Utility Company Overcharges Customer for Nearly Two Decades, Refuses Full Refund

In a central Östersund apartment, Örjan Sandler and his wife reside, surrounded by accolades from various sporting events. Örjan, a former Olympic athlete who secured a bronze medal in speed skating in 1968 and participated in five Olympic Games, is now a retired physical education teacher.

Last November, a conversation with a neighbor about electricity prices revealed that the Sandlers were paying significantly more on their electricity bills compared to others in their building, despite their smaller living space. Upon comparing bills, Örjan discovered he was being charged for a 25 ampere connection, while his neighbor paid for a 16 ampere connection.

Örjan promptly contacted Jämtkraft, the energy provider, which indicated that a previous tenant had requested a larger connection in the early 2000s. The company suggested he hire an electrician to downgrade the connection. However, upon inspection, it was confirmed that a 16 ampere connection had always been in place. For 19 years, Örjan had been incorrectly billed for a higher capacity than he was using.

Örjan expressed frustration that the utility company profited from this oversight while he, as a customer, bore the financial burden. Although he received compensation for the last ten years, the company refused to reimburse him for the previous nine years, citing the statute of limitations.

In total, Jämtkraft reimbursed him 85,000 kronor, including interest, for the last decade, but he estimates that he lost around 75,000 kronor due to the inaccurate billing. He noted the existence of the statute is to prevent endless claims against companies, but he believes that a well-established firm like Jämtkraft should show more empathy in such situations.

Stefan Sedin, the operations manager and CEO at Jämtkraft Elnät AB, acknowledged that during his nine years with the company, he has encountered a few similar cases, but none as complicated as this one. He stressed that they did not tamper with meters or change connections, which is the responsibility of licensed electricians. Furthermore, they have no reason to believe that the customer made a mistake in this instance.

Since last November, Örjan has sought to negotiate the return of the full amount with Jämtkraft, but the company maintains that it adheres to its policies and the law.

Records show that a change to a 25 ampere connection was made in 1997, but the timeline for reverting to a 16 ampere connection remains unclear. The company stated that they normally refund customers for ten years of overcharging and cover the cost of hiring an electrician for inspections.

When questioned about their refusal to reimburse the entire amount, Jämtkraft reiterated their commitment to the statute of limitations, emphasizing that all customers are treated equally and that individuals have a responsibility to verify the accuracy of their bills.

Stefan acknowledged the company's profitability in recent years and the potential for more flexibility in handling such matters, understanding the customer's disappointment with their bureaucratic approach. He emphasized that while they have a record of the 25 ampere request from a previous tenant, they do not view the situation as solely their fault.

Örjan, now 84, had never considered the implications of electrical connections until his discussion with his neighbor. Although he recognizes the legality of the company's actions, he believes they still have a duty to charge customers accurately. He feels dissatisfied knowing they benefitted financially from the situation, and that reimbursing him would not significantly impact their financial standing.