Subject of the report / Parties involved: ______________________
Subject: Systematic and recurring error in the updating of address data in the electricity market Datahub, the directing of invoices to wrong addresses, and the unfounded billing of payment reminder and debt collection fees resulting from this (conduct contrary to good debt collection practice and consumer protection).
1. Background of the matter and description of the problem
I hold several electricity contracts at different addresses. The contracting parties have been the energy companies listed below, which have outsourced their billing and payment monitoring to Ropo Suomi Oy.
The problem recurs whenever I make changes to one of my electricity connections. The nationwide Fingrid Datahub system automatically overwrites and scrambles the billing addresses of all my other valid electricity contracts according to the most recent event. As a result, paper invoices and e-invoices are directed to empty, wrong or old premises, whereby they fail to arrive without any contribution by the debtor.
Specific features and observations regarding your own situation:
[Fill in the description in the field above; the text will appear here...]
2. Ropo Suomi Oy's role and the unfounded debt collection fees
Because the original invoices are, due to the system error, directed to the wrong place, the consumer does not receive the original invoice. Ropo Suomi Oy's automated system sends payment reminders and debt collection letters with fees directly.
I have acted responsibly and paid the original principal amounts of the invoices immediately upon becoming aware of the invoice. I have disputed the debt collection fees because the error is in the back-end system, but the automation forces the consumer into a repeated and burdensome round of clarification with customer service.
3. Legal grounds
- The Act on the Collection of Debts (perintälaki 513/1999, Section 4): In debt collection, a procedure contrary to good debt collection practice must not be used, nor may the debtor be caused unnecessary costs. Shifting costs caused by system errors onto the consumer is directly contrary to this.
- The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR, Article 5(1)(d)): Data controllers must take every reasonable step to ensure that personal data that is inaccurate is erased or rectified without delay. The automatic scrambling of addresses infringes the rights of the data subject.
- The Consumer Protection Act and established case law: The party issuing the invoice bears the responsibility and the risk for the invoice reaching its destination, once the consumer has fulfilled their own duty to notify. The debt collection agency's cost automation creates a situation in which the company bills for a service the need for which arises from its own system error.
4. Request for action
I request that the Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority investigate the lawfulness of the automation between Fingrid Datahub and Ropo Suomi Oy with regard to the management of address data, as well as the electricity companies' responsibility to ensure that invoices reach their destination in situations where they rely on faulty automation.
