Etihad Orders Boeing 787 Fuel-Control Switch Inspections; Advises Pilots to Exercise Caution

Etihad
Citation : Image is used for information purposes only. Picture Credit: https://static1.simpleflyingimages.com/

Prime Highlights

  • Synergy overcharged nearly 2,850 Centrelink customers to the tune of $2.29 million.
  • The ERA directed refunds for the recent breaches; Synergy committed to compensating all victims.

Key Facts

  • Customers were charged by Centrepay even after their accounts had been closed.
  • Over 1,000 customers owe over $500 each.

Key Background

Western Australia’s public utility, Synergy, overcharged more than 2,845 Centrelink vulnerable customers for electricity charges through the Centrepay system. The overcharging has continued since 2009, with automatic deductions made even after customers had terminated their Synergy accounts. In total, the customers were overcharged a total of $2.29 million.

The Economic Regulation Authority (ERA) opened up an inquiry into the matter and has used its power to compel refund of $239,250 to 459 customers affected from February 2023 and later. However, since the breach spans several years, Synergy has voluntarily undertaken to refund the total sum to all the affected customers regardless of how many years ago the issue goes back.

ERA Chair Steve Edwell described the breach as “particularly concerning” given that Synergy is a state monopoly and customers are vulnerable. The regulator said that it had also found that over 1,000 individuals are owed over $500 each, with the financial impact on poor families mentioned.

Synergy chief executive Kurt Baker publicly apologized, saying the company had failed in its responsibility to protect customers. He confirmed that a formal internal investigation is underway to identify and rectify the procedures that allowed the overcharging to go undetected for so long. Since last April, Synergy has started calling off affected customers and already refunded nearly 30% of the overall amount.

This incident has brought into question bigger issues of accountability of state-operated utilities and the necessity of strict consumer protection rules, particularly in the case of underprivileged individuals relying on welfare support mechanisms.