- Homeowner wins urgent relief and gets access to prepaid electricity restored.
- The utility company is not allowed to use disputed water charges to block electricity purchases.
- The water billing dispute will move to oral evidence before deciding who is responsible.
A Johannesburg homeowner has won an urgent legal victory after the High Court ordered a utility management company to restore her access to prepaid electricity while a disagreement over unusually high water charges is resolved.
The ruling stops Protea Metering Premier Utility Solutions from using disputed water charges to prevent advocate Rethabile Letsipa from buying prepaid electricity until the dispute is fully resolved.
Letsipa went to court after her monthly water bill rose sharply in September 2025. She argued the increase was due to a leaking water meter, faulty readings, or communication failures in the metering system. Although she raised these concerns several times and asked for corrected bills, the disputed charges stayed on her account, and the company kept deducting money from every electricity purchase to recover the alleged debt.
She told the court that the restrictions meant she and her child faced being left without electricity. Protea Metering disagreed, saying the meter had been replaced, billing corrections had already been made, and Letsipa was still responsible for the water that passed through the meter. The company also said she had not paid levies and other charges that were not in dispute since November 2025.
Company emails raise questions
A key issue for the court was the email correspondence during the investigation into the unusually high water usage. Judge M Wentzel-Thompson found that the email exchanges supported Letsipa’s claim that the billing dispute had not been properly sorted out. The judge described the email evidence as compelling.
The court noted that one employee had asked if the disputed water charges should be reversed because they came from a leak.
Another told Letsipa that there were communication problems with the water meter and that billing corrections would be made. The judge said these communications weakened the company’s argument that all billing problems had already been fixed.
Electricity access made the case urgent
Although the billing dispute had dragged on for months, the judge found the matter was urgent because it affected Letsipa’s access to electricity. The judge noted that electricity is not a luxury but essential to modern living.
The judgment pointed out that losing electricity affects cooking, refrigeration, lighting, communication, and the basic dignity of daily life. The court also agreed that making Letsipa pay disputed charges before she could buy electricity would cause immediate and ongoing harm.
Dispute will go to oral evidence
The judge stressed that the case does not decide who is ultimately responsible for the disputed water charges. According to the judge, neither side’s version could be decided on the written evidence alone.
The case will now go to oral evidence because there are real disputes about whether the high water use was caused by a leaking meter, another leak on the property, or ongoing high water use.
Interim order protects both sides
Until the case is decided, Letsipa must keep paying all current and undisputed charges on her account. She must also make a payment plan within 10 days to settle any undisputed arrears over six months, including levies, sewerage charges, and other fixed costs that still need to be paid.
In return, Protea Metering must let her buy prepaid electricity as usual and cannot block or restrict those purchases because of the disputed water charges.
The disputed part of the water bill will stay on hold until oral evidence is heard, and the court decides who is responsible for the charges. The question of legal costs will be dealt with by the court that hears the oral evidence.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
