Consumer advocates sue energy company for double refunds over billing errors in RN
The Public Prosecutor's Office of Rio Grande do Norte (MPRN) and the Public Defender's Office of the State (DPERN) have filed a lawsuit against Neoenergia Cosern in Rio Grande do Norte (RN). The legal action seeks to rectify billing errors and abusive charges within the Solar Energy Compensation System. Specifically, the plaintiffs are demanding that Neoenergia Cosern refund customers double the amount of money wrongly charged, particularly affecting solar energy users. Since November 2025, consumer protection agencies have received numerous complaints from photovoltaic generation unit owners. These reports detailed sudden and excessive increases in electricity bills, with no prior notification regarding changes to the credit compensation logic. The issue has impacted hundreds of families and entrepreneurs in the region. The lawsuit alleges that the collective harm stems from the distributor's unilateral alteration of the billing system, leading to the charging of full consumption while disregarding accumulated credit balances. The complaint also points to the automatic imposition of improper installment plans and the levying of taxes and tariffs on compensated energy. This practice allegedly disregards the acquired rights of long-standing producers who are guaranteed exemptions until 2045. Prior to the lawsuit, the MPRN conducted a civil inquiry into credit retention and the suspension of monthly compensation, including extrajudicial hearings and requests for technical opinions. The collective action was initiated after dialogue attempts with the company were exhausted. In addition to the double refunds, the institutions are seeking R$ 46 million in compensation for collective moral damages, to be allocated to the State Fund for the Defense of Diffuse Rights. Preliminary injunctions have also been requested to prevent electricity supply suspension and negative credit reporting for affected users, alongside demands for improved customer service channels. The lawsuit emphasizes that the dispute concerns a systemic subversion of a mathematical and regulatory model designed to promote energy sustainability, not mere logistical reading discrepancies.
This legal action highlights a potential systemic conflict between energy distributors and consumers adopting renewable energy solutions. The core issue appears to be the alleged unilateral alteration of billing and compensation mechanisms, which could undermine the economic incentives designed to promote sustainable energy adoption. From a market dynamics perspective, such changes, if proven, may indicate a tension between established utility business models and the evolving energy landscape driven by distributed generation. The demand for double restitution and collective moral damages suggests a significant perceived harm to consumers, potentially impacting trust in regulatory frameworks and future investments in solar energy. The outcome could influence how compensation systems are designed and enforced, emphasizing the need for transparent communication and adherence to established rights for consumers participating in energy transition initiatives.
AI-generated to prompt reflection — not editorial opinion, not advice, not a statement of fact. How this works.