What happens when you invest in solar power to reduce your dependence on electricity supplied by a distribution company, only to face a disconnection notice over allegedly low electricity consumption?
That is the question raised by a dispute between a Lekki Phase 1 resident, Raphael Awoseyin, and Eko Electricity Distribution Company (EKEDC).
Awoseyin alleges that the electricity distributor demanded ₦112,606 from him under a charge described as “Loss of Revenue” after he installed a solar power system and significantly reduced his reliance on the company's electricity supply.
His account, shared publicly on October 19, 2026, has raised questions about prepaid meter inspections, the basis for loss-of-revenue charges and the position of customers who invest in alternative electricity sources.
However, the allegations have not been independently verified, and EKEDC's response was not included in the reports reviewed. The available information also does not establish whether a formal meter test or technical assessment was conducted before the demand was made.
According to Awoseyin, he installed an 18-kilowatt solar power system at his property in Lekki Phase 1, Lagos.
The installation allowed him to rely primarily on solar energy for his daytime electricity needs, leaving EKEDC's supply as a backup rather than his main source of power.
He alleged that after the installation, EKEDC personnel began visiting his property more frequently to inspect his prepaid electricity meter.
During one visit, he said, the officials observed that the meter was recording little or no consumption and suspected that it might have been bypassed.
Awoseyin explained that his reduced electricity consumption resulted from using solar power rather than interfering with the meter.
To demonstrate that the meter could register electricity consumption, he said he switched his property to EKEDC's supply through an inverter bypass for approximately two minutes.
According to his account, the meter then registered consumption normally.
There is an important distinction between recovering revenue that was allegedly lost through established meter irregularities and demanding money simply because a customer buys fewer electricity units.
To assess the Lekki dispute properly, several questions need answers:
- Was the prepaid meter formally tested?
- Did a technical report identify a fault, bypass or other irregularity?
- What period did the alleged revenue loss cover?
- How was the ₦112,606 demand calculated?
- Which applicable rule or contractual provision authorised the charge?
- Was the customer given a written explanation and an opportunity to challenge the assessment?
Until these details are established, it would be premature to conclude either that EKEDC acted unlawfully or that Awoseyin owes the amount demanded.
The Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) provides a formal process for resolving electricity customer disputes.
According to its published frequently asked questions, customers who have complaints about their electricity service should first submit a written complaint to their distribution company's Customer Care Unit and obtain an acknowledgement.
NERC says the distribution company is expected to resolve complaints within 15 working days, depending on the complexity of the matter. If the customer is dissatisfied with the response, the complaint can be escalated to the relevant NERC Consumer Forum. Further review can be sought from the Commission if the dispute remains unresolved.
NERC also explains that where a meter is declared faulty or obsolete through no fault of the customer, the distribution company is responsible for arranging its repair or replacement in accordance with the applicable metering requirements.
These provisions do not, on their own, determine whether the particular loss-of-revenue demand in Lekki was valid. That depends on the facts, the applicable rules and the evidence supporting the assessment.
A customer disputing a charge can request the written basis for the demand, the relevant meter inspection or test results, and an itemised explanation of how the amount was calculated.
The customer should also retain the disconnection notice, prepaid meter records, electricity token receipts and copies of correspondence.
For Nigerians investing in solar panels, inverters and batteries, the attraction is straightforward: generate electricity at home and reduce dependence on the public grid.
The investment can be especially appealing to households and businesses seeking greater control over their electricity supply.
However, installing solar equipment does not necessarily mean a property has formally disconnected from the distribution network. Customers who continue using grid electricity as a backup may still have an ongoing relationship with their distributor.
The terms governing that relationship, including applicable charges and the procedures for investigating meter irregularities, remain important.
The Lekki case highlights the need for clarity when a customer's grid consumption changes dramatically after installing an alternative power source.
Customers need to know what their meters record, what charges may legitimately apply and how to challenge assessments they believe are incorrect.
Distribution companies, meanwhile, need reliable ways to distinguish genuine meter irregularities from legitimate reductions in grid demand.
Clear procedures and documented evidence can help protect both sides.
Solar power presents a commercial challenge for a system in which distribution companies earn revenue from electricity supplied to customers.
When households generate more of their own electricity, they may buy fewer units from the grid. That is a natural consequence of using an alternative source of power.
But lower sales do not automatically establish that a customer has violated electricity rules.
The broader challenge is to maintain a system in which distribution companies can investigate genuine losses while customers are treated fairly when they reduce consumption through lawful means.
For that to happen, disputes involving suspected meter faults or alleged revenue losses need transparent calculations, clear regulatory grounds and a credible process for resolving disagreements.
In the Lekki case, the decisive information remains outstanding: the technical findings,
If a customer invests in solar power and legitimately uses less electricity from the grid, what evidence should a distribution company be required to provide before demanding money for alleged loss of revenue?
No comments:
Post a Comment