[ad_1]
Surprisingly, the Minister of Public Works, Alfredo Moreno, made an announcement on Friday about the TAG rates: the revision of the contracts made to three concessionaires: Vespucio Norte, Vespucio Sur and Autopista Central, will force a drop in values of the porticos, several of which have already been applied or are close to doing so.
But it is not all. The review of the MOP determined that the clauses of the contracts have been misapplied for several years, so they decided to arbitrate the concessionaires. The decision of these instances is scalable to the Supreme Court, so it will be this instance that will have the last word. For the time being, the concessionaires have already expressed their rejection of the MOP’s decision.
What are the specific losses that will be generated?
Casualties depend on each of the highways, because in each one the contract is fulfilled differently. Where there are major modifications is in the Central Highway, while in Vespucio Sur there are slight modifications and Vespucio Norte is in an intermediate case. These changes are already being made. Notwithstanding this, we are still in discussion for additional discounts, which they have claimed are not applicable due to technical issues, that we are working with them and that could mean that there are additional discounts.
When did this review of contracts begin?
We have been concerned about urban highway contracts for many months. Changes to readjustments were made last year. These highways had readjustments of 3.5% real annually, which means that in all this time the base rates have risen in the order of 80% real. If it had continued the same, another 70% real would have risen. That has been removed and now the base rate is only going to grow due to inflation.
We also made changes for people who had TAG disabled and who had very high fines, even with a new law that allowed them to overcome this problem and the pricing for motorcycles was modified. For a long time there has been concern, especially on this subject, which are saturation and peak rates, which is very important, because they are three and two times higher than the base rate. In recent weeks we have been investigating the contract and its fulfillment, in addition to the specific speeds at which the traffic was taking place.
Which instance will analyze the discrepancies in the contracts?
Each of these contracts has a conciliatory commission that later becomes an arbitration commission. It is they who have to define any difference between the Directorate of Concessions, the Ministry of Public Works and the concessionaire. It is a commission made up of three parts, one appointed by each of the parties and one by mutual agreement. These first try to reconcile the positions and if they do not succeed it becomes an arbitration commission, and decides and then the parties can go with a complaint to the Supreme Court, which is where finally interprets the correct meaning of each Contract clause.
When will these requirements be entered?
There is already a requirement presented on one of the highways and in the coming days the next requirements will be presented by MOP or the highways, requesting the intervention of these commissions, to settle this point, which is very important, because it not only defines current rates, but also the past. IF it is determined that the MOP is right, there will be a very significant refund to users for the years elapsed in which it has been badly charged, and that depending on the highway it could be five, six years of bad charges. And, in addition, it defines how the collection will be in the remaining years. On average these highways have a remaining fifteen years, and depending on how this clause is interpreted and applied, naturally we will have a different pricing of these urban highways into the future.
What vision do companies have about collections in previous years?
The concessionaires have an opinion that is different from that of the MOP regarding the clauses of the contract. They interpret the clauses that make it mandatory to reduce rates when there is no congestion is only optional, that is, they only apply it when they deem it appropriate. It is at will and not an obligation, despite the fact that the contract establishes otherwise. That is what we are going to review in these conciliatory and then arbitration committees.
Will contracts with other dealerships be reviewed?
There are two other concessionaires, Túnel San Cristóbal and Costanera Norte. In the first case, as a result of the construction of Vespucio Oriente, which greatly interferes with the tunnel, a fixed rate structure was established, so it does not have the situation of the other three. Therefore, the tunnel does not have a problem with its rates, which is equivalent to what it had in 2018. However, it is possible that in the tunnel there have also been differences in charges, because the contract when it was not in this Special period was the same as the other three highways. So it may be that in 2017 and 2018 there has been a difference in rates, in which case it will also be part of a discussion in the arbitration commission.
In the case of Costanera Norte, the contract is different, it does not have a quarterly review like the others, but it does change its rates once every six months. The concepts by which they are changed are the same as the other three. Now a reduction does not correspond to him, worse yes it is going to have to lower as of July product of the reduced traffic that we have had in this semester.
In the same way that I explained regarding the tunnel, in any case, the Costanera Norte rates will be reviewed to ensure that there has not been a difference in any rate in the past that could have been incorrectly charged. Basically any modification for the traffic of this semester, in the case of Costanera Norte, will be applied from the first of July, which will be equivalent to the one we are having on the other highways.
[ad_2]
