ENERGY AND WATER OMBUDSMAN QUEENSLAND (EWOQ)
Overview
This page documents my interactions with the Energy and Water Ombudsman Queensland (EWOQ) following Energex’s denial of a compensation claim and the subsequent appeal.
It sets out how the EWOQ process unfolded, what information was considered, what questions were raised, how responses were provided, and which matters remain unresolved. This page focuses on process, independence, and procedural fairness.
No allegation of intent, misconduct, or bad faith is made. The purpose is to provide a factual record of interactions and outcomes.
How EWOQ Became Known as the Next Step
At no point during the claims or appeal process did Energex advise that the Energy and Water Ombudsman Queensland was the appropriate next step if the outcome was disputed.
Instead, awareness of EWOQ as a potential avenue for review came indirectly, through a conversation with one of our own customers who was familiar with the Ombudsman process.
This is less than ideal.
Customers disputing a compensation outcome would reasonably expect to be advised of all available escalation pathways. We subsequently asked whether this lack of guidance had been addressed or rectified. No response has been received.
In the absence of any indication to the contrary, we must assume that this practice has not changed.
Complaint Lodged with EWOQ
After Energex denied the compensation claim and upheld that denial on appeal, a formal complaint was lodged with EWOQ.
The complaint included:
-
A detailed chronology of events
-
Independent technician reports
-
Questions regarding low-voltage switching and over-voltage safeguards
-
Concerns regarding appeal independence
-
Evidence of inconsistencies in Energex’s account over time
The complaint was submitted in good faith with the expectation of independent consideration.
Initial Documentation and Early Concerns
At the outset of the EWOQ process, documentation received could reasonably be described as unprofessional in presentation and substance.
This included:
-
Informal or poorly structured material
-
A lack of clarity regarding what had been reviewed
-
No clear explanation of investigative steps taken
These concerns were raised early.
Reliance on Energex’s Account
Throughout the EWOQ process, correspondence consistently stated that “Energex advised…” in relation to key factual and technical matters.
It was not made clear that:
-
Any independent technical investigation had been undertaken by EWOQ, or
-
That primary operational data had been reviewed independently of Energex
In effect, it appeared that Energex’s account formed the basis of EWOQ’s understanding of events.
Awareness of the Outcome Before the Complainant
A significant procedural concern arose when our local Member of Parliament was made aware of the EWOQ outcome before we were.
The local member advised that they had been informed of the outcome by Energex.
This raises serious questions regarding:
-
How information flowed during the EWOQ process
-
Whether Energex was effectively conducting or controlling the investigation
-
Whether the complainant was afforded procedural priority and fairness
This matter was raised with EWOQ.
It has never been addressed.
Request for a Section 22 Decision
Given the lack of clarity and substance in responses, we formally requested a Section 22 decision under the Act.
This was sought so that:
-
The reasoning could be clearly articulated
-
The evidence relied upon could be identified
-
The investigative steps could be understood
Substance of the Section 22 Decision
The Section 22 decision provided lacked meaningful substance.
In summary:
-
It asserted that the matter had been reviewed
-
It relied on assurances that consideration had occurred
-
It did not explain how evidence was weighed
-
It did not reconcile inconsistencies in Energex’s account
-
It did not explain why Energex’s account was preferred over ours
No detailed reasoning was provided.
No methodology was explained.
No investigative steps were described.
Questions Raised and Refused
Throughout the EWOQ process, we consistently asked:
-
How investigations were carried out
-
What evidence was reviewed
-
How conflicting accounts were reconciled
-
Why Energex’s account was given greater weight when it had changed over time
-
How procedural fairness was ensured
EWOQ was unwilling to answer these questions.
Responses, where provided, avoided the substance of the questions.
Secondary Review by a Different EWOQ Officer
After the final decision, another EWOQ officer reviewed aspects of the matter.
During this later review:
-
Evidence was supplied showing that high voltage supply was not disrupted
-
This information was provided clearly and with supporting material
However:
-
No evidence was supplied regarding low voltage supply
-
No documentation addressed how low-voltage switching was managed
-
All questions relating to low voltage were ignored
This review occurred after the final decision, raising further questions about process and sequencing.
Low Voltage Remains Unaddressed
Despite repeated requests:
-
No evidence has been supplied regarding low-voltage conditions
-
No explanation has been provided as to how low voltage was managed
-
No safeguards against over-voltage at low voltage level have been demonstrated
Questions concerning low voltage were consistently ignored during the later review.
Unanswered Procedural Concerns
To date, EWOQ has not addressed:
-
Why Energex appeared to conduct or control the investigation
-
Why the local Member was informed of the outcome before the complainant
-
How conflicting accounts were reconciled
-
Why Energex’s changing account was preferred over a consistent account
-
How natural justice requirements were met
-
How the Act’s requirements for independence were satisfied
Consistency of Account
Throughout the entire process:
-
Our account has remained consistent
-
Independent technician reports have not changed
-
The same questions have been asked repeatedly
In contrast:
-
Energex’s account has varied over time
-
The account supplied to EWOQ differed from earlier versions
-
No reconciliation of these differences has been explained
Purpose of This Record
This page is provided:
-
To document interactions with the Energy and Water Ombudsman Queensland
-
To assist others in understanding how the EWOQ process may operate in practice
-
To highlight procedural issues that may be relevant to oversight bodies
-
To preserve an accurate public record
This page records events and correspondence only and does not assert fault, motive, or intent.
This page presents a factual record of process and correspondence and does not assert cause, fault, or intent.