M’sian homeowner who tampered with TNB wiring to charge his Tesla for ‘free’ may face up to 2-year jail & RM50,000 fine
A viral video caused a stir recently, showing a tampered electricity wiring setup at a residential home preventing the electricity consumption of a Tesla electric vehicle (EV) charger from being detected by the Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) meter.
In the video, recorded at a residential home at an undisclosed location in Peninsular Malaysia, a TNB personnel can be seen examining the tampered wiring and questioning an individual, believed to be the homeowner, about the matter. The staff explained to the individual that the Tesla charger ‘bypassed’ the TNB meter, leading to losses for the electricity supplier.
However, the individual pled ignorance and claimed that the tampered wiring was made by the technician who installed the Tesla charger.
Regardless, as elaborated by the TNB staff in the video, such tampering is an offence in Malaysia and the homeowner may face legal action.
So, what repercussions does the homeowner face? Well, join us as we delve into the relevant laws and regulations on the matter below.
Section 37 of the Electricity Supply Act 1990
Regardless, as elaborated by the TNB staff in the video, such tampering is an offence in Malaysia and the homeowner may face legal action.
So, what repercussions does the homeowner face? Well, join us as we delve into the relevant laws and regulations on the matter below.
In the case of the homeowner, he may be charged under Section 37(3) of the Act below:
As per the above provision, it can be argued that the homeowner had either dishonestly abstracted, consumed or used electricity and even prevented the TNB meter from recording the consumption of electricity by tampering with the wiring to allow for his Tesla car to be charged without it being recorded by TNB.
Given that the offence was committed at a residential home, the offender is considered to be a “domestic consumer” and the tampering as a “domestic installation” by the Electricity Supply Act 1990 as per Section 37(16) below:
Hence, should the homeowner be charged and convicted under this provision, he may face punishment under Section 37(3)(A)(i), which prescribes a fine between RM1,000 to RM50,000, up to 1 year in jail, or both.
Furthermore, if it was found that this was not his first offence, the individual can also be liable under Section 37(3)(B)(i), which prescribes a fine between RM5,000 and RM100,000, imprisonment up to 3 years, or both.
Besides that, the homeowner may also be charged under Section 14 of the Act below:
Based on the video, it can be argued that the homeowner had removed the instrument used in connection with the meter for recording the consumption of electricity so that he could charge his Tesla car without incurring any charges from TNB.
Accordingly, should he be convicted under this provision, the homeowner may face up to 2 years in jail, up to RM50,000 fine, or both.
Moreover, under Section 38 of the same Act, TNB is given the authority to disconnect the supply of electricity to the residential home if there’s evidence which gives reasonable grounds to believe an offence has been made under Section 37(3) or 37(14) of the Electricity Supply Act 1990.
Under Section 38(1), TNB is allowed to disconnect the electricity supply after a 48-hour notice. Furthermore, TNB can require the consumer to pay the company for the loss of revenue due to the offence committed and any reasonable expenses directly incurred as per Section 38(3).
However, TNB doesn’t have absolute discretion to disconnect the supply of electricity and any claims for loss of revenue must have evidence of tampering and be made by way of civil action.
In the case of Tenaga Nasional Bhd v Chew Thai Kay & Anor [2022] 2 MLJ 25, it was held that Section 37(1) of the Electricity Supply Act 1990 must be an ongoing offence and if TNB had removed the offending device or replaced the defective meter, there will no longer be an issue of any offence being committed as the supply of electricity to the premises was properly and accurately recorded. Hence, only if the tampering is still ongoing can TNB disconnect the supply of electricity, and if so, only after a 48-hour notice as prescribed by Section 38(1) of the same Act.
Azahar Mohamed CJ (Malaya) (as he then was) in delivering the judgement held:
“The language of s 38(1) does not allow for future disconnection of electricity in circumstances where the offence under s 37(1) was in the past and is no longer being continued. Flowing from the provisions, we should emphasise that for the notice of disconnection issued by TNB against the respondents to be good in law under s 38(1) the offence under s 37(1) must still be ongoing or continuing…
“ In consequence and in light of all the above, our answers to the legal issues posed under questions 1 and 2 are as follows. TNB has no lawful power to disconnect a consumer electricity supply pursuant to the current s 38(1) of the ESA once the impugned meter has been rectified and replaced, and the offence under s 37 is no longer subsisting and cease to exist at the material time when the notice of disconnection is issued to the customer.”
Furthermore, the judgment further established that a loss of revenue by TNB should be recovered by way of civil action:
“Nowhere in the ESA is it stated that TNB may proceed under s 38(1) to compel payment for the loss of revenue. The only recourse available to TNB in such a situation is provided for under s 38(5) where it allows TNB to file a civil action for the recovery of loss revenue. TNB cannot have the best of both worlds and a second bite of the cherry fruiting from their deliberate course of action. Where a statute creates a right and, in plain language, gives a specific remedy for its enforcement, a party seeking to enforce the right must resort to that remedy and not to others,”
With all of that established, let’s hope that TNB and the authorities take stern action against the homeowner and others who commit a similar offence. Tampering with TNB wiring so that you can enjoy ‘free’ electricity is not only dishonest but also dangerous as it could lead to damage to property and danger to human life.
For more insights into the Malaysian legal system such as this, do make sure to follow us on Facebook and Instagram or visit our official website. You can also read our articles on the popular Malaysian news aggregator app Newswav here.
