Mr van Wyk’s electricity was disconnected last week Wednesday (January 13), for failing to settle an outstanding amount of R1 700, which he will challenging.

On the 14th, Mr Van Wyk, of the firm Wynand Prinsloo & van Eeden Inc, brought an urgent court application for his electricity to be restored within an hour of the successful application.

Article 129 of the national Credit Act stipulates the process a municipality must follow before a consumer’s services can be terminated.

According to the Act, an account must be unpaid for 20 days before the municipality can give notice of termination of services.

After a notice has been issued, the consumer is afforded another 10 days to settle the account before termination.

If the account holder fails to comply, the municipality can subpoena the client who, has a legal right to challenge the municipality in court.

Only after the court rules in favour of the municipality, can services be terminated.

Mr Van Wyk says he only received his account on the day his electricity was cut. He paid R3700 on his account on January 4, well before the 7th.

“When I arrived home on the 13th, there was no electricity, I thought we had load shedding so proceeded to mow my lawn with my petrol mower,” Mr Van Wyk told the Middelburg Observer on Monday.

Later, when a neighbour started mowing his lawn with an electrical mower, Mr Van Wyk realized that he was the only unit in his complex without electricity, spurring him to make a few calls.

He was notified by SMS that senior management would only attend to the matter the next day.

Mr Van Wyk however preempted the municipality’s move by obtaining a court order for his electricity to be restored.

The municipality was notified by the Sheriff to reconnect Mr Van Wyk’s supply within the hour after the order was obtained, though the municipality failed to comply.

En route to the police station to lodge a complaint of contempt of court against the municipality, the Sheriff notified Mr Van Wyk that the municipality had contacted them and was busy reconnecting him to the grid.

His power was back on by 13:00 on Thursday.

“Despite paying R3700 on the 4th, the municipality proceeded to terminate my supply, because I supposedly owe them R1 700,” Mr Van Wyk says.

“Until now I have not received any explanation of how the outstanding amount has been calculated and for what utility of services”.

For the past two months my account, which I seldom receive on time, has increased by R700, which I question since it’s only me and my wife in the house,” he challenges.

He said that his accounts has been drawn into question by Ms Jeanette Mahlangu, Mayoral Committee member for Infrastructure, Development and Services delivery, whom Mr Van Wyk engaged on the 13th to remedy the matter.

The case will head back to court on February 11, for the municipality to make submission as to why the order should not be made permanent.

“When I don’t receive my account before the date date of settlement on the 7th of each month, I make a baseline payment of between R3 500 and R3 700, because my account has always been out by an odd R100,” Mr Van Wyk says adding that his account is often credited for overpayment.

“The municipality is not above the law, and has to follow the same legal route consumers do, to protect themselves against unfair practices,” Mr Van Wyk concluded.

• In 2010 and 2013 Mr van Wyk shot to national fame after taking the minister of justice and the department to court for cutting acting magistrates’ salaries with 40%, compared to the salaries of serving magistrates. He won both his urgent application in 2010 for a full salary, and the minister and department’s consequent appeal against the ruling in 2013.