Tulbagh Info Information
Witzenberg Municipality discourages development
Last correspondence - if any - follows after in sequence below.
Original letter to the Municipality about the multiple sewerage charges which in the opinion of the writer, discourages development - contrary to its obligations in terms of Clause 4 (2) of Chapter 2 of the Municipal Systems Act 2000 (other correspondence between the Municipality and the writer follows below)
5 January, 2009
The Municipal Manager
Witzenberg Municipality
Attention Mr. David Nasson
Dear David,
Further to my mail of yesterday addressed to your official, Mr. Hennie Le Roux, I looked up my previous account and I notice that I was also charged for multiple Refuse and Sewerage charges on that account as well.
Why is the Municipality charging me service charges for empty shops? There is no sewerage being generated from the empty shops and no refuse is being generated either. Must we go through this exercise all over again?
I reiterate what I have said time and time again........Before I took the plunge to create a little commercial centre, the Municipality was getting residential rates on this property and was receiving ONE sewerage and ONE refuse charge from this property.
Now you (the Municipality) are reaping the benefits of my entrepreneurship and my risk-taking and are getting commercial rates and multiple sewerage and refuse charges and yet you seem determined to do what you can to discourage me and to make every effort at every turn to ensure that my developments are not financially viable and I am not a satisfied and content Ratepayer of this Municipality with a sense of well-being - as I should be.
Do you as a Municipality and your Councillors really have a policy of 'take as much as you can to cover your bloated costs and salaries' and give nothing back, or am I just imagining it or being overly sensitive? I have to work hard to generate income especially in these harsh economic times but you as a Municipality just take a bit more from us each year for less service than the previous year.
I am really getting to the point whereby I feel that being in the Witzenberg Municipality is a HUGE negative in my life and for Tulbagh as a community as well. I have watched this town deteriorate over the years to the point that it is clear that this municipality appears incapable of delivering good services and administration to this community and never has, as it is obliged to do in terms of the Constitution. It is just write, write, talk, talk, promises and promises and mostly a total attitude of intransigence towards the Ratepayer of Tulbagh. I am sick to death of it all. Or, am I the one who is negative? Someone correct me if I am?
Unless the Municipality starts to do what it is supposed to be doing - very soon - efficiently and fairly, I aim to devote all my energies this year into making as much 'noise' as I can - much more than previously, to show this Municiplaity up for what appears to be a dysfunctional mess of an example of a Local Authority and to do what I can to get Tulbagh OUT OF the Witzenberg Municipality - even if it means taking the matter of your poor service to much higher levels of Government, the Press and if all fails, to achieve the desired results of good Governance, possibly a Constitutional Court challenge also?
Happy New Year!!
John Veschini
Disheartened and disillusioned Tulbagh resident and property owner
REPLY FROM HENNIE LE ROUX
----- Original Message -----
From: Hennie le Roux
To: John at Rocky Valley ; David Nasson
Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 1:21 PM
Subject: RE: Municipality of Witzenberg discourages development in Tulbagh - open letter
Dear John
Sorry to read about your grieved response, both the one addressed to me and the one below.
In my email I have tried to provide to you with the information that should have happen according to the Councils policy, due to your question.
There was definitely a mistake made by the Municipality by charging refuse removal fees, I did try to indicate it in my email but was not in procession of all the facts at the time of response.
The following charges will be reversed and the credit will be given on the January 2010 account:
4 x Refuse charges – October 2010 3 x Refuse charges – November 2010 3 x Refuse charges – December 2010 The total value of the credit is R *****.** VAT inclusive.
The sewerage is an availability charge, and therefore not a charge that will stop once the tenant is out of the shop. It is also important that the owner ensure that a service connection is performed by the tenant from date of occupation otherwise the levy will stay on the owners account. There are responsibilities on both ends; owner and tenants.
I didn’t had enough time, because I had to attend to another meeting at 09:30, when I send the email below to get all the detail facts but I am really very disappointed in the fact that you did not afford me the opportunity to respond on your grievances prior to you making it an open public document.
I send the email 09:27 and received again a response 11:25. I was still in the meeting at the time of receipt of your response.
REPLY FROM JOHN
----- Original Message -----
From: John at Rocky Valley
To: Hennie le Roux ; David Nasson
Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: Municipality of Witzenberg discourages development in Tulbagh - open letter
Dear Hennie,
Firstly, I already drafted my 'open letter' email before I got your first response but after checking my accounts, I decided to publish the draft anyway. It went off just after my mail to yours.
Secondly, I am not satisfied with your response at all but thank you for your mail and your explanations
However, I not that the 'mistake' was over a period of three months and if I was not aggrieved by this and did not draw your attention to the fact, the municipality would carried on making the 'mistake' for January as well?
Furthermore, your (the Municipality's) viewpoint about sewerage being classed as an 'availability charge' is to me ludicrous. As explained in my emails below and countless times before, the sewerage connection was always here. You were getting a sewerage service fee when the properties were residential and now you are getting multiple sewerage service fees as the shops let. We are not talking about the municipality having to put in sewers to a residential township where few houses are built. In that instance, I can understand availability charges for electricity, water sewerage etc being charged to the owner of a vacant plot. It is as I suggest... a case of discouragement of development when a Municipality such as this one gets 'greedy' and starts to kill the 'goose that lays the golden egg' so to say.
My grievances with the Municipality and especially but not limited to the accounts department, go much further than the above subject matter. I intend to 'flood the communications media' with my 'grievances' in due course. I have had enough.
I have paid the account in question - minus all the sewerage and refuse charges.
Kind regards,
John Veschini
Tulbagh
(No response to the above letter by the Municipality as of 5 February, 2009)
Further letter written by John Veschini on unresponded to or unresolved issues in respect of consumer accounts and Municipal charges
----- Original Message -----
From : John at Rocky Valley
Date : 03 February 2010 01:02 PM
To : Hennie le Roux
Subject : Municipality of Witzenberg discourages development in Tulbagh - open letter
Witzenberg Municipality
Accounts Department
Dear Hennie,
Re : Municipality of Witzenberg discourages development in Tulbagh
I note that these matters referred to in the previous mails (above) have not yet been resolved.
Clarity is still required on the following issues;
1. How and why the Municipality sees fit to charge Sewerage 'availability charges' for empty shops/offices/apartment that are generating no sewerage? What Council policy document, or section of the Municipal Systems Act determines that the Municipality may levy these charges and whether this is considered fair treatment by the Municipality in terms of the Municipal Systems Act? If you have the right to charge these 'sewerage availability levies', can you give me an assurance that every property in town which is let to more than one entity in respect of both residential and commercial, are paying sewerage and refuse charges per entity? In the case of illegal use of residential properties for business purposes all over the town, are the owners or tenants of the business entity being charged an additional sewerage and refuse collection fee?
2. How binding is a Consumer Service agreement on the consumer? Is there expected to be any responsibility on the consumer to honour the terms of the agreement? What responsibility does the Municipality have in collecting debts incurred by consumers who have entered into Service Agreements with the Municipality? What does the Municipal Systems Act say about this?
3. Is the Municipality not willing to accept being at fault for allowing Consumer accounts to go into arrears when the mechanisms are their to control these arrears, such as blocking electricity meters? Are the current controls measures adequate and in place to ensure that this does not happen? Is the deposit paid enough to settle an account that goes into arrears?
4. If there is a deposit paid, why does the municipality allow the account to go into arrears beyond the amount covered by the deposit
5. If the Municipality allows arrears to occur, what right has the Municipality to allow consumers who are not owners of property to build up debt and on their accounts and enter into 'arrangements' with the said consumers to allow this debt to continue, without first obtaining the permission of the owner concerned? Since you contend that it is the owner's responsibility to pay the said arrears before a new consumer can enter into a new Service Agreement with the Municipality, is it not fair and just that the Municipality must play it's part instead of seemingly sitting back and passing the Buck to the owner of the property concerned?
6. Is there a Legal process involved in collecting debts owed by the consumers in terms of their Service Agreements. If they don't pay, is any effort made by the Municipality to recover the debt, or is it just passed onto the owner? My understanding from you in previous discussions, was that the Municipality will do everything in it's power to recover the debt from the consumer, including taking legal action if necessary. However, recent correspondence leads me to believe that this is not the case and that the Municipality accepts no responsibility for it's consumer's accounts and that it is simply passed onto the owner?
I note with interest that I am being quoted chapter and verse about what you as a Municipality can do in terms of the Municipal Services Act but not what you are OBLIGED to do in terms of that Act. More of that to follow.
What I notice also, is that the Municipality has an obligation to consult with the community on all matters. So why the reluctance to answer mails if it is expected that the public will have access to these mails? More of that to follow too.
Kind regards,
John Veschini
Further response from Hennie Le Roux of the Witzenberg Municipality in respect of consumer accounts and Municipal charges
From : Hennie Le Roux
Date : 08 March 2010 01:21 PM
To : John Veschini
Re: What exactly is the Council policy - unfair charges for sewerage and refuse removal on empty shops?
Hi John
Sorry for the delay in the response to your email, I don’t want to bore you with the reasons why I haven’t responded earlier but it all boils down to time constrains.
Your email seeks to request clarity on a few matters I have cluster them into two sub headings.
1. Tariff policy
First there is a distinction between an availability charge and a service charge in many Municipalities. Witzenberg have gone the route of service availability charge and the levy is per month or part of it.
Legal Framework for the service availability charge
Sect 156 of the Constitution provides the legal authority in respect of powers and functions of the Municipalities.
Sect 74 of the systems act determines that the municipality must adopt a tariff policy which reflects certain principles, some of the principles are a “must” and others are a “may”. The most relevant ones to this case study is Sect 74(2) (a) dealing with equitably; 74(2) (b) dealing with proportion to their use; 74(2) (d) dealing with cost reflected; 74(2) (e) dealing with sustainable.
Sect 75A provides the general power to the Municipality to levy and recover fees, charges and tariffs.
The tariff policy and bylaw was developed, adopted and implemented by Council for the first time in July 2002. The policy was the last time reviewed by Council on the 28/05/2009 with implementation date 1 July 2009. Except for minor changes the tariff policy stayed the same over the years!
The following is extracts of the principles as set out in the tariff policy:
“3. Principles
The determination of tariffs should in all instances be based on sound economic principles. The Council’s input is to ensure that the tariffs policy be reviewed and modified during the annual budgetary process.
3.1 Basic principles
The following principles, in addition to those enunciated in section 74 of Act 32 of 2000, were considered:
o Equalisation within the shortest possible time
o Affordability of service
o Discouragement of wastage through pricing mechanisms
o Ensurance of sufficient cash flow
o Simple and understandable structure
o Justifiable structure
o Transparent structure”
“3.2 The Municipal account
The accounts for property rates and services may not be viewed in isolation. They must be approached collectively in order to determine the most affordable amount to be paid by different clients as a total account.”
“3.4 Costs of the provision of services and the calculation of tariffs
Tariffs must be capable of recovering the costs of the provision of a service. If a service should be run at a loss, there will by necessity have to be cross-subsidising from other services. It is therefore imperative that the tariffs for each service be accurately calculated and that the correct tariffs structure is accepted and implemented.”
“3.6 Equalisation of principles
In order to accomplish the total legalisation of tariffs, the tariffs must as far as possible be standardised throughout the whole municipality. Unique circumstances of a particular town will, however, play a role in preventing the tariffs from being 100% identical throughout. The principles for the determination of the tariffs should however, never vary.”
The following extracts from the policy are also applicable in the context of your enquiries:
“4.2 Water
4.2.1 Client groups
Recovery of the costs of the water service is not based only on consumption and the type of client, but also on the extent to which the client has access to the service and what the service must provide for, as well as the actual consumption. The principle of equity is taken into account when the client groups are classified.
Clients are classified in accordance with the size of their connections to the main supply. By classifying the client in accordance with the size of the connection, a more equitable basis for contributions towards costs is obtained than when a tariff is simply allocated to a certain type of consumer. In this way, cross-subsidising is largely eliminated.
4.2.2 Tariffs structures
The following tariffs structures will be in existence:
· Availability levy on all vacant premises within the town areas linked to the water network.
· Minimum levies for every size of connection with distinction being made between the following sizes:”
As can be seen from this a lot of emphasis was place on extent to which the client has access to the service rather than only on consumption and therefore the service availability charge, the same with regard to sewerage
“4.4.1 Costs structure and client groups
In order to determine a basis for the equitable sharing of costs, each client group’s share in the costing structure should be considered.
Potential dumping is used as the fairest method. The client is levied in accordance with his dumping potential. This is determined by the size of the water connection to the property. The client with a bigger connection has the ability to dump more water into the sewerage system. The quantity of water used is not taken into account.
As sewage sludge is based on the flow of water, the costs are largely incurred in respect of the dumping into the sewage works and the treatment of the substances.
The following categories are distinguished:
<20mm water connection
21-50mm water connection
80mm water connection
100mm water connection
150> water connection
A special category was created for Qbiqua Prison.
4.4.2 Water-closet system
For the purposes of classification where one connection is in place but more than one usage are separately operated on the premises, each separate usage is regarded as a connection in accordance with the classification under which such usage would normally be connected, but not bigger than the connection that serves the premises.
Examples of these are flats, shopping centres where sub-letting takes place and a residential house with a separate flat.
All levies are a monthly levy, or part thereof, provided that where a resident is connected after the 15th of a month, a levy will only be imposed on the following month’s account.
A monthly availability levy is imposed on vacant premises where the possibility exists for the connection of a water-closet system to the main sewerage system. The tariff is calculated by dividing the total loan costs by the number of clients (built-up and vacant premises) and to divide that figure by twelve”
In determining the tariff for the service availability the actual consumption of the service was not taken into consideration but rather the potential burden, the variable costs where recovered via the consumption tariffs where applicable.
It is therefore safe to say the Municipality has the legal right to levy the service availability charge. All customers is treated equally, no differentiation is suppose to be made between categories of clients except in terms of tariffs. The principle is that when a tenant moves out, all service availabilities are moved to the owner.
We have also enquired at other municipalities and the same practice is used. In the Drakenstein they even have an availability charges for refuse removal which we don’t have.
The tariff for refuse is as follow:
Drakenstein R 1546.38 per year versus Witzenberg R 1,582.80 per year
The tariff of Drakenstein for sewerage is based on the size of a lot with a minimum of R 218.29 per year and increases to R 396.67 per year for a 1000m2 plot. The charge for the similar size plot with a 25mm water connection is R 122.85 per month.
2. Credit control & Debt collection
The consumer service agreement is a legal document and its legal status is obtained via Chapter 9, Sect 96, Credit control and Debt collection, of the systems act. The Council have also revised it credit control & debt collection policy on the 28/05/2009 with implementation date 1 July 2009.
Sect 11 deals with the service agreement; this section is extracted for your easy reference. You would recall that you requested a change from only entering in agreements with owners to one that allows for entering in agreements with tenants.
“11 APPLICATION FOR SERVICES AND SERVICE AGREEMENTS
11.1 Before being provided with electricity, water and/or other customer services, and prior to taking occupation of premises, every customer shall enter into a service agreement with the Council in which, inter alias, the customer agrees that the electricity, water and/or other services, supplied by either Prepaid or Credit meter systems, may be used for credit control purposes to collect arrears in respect of all outstanding debt.
11.2 All consumers wishing to utilise municipal services must apply to enter into a service agreement.
11.3 The service agreement will be entered into prior to the provision of services and prior to the consumer taking occupation of the premises.
11.4 A new service agreement will only be entered into once all amounts owed by a consumer on other debtor accounts are settled in full.
11.5 A new service agreement will only be entered into on a property, once all outstanding amounts owed on the property are settled in full. The owner of the property shall have the responsibility to ensure that all debts incurred after 1 July 2007 are fully paid by the tenant in order to mitigate the non provision of services to tenants/residents after the date mentioned above.
11 .6 Where municipal services are used/consumed or made use of, and the owner, tenant, or occupants of a property, have not entered into nor completed an agreement for such services, the owner responsible for the payment of rates on the property will be billed for the metered consumption and all municipal service charges applicable to the property.
11.7 The service agreement shall indicate that transfer of a property may not be registered until the municipality issues a clearance certificate which reflects that all amounts due in connection with that property for municipal service fees, property rates and other municipal taxes, levies and duties have been fully paid. The outstanding monies include accounts relating to tenants who may have left the property of the seller.
11 .8 Application forms are available at the municipal offices and the application process must occur at least ten (10) working days prior to taking occupation of the premises. This will ensure that services are available when occupation is taken. Failure to adhere to the timeframe may result in customers not having the services available when occupation is taken. Once the application has been approved, a service agreement will be entered into and services will commence.
11 .9 The Municipality will render the first account after the first meter reading cycle following the date of signing the service agreement or as soon as is administratively possible.
11.10 Consumers who illegally consume services without a valid service agreement will be subject to disconnection and/or removal of the service and may have charges laid against them for theft and fraud.
11.11 The service agreement shall set out the conditions under which the services are provided and shall require the signatories thereto to accept the contents of the municipality’ s credit control and debt collection policy, as well as the provisions of the Municipal Systems Act, 2000 (Act No. 32 of 2000).
(a) An undertaking by customers:
o That the electricity, water and/or other services supplied by either the Prepaid or Credit meter systems, may be used for credit control purposes to collect arrears in respect of all outstanding debt and shall include rates if the customer is the owner of the property;
o That they are liable for the costs of collection, including any administration fees, penalties for late payment, legal costs, interest, disconnection fees and reconnection fees, and
o That any alleged non-receipt of an account does not affect the customers liability for the account, nor stop the credit control process;
(b) An undertaking by Council:
o That it will deliver accounts to customers
o That if customers do not receive an account and have accordingly requested one, a statement will be supplied to them.
11.12 Where a signatory is not the owner of the property to which the services are to be provided, a letter from the owner indicating that the signatory is the lawful occupant of the property and where a lessor/lessee arrangement exists between the parties, a copy of such agreement shall be attached to the service agreement.
11.13 Where a consumer has failed to enter into a service agreement with the Council, water and/or electricity shall be restricted or disconnected, as the circumstances may require, until such time as a service agreement has been entered into and the applicable deposits have been paid. In such circumstances, the consumer will be held liable for any calculated amounts.”
Sect 12 of the policy deals with deposits and is extracted for your easy reference.
“12 DEPOSITS AND GUARANTEES
12.1 Every customer, other than those who are the registered owners of the property, is to pay a deposit on application for the provision of municipal services before the municipality renders any service to the property. Deposits are payable when new customers sign service agreements and when existing customers move to a new supply address. All deposits shall be paid at least 5 (days) days prior to occupation of the property or prior to the date on which the services are required. Failure to comply with this clause may result in a delay in the connection of services and the Council shall not be liable for any loss or prejudice suffered by a customer as a result thereof.
12.2 Subject to the provisions of clauses 12.3, 12.4 and 12.5 hereunder, the calculation for deposits shall be based on two months’ consumption of metered services together with any charges for other municipal services, or a minimum amount specified by the Chief Financial Officer from time to time.
12.3 In determining the deposit described in Section 12.2, the Chief Financial Officer may differentiate between areas to give cognisance to differences in service standards and usage.
12.4 The Chief Financial Officer may re-assess customer deposits for new domestic, commercial and industrial customers three months after the initial deposit date and may, as a result of this reassessment, require an additional deposit from the customer.
12.5 The Chief Financial Officer may review deposits annually and, in the case of a customer’ s service being disconnected or restricted as a result of non-payment or tampering, may increase the deposit. Should the deposit be increased as a result of this review the customer must immediately make payment of the increased amount in line with the instruction from the Chief Financial Officer.
12.6 The outcome of the review contemplated in clause 12.5 shall be communicated to the customer in the event of any variation in the deposit arrangements being required.
12.7 Should a customer’s services be disconnected twice during any twelvemonth period due to non-payment, the customer’s deposit shall be adjusted the following month to conform to Clause 12.5.
12.8 Bank guarantees are only permitted for businesses and only under circumstances as determined by Council from time to time.”
Although the policy allow for differentiation the Council have set fixed deposits. Differentiation was made between Business and other categories taken into consideration the type of services. If a deposit is to be set at recovering the possible outstanding debt it will discourage clients to settle in Witzenberg because then the deposit should not be less than 3 times the average municipal account.
The credit control policy allows for internal mechanisms and all legal mechanisms to be followed. The Municipality has recently, during January 2010, appointed a service provider in order to assist with these credit control and legal processes.
From the Municipalities side we try to ensure that all clients are treated equally and that all mechanisms are used to provide sustainable services.
I trust that you will find above information and answer of value
Kind regards
Hennie Le Roux
John Veschini's Response to the email above and the debate goes on. John Veschini declares a dispute with Council.
To Hennie Le Roux
Date : 19 March 2010 05:37 PM
Subject : What exactly is the Council policy - unfair charges for sewerage and refuse removal on empty shops?
Dear Hennie,
I thank you for your detailed reply. No problem about the delay. On my side, I also apologise for the delay in offering you my response and comments and it also boils down to time constraints.
I am sorry to read that you may be leaving the Municipality. From my perspective, you will be remembered as a dedicated efficient public servant. I wish there were many more like you and a few others whom I have the pleasure of dealing with at Witzenberg. However, dealing with some others, has been mostly a frustrating, time consuming and wasteful exercise in public relations. You will be missed!
What I am reading here, I have already read. The problem with all of this is that you and others continue to quote Chapter and Verse as to what Chapter and Verse your Municipality can do this and that. In doing so, you also illuminate other Chapters and Verses that tell me that there could be another and a more fair way of levying charges.
In this respect I draw your attention to what you have referenced below (in the mail above).
Let me start with the three Sections you referred to and three others that you did not refer to.
Sect 74(2) (a) dealing with equitably; 74(2) (b) dealing with proportion to their use; 74(2) (e) dealing with sustainable and two you did not refer to. One is Sect 74 (2) (d) dealing with costs reasonably associated with rendering the service and the other is Sect 74 (2) (g) dealing with "promotion of local economic through special tariffs for categories of commercial and industrial development"
Sect 74(2) (a) - keyword is "equitably". You know and I know that your policy of charging for sewerage to empty shops on a new development is not being done equitably. In the subject case which prompted these email exchanges, there is a property adjacent - also a new development, where the Municipality has NOT levied these so called 'availability' charges. I know this for a fact as I am the owner and developer of this small mixed residential/commercial complex. I am also sure that you are aware (but are not saying so), that there are many properties in Tulbagh and the Witzenberg within the various Urban edges, where owners are letting out portions of their properties, either on a permanent monthly tenancy, or per day - either commercially, or for accommodation. I asked the question in my mail below of 2 March 2010, as to whether all the owners are being treated the same and you have not answered that question. I have answered it for you. They are not!
Sect 74 (2) (b) - keyword here is "in proportion to their use".
How can this Municipality feel satisfied to charge on empty premises in a new development on the basis of the said charges being "in proportion to their use", when in this case the premises are NOT being used and are NOT generating sewerage for the Municipality to process?
Sect 74(2) (d) - The first sentence bears attention - "tariffs must reflect the costs reasonably associated with rendering the service".
How can this Municipality feel satisfied with charging costs "reasonably associated with rendering this service" when there are no costs except to your accounts department (which they create), for adding the charge to the monthly statement. There can certainly be no other costs for providing no service - surely?
74(2) (e) keyword here is "sustainable". Yes, sustainable in this instance refers to the sustainability of the Municipality's service. But, as I have said before, what has a unit or shop in a complex being developed which had one connection in its original form (it was sustainable then? got to do with adding to the sustainability of the Municipality? It certainly has a lot to do with the sustainability of the developer - me in this instance, who if successful and am able to let out all the shops over time, will most certainly have added to the sustainability of the Municipality by providing more sources of revenue to the Municipality in the form of consumers it never had before - surely??
Sect 74 (2) (g) dealing with "promotion of local economic development through special tariffs for categories of commercial and industrial development". Here I refer you to a previous email written to the Municipal Manager with the subject line being "Municipality discourages development in Tulbagh". That mail and the one you are now replying to relate to the same subject and that is whether the Municipality is serious about encouraging development with what I consider to be unfair and unwarranted charges for 'sewerage availability' on empty premises.
With reference to the 3. 'PRINCIPLES' below. We are saying the same thing so I will not offer comment in this respect except for your comments wherein once again you make the reference to the right of the Municipality to do this and that and compare sewerage tariffs to other Municipalities. Here you are basing all your argument on a connection to a lot or plot. An empty premises in a commercial building under development is neither, as I have alluded to a few times before, in the various emails relating to this matter.
Then you once again refer to what Council's Policy is towards consumers and how eventually Council has determined that the owner of the property must pay etc., etc., "
11 .6 Where municipal services are used/consumed or made use of, and the owner, tenant, or occupants of a property, have not entered into nor completed an agreement for such services, the owner responsible for the payment of rates on the property will be billed for the metered consumption and all municipal service charges applicable to the property.
Once again, I ask you with now real tears of frustration, how does the Municipality interpret the above clause in your Service Agreements Policy document etc. in a way that entitles them to charge a tariff where in this case you cannot even meter a sewerage flow that does not exist???
To put an end to this matter, I should like you to treat this 'so called sewerage charge exchange of emails as a formal request to Council to reconsider the said charge as being unfair and to consider amending it and to hitherto promote and encourage my development as you should do others. I also make a formal request that you do not levy charges that are not equitable to other owners who are not paying similar charges.
Lastly, kindly record that on behalf of Suskia 1011 cc I declare that I am in dispute with the Municipality in respect of these ridiculous and unfair charges that are being levied against this property until this policy is amended in accordance with fair principles that ensure an 'equitable' process of deriving income from the owner of a property that is just, fair and the same for all. Until then, I refuse to pay a charge for sewerage availability on this property for an empty premises. Should they be let, you will know of it as you will have a consumer to levy the various charges to, which you say you are entitled to levy to them.
This matter of the availability charges, promotion of sustainable development and general treatment of owners/ratepayers by this Municipality or its officials, will be tabled for discussion at the forthcoming meeting of TRIF.
Kind regards,
John Veschini