DEAR Editor,-
France Zama’s (Ugu spokesperson) statement in the South Coast Herald ‘Ugu clears up complex confusion’ further adds to the confusion to which complexes have been subjected to these past three months.
The notice which Ugu has given to some complexes only is that if they, as a whole, use more than 2kl per day (Zama says 1kl), they must install tanks to Ugu’s specifications. This would be for only one day’s supply of water in case their system breaks down. Many have recently been without water for more than three days. (Yes, we know it is a ridiculous by-law) Ugu also only applied this injunction to multi-unit developments. (Zama now adds businesses?)
It is most obvious that Ugu does not understand its own by-law when it pertains to ‘consumer unit’- or their application regarding all ‘premises’ under their jurisdiction. Ugu has also not responded when the matter was pointed out to them. And so, for this reason, it needs to be made public.
The 1998 by-law states: ‘The Authority (Ugu) may, when any premises or consumer unit consumes in excess of 2kl per day, receive notice to the effect that within 30 days they must install a cistern capable of holding not less than the average daily consumption.’ The specifications for such a cistern are then set out.
Ugu’s injunction, as they see it, applies to a complex as a whole and not the individual units therein.
Now it must be obvious to anyone of reasonable intelligence and logic, that a complex of say 50 units being subject to 2kl per day, cannot be equated with one of five units. For instance, very large complexes (some over 100 units), would clearly suffer such a restriction from Ugu and would require enormous storage for one day’s supply. (There is something wrong here)
Now, unfortunately for Ugu, the definitions of ‘premises’ and ‘consumer unit’ make it plain that they are wrong! Firstly ‘premises’ applies to all properties registered at the Deeds Office, which means every single piece of land that contains a structure, such as a single dwelling (house), office block, shops, factories, farms, sectional title units or tribal trust lands. None of these have been notified – except complexes? Strange! This, notwithstanding the fact that there is a laundry shop using around 8 kl per day. So, unless this is rectified, it becomes discrimination when applied to complexes only.
The definition of ‘consumer unit’ clarifies the matter completely. ‘Means any structure and or unit, situated on premises to which water services are provided’. Now what part of any unit on premises does Ugu not understand? Nevertheless, it needs to be spelt out to them: Any ‘unit’ in a complex ‘premises’ that uses more than 2kl of water per day would be subject to the by-law if given 30 days’ notice.
Ugu desperately needs to gets with it and either scrap the by-law or institute it in the correct manner. We rest our case.
PHIL ROWLEY
On behalf of all Bodies Corporate under Ugu
HAVE YOUR SAY
Like our Facebook page, follow us on Twitter and Instagram
For news straight to your phone, add us on BBM 58F3D7A7 or WhatsApp 082 421 6033
