalta fail to reach agreement on the quantum of damages due, that matter could be referred to voluntary arbitration to which both Enemalta and the consumer would have preventively subscribed,” he said.

Judge Said Pullicino recommended that the Malta Resources Authority and Enemalta Corporation should, within the limits of their respective competences, revisit the provisions of the EU Directive concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity with a view to ensuring that the review of the authority’s complaints mechanism is strengthened and rendered more effective for out of court settlement of disputes.

He said that both the consumer who opted to have recourse to the Malta Resources Authority and Enemalta would bind themselves to abide by the authority’s decision on whether Enemalta was to be held responsible for the damages claimed by the consumer.

They had to undertake that, if no agreement was subsequently reached on the quantum of damages, that matter should be referred to voluntary arbitration.

Judge Said Pullicino said that it has been agreed with the MRA that this and other complaints of a similar nature presently pending before his office would be referred to it for investigation, on a trial basis, in anticipation of a favourable response by the competent authorities to the recommendations made in his opinion.

The full report may be read in the pdf link attached.