Following is an update to my previous posting, “Direct Action in Victoria: Smart meter removed by homeowner and returned to Powercor”. The below message was sent to this blog by subscriber Alan Manson. I must state at this point that I do not condone the removal and replacement of a smart meter unless done by a licensed electrician.
However, considering the deplorable actions on part of both the utilities and the Victorian government, especially their continuing denial of any possible health hazards, such drastic community action is perhaps an inevitable consequence. If the Victorian government wants to end such drastic direct public action they need to urgently commission a truly independent research effort, especially sleep research, to address these concerns. If they are so convinced that there can be no possible health effects then why not commission the research to find out, one way or the other?
Until this is done, expect more smart meters to end up on utility counter tops………
Smart Meter Removal – the Legal Position
Some of you may not be aware of this news, but a young father named Jason removed his Smart Meter and replaced it with an Analogue Meter and then returned his Smart Meter to Powercor last Monday. He did this because the Smart Meter”™s radiation was affecting the health of his young daughter. You can view the three videos of Jason”™s Smart Meter removal and of its replacement here.
Â· The Smart Meter prior to its removal ”“ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5h8bI5eVSzk
Â· The power box after the Smart Meter”™s removal ”“ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COH5wryuNLo
Â· The analogue replacement meter. As you will see, it appears to function normally ”“ the only thing is that the red dial records in 0.1 kilowatt hour increments whereas Jason says it is in “kilowatts”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT_b5ZF60zo
The video of the Smart Meter being returned to Powercor can be seen here ”“ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUalD4qtVbI
Several people have asked me what the legal position is regarding the removal of the Smart Meter as performed by Jason; so this is my understanding.
The Criminal Code (below) tends to justify Jason”™s actions in removing his Smart Meter on the basis of “Self-defence”. Therefore, if anyone is considering removing their Smart Meter and they have been concerned about breaking the law, the words of the Criminal Code should assure them that ”˜the Law”™ does allow for lawful rebellion or civil disobedience when used in the self-defense of your property, or for the personal welfare of yourself or your family.
As an example, where ARPANSA provides health warnings about the dangers of microwave radiation on children, this could be used as justification to remove the meter if children are affected and the power companies have failed to respond to the parent”™s pleas to have it removed. See ARPANSA”™s Fact Sheet 14 here.
Below are the images [not attached here] from the Criminal Code 1995 that I have checked out and that are referred to in George”™s email below and downloadable at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013C00366/Download. Also take note that Section 10.4.2.(d) and (e) relate to property owners having the legal right to eject trespassers from their property.
The following comments are my opinion, for what they are worth.
If anyone has a Smart Meter installed and has undertaken the following prerequisites beforehand, they have the legal right to remove the Smart Meter and return it to the power company. This is a lawful act according to the Criminal Code as stated above. How else can this be interpreted? Naturally, to avoid being charged with the theft of electricity, the Smart Meter needs to be replaced with an alternative meter ”“ the Analogue Meter.
If the property owner”™s original Analogue Meter was replaced by a Smart Meter, the following requirements should have been met to justify the removal of the Smart Meter:
1. You should have had your meter box securely locked.
2. You should have placed signs on the power box (”˜NO SMART METER TO BE FITTED”™) and a ”˜NO TRESPASSING SIGN”™ directed towards any Smart Meter installers at the entrance to the property.
3. You should have written to your power company stating clearly that you DO NOT WANT a Smart Meter installed.
4. A copy of that letter should have been sent to the Minister for Energy.
5. Other correspondence should have taken place between you and the power company without any resolution ”“ and you have copies of that correspondence.
I also believe that if you haven”™t complied with any or all of the above requirements, you would still be within your rights to remove and return the Smart Meter because it is “unsafe”; as stated below.
In addition to the above Code, the Electricity Act 1998 states in 43,(2):
(2) The occupier of any premises in which there is any unsafe electrical
(a) cause the electrical equipment to be removed from the premises or to
be made safe;
As there is ample evidence available to prove that Smart Meters are unsafe (because they cause explosions, fire and radiation hazards) it could be argued that the above clause justifies the removal of the meter. See this part of the Act reproduced below.
I am simply offering this information to inform those of you who have expressed a desire to know the legal position of anyone who removes their Smart Meter and replaces it with an Analogue Meter.
Leave a reply →
(1) A person is not criminally responsible for an offence if he orshe carries out the conduct constituting the offence in self-defence.
(2) A person carries out conduct in self-defence if and only if he or she believes the conduct is necessary:
(a) to defend himself or herself or another person; or …
There’s also 10.2 Duress & 10.3 Sudden or extraordinary emergency & 10.5 Lawful authority etc
Alan is in touch with Jason who was defending another person (daughter) in self defence … worthy of consideration? see http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013C00366/Download
Both World Health Organisation & ARPANSA have issued health warnings, especially for children … we have bags of info justifying self defence – just ask. Or, Mark’s Self-Empowerment path may appeal to Alan/Jason/others rather than use the adversarial Legal System path of legal or class action or defence (maritime law), instead asserting common law
“Every Man is independent of ALL LAWS except those prescribed by nature. He is NOT bound by any institution formed by his fellow Men WITHOUT his consent.” Cruden V Neale ZNC 338 May Term 1796