Regents Park couple battles City Power over R54k bill

Jade and Victor van der Heever, owners of a property in East Road, Regents Park Estate, have been locked in a months-long dispute with City Power over an electricity billing issue.

The Southern Courier was alerted to the matter by the couple in April, but despite several attempts to resolve the issue, they say they have yet to receive a satisfactory solution.

The couple said electricity meter boxes on their street were stolen in September 2024 and had not been replaced by April 2026. Despite this, Jade continued receiving monthly eBills showing ‘actual readings’, despite there being no functioning meter at the property.

“To make matters worse, it appears that the entire block has been connected to a single cable. My household is fully solar-powered, and we do not make use of any electricity supplied by the City of Johannesburg. Despite this, our electricity bill continues to increase at an outrageous rate, currently standing at approximately R54 600. This amount is equivalent to several months’ salary for the average individual and is simply not justifiable,” said Jade.

She said the bill had doubled over the previous four months.

“For many households in this area, these charges represent between six to eight months’ worth of income. This is not only unsustainable, but deeply distressing.

“I have approached City Power on multiple occasions, pleading for assistance. I was instructed to pay for a new meter in October 2025, despite having already paid for a prepaid meter in June 2025. To date, neither of these meters has been installed.

“Furthermore, I have been informed that my case will only be considered once the full outstanding amount has been settled – which is simply not feasible under these circumstances,” she said.

Jade said her attempts to resolve the matter through official channels had been unsuccessful.

She said neither the customer care centre at Region 9, the service centre on Ruwe Street nor the accounts centre on Jorissen Street had provided meaningful assistance.

“Each interaction has been met with excuses rather than solutions. To make matters worse, I continue to receive notifications stating that fault logs or queries have been ‘resolved’ or ‘completed’, despite no actual work being done.

“I am extremely concerned that this may be part of a broader issue, and that my neighbours may also be unfairly billed and potentially exploited,” she said.

Jade said she had documentation supporting her claims, including proof of payments, correspondence and evidence of the missing infrastructure.

City Power responds

On May 7, Isaac Mangena, general manager of the public relations and communications department at City Power, responded to questions from the Southern Courier.

Regarding the replacement of the outside meter box, Mangena said the customer would first have to submit a police case number confirming that the meter had been stolen.

“This is part of City Power’s standard process for handling reported meter thefts. It helps us verify the incident, prevent fraudulent claims, and ensure the replacement is properly recorded for both the customer’s safety and the integrity of the network,” he said.

He added that once a valid case number was received, City Power would schedule the replacement as part of its normal service restoration process.

On the monthly billing, despite the property being solar-powered, Mangena said that as long as there was a registered City Power account, the system would automatically estimate the customer’s monthly electricity usage.

He said billing was based on the account registration and metering configuration on City Power’s system, rather than the customer’s energy source alone.

“In cases where solar installations are in place, billing is still generated based on the account status, meter readings, where applicable, or system-generated estimates where actual consumption data is not fully captured or communicated through a compliant metering interface,” said Mangena.

He advised customers wishing to avoid estimated billing to submit monthly meter readings to City Power between the 25th of the current month and the 10th of the following month.

Regarding Jade’s claim that she had paid for a new meter in June 2025 and was again instructed to pay for one in October, Mangena said City Power’s Customer Service office had not received supporting documentation.

He said the documentation was required to reconcile system records, procurement requests and installation schedules.

“Once the relevant documentation is submitted and verified, the case can be properly investigated against City Power’s records, including payment history, job card allocation, and installation logs, to determine the accurate sequence of events and ensure the matter is resolved appropriately,” he said.

City Power also said there were no recorded similar queries from other customers on the same street regarding meter boxes.

According to Mangena, technicians attended the property on May 6 to inspect the site and establish whether a post-paid meter was installed. However, access to the property was not granted, preventing the assessment from being completed.

A follow-up site visit was subsequently arranged with the customer for May 8.

Further correspondence

The correspondence between the Van der Heevers and City Power continued over the following months.
On May 28, Divhani Muthakhi of City Power informed the customer that the meter would be updated after the billing system had closed for billing purposes.

On June 11, Muthakhi said City Power could remove the meter from the account to stop estimated billing. However, Muthakhi warned that if the customer later wanted City Power to resume billing, a new service connection application would have to be submitted.

On June 26, Muthakhi said the customer had not responded to the June 11 email and was expected to provide approval for the proposed action.

Muthakhi also asked the customer to remind her on July 1, noting that the billing system had already closed.

On July 8, the customer was informed: “Your issue has been resolved. Kindly wait for the new statement to come out.”

However, on August 19, City Power provided further clarification.

“Kindly note that the customer must apply to decommission a supplier for the City to perform a full removal of the meter.

“Once the application is submitted, the City will review it and schedule a time for the removal process. This ensures that all procedures are followed correctly and that the customer is informed at every step,” said Muthakhi.

Muthakhi added that she had followed up with the billing department after the meter was reinstated on the account and had been advised that the customer needed to follow the decommissioning process.

The latest advice means the customer must now apply to decommission the electricity supply before City Power can proceed with the full removal of the meter and address the estimated billing issue.