City water campany sued in class-action lawsuit

Thursday, June 11th, 2015

image

City News September 03, 2003

City water campany sued in class-action lawsuit
Zakki Hakim, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The Jakarta Tap Water Consumers’ Community (Komparta) demanded on
Tuesday that the private partners of city-run tap water company PD
PAM Jaya pay Rp 1 billion (US$117,647) in damages for their failure
to provide proper services to their customers.

The claim against PT Thames PAM Jaya (TPJ) and PT PAM Lyonnaise Jaya
(Palyja) was submitted as part of a class action filed by Komparta in
the Central Jakarta District Court. Komparta says it represents water
consumers in all of Jakarta’s five municipalities.

TPJ’s and Palyja’s defense lawyers, respectively from the Amir
Syamsuddin & Partners and Luhut Pangaribuan & Partners law offices,
requested a week to study the claim before responding to it.

Presiding Judge Andriani Nurdin adjourned the case until Sept. 10.

Komparta’s lawyer Amstrong Sembiring told The Jakarta Post that the
lawsuit was being brought on behalf of some 800 residents in five
municipalities who were dissatisfied with TPJ’s and Palyja’s
services.

Amstrong said that most of the complaints concerned water quality and
pressure. For example, the water was turbid and smelled of chlorine,
while most of the time water pressure was abysmal.

“Since the foreign partners took over the operation five years ago,
there have been no improvements in the service,” he said.

Amstrong emphasized that the material damages were not the main
objective. What Komparta really wanted was that the administration be
forced to reconsider its partnership arrangements with the foreign
companies.

If the first case went in favor of the plaintiffs, then Komparta
would file another suit demanding that the partnership deals be
reconsidered, he said.

Currently, Komparta has also filed a lawsuit demanding that the
administration and the city council be ordered to cancel the 40
percent increase in water charges that was imposed on April 1.

Amstrong said that if the courts ruled in favor of Komparta in these
two actions, the rulings would serve as precedents that could be
relied upon by residents in suing other public service institutions
providing such essentials as electricity, liquid petroleum gas and
telephone services, as well as toll road and parking lot operators.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: