Home / News / Ukraine / Ukrmetallurgprom Ukrzaliznytsya accused in abuse of monopoly position

Ukrmetallurgprom Ukrzaliznytsya accused in abuse of monopoly position

Ukraine / Ferrous metallurgy
1 203
0

Metallurgical lobby of Ukraine appealed to the Antimonopoly Committee with a complaint against a rail operator.

Ukrmetallurgprom Ukrzaliznytsya accused in abuse of monopoly position

business combinations "Ukrmetallurgprom" has addressed in Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (AMCU) with a complaint of abuse of JSC "Ukrzaliznytsya" its monopoly position, in particular through the implementation of the "Agreement on provision of services on organization of transportation of goods by rail". On Thursday reports "the Center of transport strategies."

In the letter, addressed to the head of AMKU Yury Terentyev, metallurgists draw attention to the fact that the Railways, being a natural monopoly, can define the conditions of circulation of goods on the market for the use of wagons and directly determines the possibility of the admission of cars of other market participants to their infrastructure, and hence has significant market power and the ability to influence the car market at the stage of conclusion of the contract between the operator of the train and the railway.

According to representatives of the metallurgical industry, the "Agreement on provision of services on transportation of cargo by railway transport" Ukrzaliznytsya has set the following terms of service, which would be impossible to install if there was market competition.

As you know, the Railways have already launched the corresponding contract campaign and begin to carry out transportation of cars under the new rules from 1 April, however, Ukrmetallurgprom see in the document is a serious threat to the rights of users of services of Railways.

For example, the form of the contract about organization of transportations offered by the railroad, does not correspond to the form of the agreement provided for MEW. The proposed form of the contract does not stipulate the procedure of approval and make the other party objections or suggestions. At the same time, Ukrzaliznytsia retains the right to make changes unilaterally, on his own initiative.

"Therefore, will be legally enshrined practice in which the BONDS without the need for coordination and discussion, abusing its monopoly position on the market of railway transportation, can impose contracts on any favorable terms and the possibility of harmonizing the provisions of the Treaty and the input of other parties will be resolved," the letter reads Ukrmetallurgprom.

Next controversial point is the obligation of the customer to be responsible for the delay of cars, whereas it has no way to influence it, including on the approach to the destination station.

Also shippers criticize spelled out in the contract blurred the responsibilities and liabilities of the ULTRASONIC coordinate applications for transportation, which can have signs of abuse of monopoly position during the processing of orders for shipment. On the background of the customer's obligations to provide technically sound cars is completely absent, the carrier's liability for providing faulty cars.

Following the claim to Ukrzaliznytsia - in the "Agreement on provision of services on organization of transportation of goods by rail" there is no clear definition of the conditions under which the uz has the right to refuse the customer to the transportation of goods. At the same time, stated that she has the right "to refuse and/or suspend the provision of services in accordance with the agreed transportation plan, in the event of ban or restrictions on shipping to/from the station designated in the plans. In this case the carrier is not liable for failure to provide the services."

Pay in Association Ukrmetallurgprom attention to the economic aspects of competition infringement.

So called unreasonable, uz, charging fees for transportation of empty wagons, in spite of the fact that when dual loading operation of empty cars for loading are not required but the company receives a fee for services that does not provide.

in addition, the use of ratio Tdod on when calculating the cost of using a private car for the BONDS of the customer actually means the need to pay for additional 2 days use of the car. Further blow to the pockets of customers formula in which no discount for 1 day use of the car, which can be useful to the customer for the sweep, bringing the car to working condition (given that the cars TIES often served in a dismantled, unserviceable), etc.

Сomments
Add a comment
Сomments (0)
To comment
Войти с ВК Войти с ФБ Войти с Яндекс
Sign in with:
Войти с ВК Войти с ФБ Войти с Яндекс