Cut Thames Water bill WITHOUT a meter

Gothicfairy

stephenhj wrote: »

If you dislike being kept in the dark by your monopoly water supplier, hit back: 1. Complain to the relevant consumer council for water; 2. Complain to Ofwat--even that "regulator" , totally supine on this issue, must take some notice, one day, of the way it is colluding in a rip-off; 3. tell anyone you know who may be a victim of the rip-off that there IS a way out, the assessed charge which the monopolists and Ofwat are so eager to keep secret.

All well and good but Assessed charges are not a new tariff or a special one .........It is for people who want and have applied for a meter and can not have one.
It does not apply to anyone else and nor really should it. It is illegal at the moment to offer a discount on water bills and as such the options are:
RV or meter..Nothing more, assessed is only a concession for people who do really want to try and cut their bills but are unable due to pipe work etc..
No one stops people from applying for a meter and in fact most companies do try and push meters on people. That way everyone would pay for what they use

I have no idea where people get the idea that assessed is a rate of charge open to everyone because it is not and never has been.
OFWAT etc want everyone on meters and that would then remove the RV totally and everyone would then be fair and clear.
Complain all you like by all means but please make sure you do the research first rather then just take the word of people here as it might save you a lot of time and trouble.
If you want to pay for what you use, apply for a water meter and let the company work out if you can have one or not.

Cardew

Gothicfairy,

The(valid) gripe that the posters have is that there is no publicity given to the fact that an assessed charge is available if a water meter cannot be fitted.

Many occupants of flats in London were aware that it wasn't possible fo fit a meter as others had tried to get them fitted. - Don't forget that years ago it was the occupants responsibility to pay to have a meter fitted and it was inspected by the water company - this is exactly what I did.

So knowing that a meter could not be fitted in their block of flats, and unaware that provision for assessed charges existed, they carried on paying very high charges on the RV charging system.

If Thames Water, and other companies, put a prominent notice, about assessed bills, with the water bills it would bring it to the notice of customers.

As I have pointed out earlier, it is not as if it loses Thames money. If they lose revenue from customers moving to assessed bills they increase charges to all other customers to compensate. They still collect the £xxmillion that ofwat authorise.

PlutoinCapricorn

Gothic Fairy, mixed use blocks with common supply pipes are often to be found in big cities. You get flats on top of offices, which are on top of shops, a car park or cinema etc.

Those of us who live in such flats are a constituency that appears to have been overlooked, deliberately or otherwise. We would love to have a water meter as we would pay a lot less but have known for decades that individual meters cannot be fitted, so would not think to apply for one.

Our case has the following main issues:

We have been grossly overcharged for many years as billing is on the basis of rateable value: we pay for water that we have not used;

As we know that meters cannot be fitted - I have a letter from Thames Water that confirms this - we would not think to apply for one thus do not get to hear about new tariffs as TW does not publicise them;

Why should we have to apply for a meter when we already know that this is not possible: it seems to be just a delaying tactic?

There is no good reason why the new tariffs should not be widely publicised and available on application, provided that there is already evidence of unsuitability for a meter.

At least awareness is picking up:
http://kingscrosslibdems.org.uk/2009/09/17/thames-water-overcharging-half-of-residents/

christarpey

Fascinating thread.
I first used the assessed charge (which has gone through various names over the years) in 1982 in a small office in Regents Street, in the West End of London. My rates were £7,000 my Water Rates were £3,000 and when I got onto the assessed charge this fell to £650.
I live in Belsize Park NW3. I heard of the AC (assessed charge) from Camden Council, and applied for it. I was twice told by Thames Customer Service line that the charge would apply from the date of application. This was then denied by the billing department. I persisted through ofwat, which passed me onto the Consumer Council for Water, and Thames, as a "one-off gesture" backdated the reduced price.

But hey, why aren't we shouting at moneysavingsexpert for not publicising this saving???

Go to: - thameswaters website look for assessed charges, and you will find this

Assessed Household Charge

The Assessed Household Charge is for customers who have requested a water meter, but cannot have one installed on their property. This applies to properties where there is a shared supply pipe, such as flats.
This new charging system was agreed with our regulator, Ofwat in 2007. Properties are placed in one of four bands, based on the number of bedrooms. Our charges for 2009/2010 are highlighted in the table below.

Band No of bedrooms Volume charge Standing charges Annual total Water Wastewater Water Wastewater 1 Single occupier £68 £34 £27 £36 £165 2 Studio / One bedroom £98 £48 £27 £36 £209 3 Two bedrooms £112 £55 £27 £36 £230 4 Three or more bedrooms £148 £73 £27 £36 £284
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

My two bed flat is probably worth £450,000. My water bill this year under the ratable system would be £380, under AC it is £230. A saving of 40% or £150.

IF YOU ARE IN A HIGH VALUE HOME, YOU WILL SAVE MONEY. THE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS IS IRRELEVANT.

METHODOLGY

1) Find out the AC from your water company.
2) If it saves money apply for a meter.
3) If they say you can't have one, you must then be offered the AC

N.B. IF THEY SAY YOU CAN HAVE A METER, AND YOU DON'T REALLY WANT ONE, TELL THEM TO STOP!!!!
AND IF YOU HAVE A METER INSTALLED, FOR UPTO A YEAR YOU CAN ASK FOR IT TO BE REMOVED: YOU WILL NEVER SUFFER ANY CHARGES OR COSTS FOR ANY OF THIS.

Cardew

christarpey wrote: »

Fascinating thread.
I first used the assessed charge (which has gone through various names over the years) in 1982 in a small office in Regents Street, in the West End of London. My rates were £7,000 my Water Rates were £3,000 and when I got onto the assessed charge this fell to £650.
I live in Belsize Park NW3. I heard of the AC (assessed charge) from Camden Council, and applied for it. I was twice told by Thames Customer Service line that the charge would apply from the date of application. This was then denied by the billing department. I persisted through ofwat, which passed me onto the Consumer Council for Water, and Thames, as a "one-off gesture" backdated the reduced price.

But hey, why aren't we shouting at moneysavingsexpert for not publicising this saving???

Go to: - thameswaters website look for assessed charges, and you will find this

Assessed Household Charge

The Assessed Household Charge is for customers who have requested a water meter, but cannot have one installed on their property. This applies to properties where there is a shared supply pipe, such as flats.
This new charging system was agreed with our regulator, Ofwat in 2007. Properties are placed in one of four bands, based on the number of bedrooms. Our charges for 2009/2010 are highlighted in the table below.

Band No of bedrooms Volume charge Standing charges Annual total Water Wastewater Water Wastewater 1 Single occupier £68 £34 £27 £36 £165 2 Studio / One bedroom £98 £48 £27 £36 £209 3 Two bedrooms £112 £55 £27 £36 £230 4 Three or more bedrooms £148 £73 £27 £36 £284
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

My two bed flat is probably worth £450,000. My water bill this year under the ratable system would be £380, under AC it is £230. A saving of 40% or £150.

IF YOU ARE IN A HIGH VALUE HOME, YOU WILL SAVE MONEY. THE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS IS IRRELEVANT.

METHODOLGY

1) Find out the AC from your water company.
2) If it saves money apply for a meter.
3) If they say you can't have one, you must then be offered the AC

N.B. IF THEY SAY YOU CAN HAVE A METER, AND YOU DON'T REALLY WANT ONE, TELL THEM TO STOP!!!!
AND IF YOU HAVE A METER INSTALLED, FOR UPTO A YEAR YOU CAN ASK FOR IT TO BE REMOVED: YOU WILL NEVER SUFFER ANY CHARGES OR COSTS FOR ANY OF THIS.

Welcome to the forum.

I am not sure if you are just talking about Thames Water or Water companies in general.

A couple of points on your post:

Firstly, the water company can insisist on a meter being fitted on change of occupant; some companies don't enforce this regulation, but from some posts on here - I believe Thames are enforcing this rule.(possibly only in some areas). These new occupants do not get the chance to change to the RV system,

So if you have applied for a meter, you might not get the option to refuse one, albeit you can immediately revert back to being charged on the RV basis.

Also in certain areas of the country, even existing customers are having a meter imposed.

Secondly a meter is never removed. True that existing customers who have asked for a meter can revert to charging under the old RV system within 12 months(24 months with some companies), However the meter stays in situ and the next occupant will be on a metered charge.

Lastly your statement that "IF YOU ARE IN A HIGH VALUE HOME, YOU WILL SAVE MONEY" is not necessarily the case. The Rateable Value of a house is nothing to do with the value of the house.

The RV of a property was based on the notional rent it would command as far ago as 1973. That rental valuation was based on many factors, but modern facilities figured highly.

There are many older mansions with huge grounds that have an extremely low RV(as low as £50) yet are now worth over a million pounds and Band H. That is because in 1973 they were completely unmodernised(no CH etc) and people just wouldn't want to rent such a place with the high upkeep.

London is a good example. Certain area were unfashionable in the 70's - Fulham, Islington, Wapping etc - and the properties often had a very low RV. In fact I lived in a 3 bed Tce house in Chelsea that was such a property - it was almost uninhabitable in the 70's, but now beautiful inside.

stephenhj

In reply to Gothic Fairy. No one in this thread has ever suggested that assessed charge is "open to everyone". Of course it isn't.

The complaint, as Cardew rightly said, is that its existence is deliberately concealed from that minority who might (a) be entitled to it because they cannot be metered; and might (b) apply for it, thus (c) saving a lot of money--- except that (d) they've never heard of this form of charging, because its existence is deliberately concealed from them (and from anybody else, to the best of some water companies'--and Ofwat's--ability

sardarji

In short, to sum up this thread which I started:

One, the water companies are deliberately concealing a vital element of charging from consumers;

which, two, helps the companies--as one of you put it--to rip some of those consumers off blind; and all this

three, with the active connivance of Ofwat, the supposed consumers' friend

It stinks.

Cardew

sardarji wrote: »

In short, to sum up this thread which I started:

One, the water companies are deliberately concealing a vital element of charging from consumers;

which, two, helps the companies--as one of you put it--to rip some of those consumers off blind; and all this

three, with the active connivance of Ofwat, the supposed consumers' friend

It stinks.

Agree with 'one'

Don't agree with 'two'. The companies will raise the revenue they are allowed to charge(by ofwat) regardless of people paying less on an assessed tariff - they will simply charge other customers a little more to compensate. That is what makes the lack of publicity inexplicable, the companies are not affected financially.

Regarding 'three' - the Consumer Council for Water are the 'consumers friend'. ofwat are the regulator.

sardarji

Cardew: let's not niggle about words. If you are conned into paying £500 for something that should cost you £250, you've been ripped off by the seller, even if he gives every extra pound to Oxfam. And, no doubt the water consumer council is officially designated as the consumer's friend, but that is what Ofwat also should be, and indeed claims to be.

stephenhj

Does Thames Water really not profit from its quite deliberate failure to inform those unmeterable folk who might benefit from an "assessed household charge" that that basis of charging actually exists?

My answer is Yes, it does. Suppose all these households ask tomorrow for a meter; are (quite correctly) told it's impossible; are then--but only then!--told about the assessed charge; and promptly switch to it. Thames Water's revenue for the current year quite certainly falls.

Even if Thames can raise overall charges to consumers in the following year, to take account of that switch, that is next year's revenue--and any trader knows that next year's money is not the same as money now.

Can they next year retrieve this year's shortfall? I asked another water company what happens if, say, 50,000 more customers than expected switch from rateable value to a meter. This was the answer:

"Within the regulatory mechanism, water companies are compensated to cover the number of customers that switch to meters. The price determination will assume a number of customers will switch to meters over the five year period and the annual change in prices will reflect this. There is an annual “headroom” adjustment to price limits that takes account of the actual number of customers switching to meters during the period. In the next regulatory period (10-11 to 14-15) a revised regulatory mechanism is due to come in (a revenue adjusted price cap) which should result in any unanticipated lost revenue being recovered".


This was talking about meters, a far more weighty item in water companies' finances than assessed charges. And the sentence I've put in bold suggests to me that even for meters, though the companies can in "year 2" adjust forward for the unexpectedly-high number of people who switched in "year 1", they cannot--at present--in addition retrieve year 1's "unanticipated loss". It really is water gone under the bridge.


The new "revised mechanism" means that during the coming five-year period they will be able to grab back this sort of lost revenue. But the clear implication is that at present they can't.

If the same holds good for switches to assessed charges (as you'd expect, given they matter less to the companies), then customer ignorance of these has indeed been a "nice little earner" (little, but nice) for Thames up till now--indeed, till next April. Albeit that it will/(may?) then cease to be so.


Not, frankly, that this question is the point. The real issue is the deliberate lack of information from Thames Water. As everyone seems to agree, this is a disgrace. I personally think Ofwat's approval of it even more disgraceful. Thames, after all, is in business to make money. It has an excuse, however shabby. Ofwat has no excuse whatever. It is tasked to--among other things--protect water consumers. And in this matter it is--quite deliberately, on grounds that are simply ludicrous even if they are its real ones--doing the reverse.