How far back could you claim back water rates?

born_confused

I recently met a nice old couple (90’s) in who live in the hills outside Rawtenstall in the Rossendale area.
I was asked to look into what happened to the sewage from their property by an environmental health officer and found out that it went untreated into a nearby field. They are now going to be forced, rightly so, to install a treatment tank (bio unit) by the local authority.
It turns out that they have been paying rates for the treatment of waste water since 1968.
I would like to tell them that they could claim back enough money to cover the costs of the tank but I believe that the ownership of the public sewer has changed a number of times in this period which confuses the issue.
Does anyone know what the chances of recouping this money are? I would want to manage expectations as much as help out if it is a hopeless task. Life is too short to waste (excuse the pun) at this age.

Psykicpup

Statute of Limitations (? unsure if this is the right term) is 6yrs - I believe this is what you are refering too - ie they can only back date any under or overcharge for 6yrs. - HTH

Gothicfairy

Actually under the water act there is no set time scale for water bills ( unlike all the other utilites) but most don't go back for billing more then 6 years . However if it is the other way around IE they bill and it turns out to be a service you are not connected for most only go back to the first of the year IE 01.04 when they were advised or proof was supplied.
They take the possition that it is down to the householder to know what supplies they have and water they don't.
I would be suprised if they went back further then this year but it never hurts to try

Ellie2758

An article in saturday's Times highlighted the fact that water boards are obliged to offer a rebate on waste water that does not go into the sewerage system but into soakaways or other private arrangements. Apparently even in cases where it should have been obvious to them that a house had an alternative arrangement (i.e. another house in the same road built at the same time was getting the rebate) they will still only refund for one year's overpayment.

No wonder their profits are so high :mad:

Gothicfairy

The profits have nothing to do with this at all. OFWAT set the amount of allowed profit for each year based on a 5 year plan, if they reduced the money from SWD they would just add it somewhere else.
Also it is OFWAT that set the limits and time scale for rebates and not the water company either.

Rebates for SWD are down to the customer in all cases including if a property on the same street has a soakaway ( most water companies accounting systems don't like properties like that anyway so they would not match one place to another anyway) that has been explained on the back of each water bill and in the leaflets for as long as I can remember.

I understand why people are unhappy with the way things are but that needs to be address to the right body and that is OFWAT and the government.

Cardew

Ellie2758 wrote: »

An article in saturday's Times highlighted the fact that water boards are obliged to offer a rebate on waste water that does not go into the sewerage system but into soakaways or other private arrangements. Apparently even in cases where it should have been obvious to them that a house had an alternative arrangement (i.e. another house in the same road built at the same time was getting the rebate) they will still only refund for one year's overpayment.

No wonder their profits are so high :mad:

This has been covered many many times on MSE - search for Surface Water Drainage.(SWD)

It is a disgrace IMO that the 'default position' is that they charge for SWD even on new houses when it is most unlikely planning permission would be granted unless surface water entered a soakaway.

Even worse is that in blocks of flats(obviously with the one roof!) each flat will be charged for SWD unless relief is claimed.

That said it is not the water companies fault but was a condition of the water privatisation act.

Also in terms of profit, as stated above, it doesn't matter to the companies if they have SWD income or not. The revenue and hence profit of the water companies is controlled by the Regulator(ofwat). If a company lost, say, £1 million pa income from SWD charges they would be allowed to raise that £1 million from other charges - classic 'robbing Peter to pay Paul'

Ellie2758

Cant understand why they are ALLOWED to earn such huge profits on something that is an essential service. But then I guess that is privatisation for you.

Cardew

Ellie2758 wrote: »

Cant understand why they are ALLOWED to earn such huge profits on something that is an essential service. But then I guess that is privatisation for you.

You can thank Maggie Thatcher for that disaster!

Actually it was something of a master stroke politically as water supply and sewerage were based on a largely Victorian infrastructure which had been neglected for decades and needed many £billions to modernise.

They sold off 'our'(the tax payers) possessions to private companies, and even though the Regulator has teeth, the companies simply cannot fail to make money.

What is worse they didn't 'share the pain' of modernisation costs equally and places like the West Country pay well over twice as much as other parts of the country.

That said the profits are not huge compared with the size of the investment - but of course they are virtually guaranteed.