Yorkshire Water want to help themselves to my money

camelseye

It’s bad enough when the energy companies decide to help themselves to our money because they have access to our bank accounts because we pay by direct debit but when a water company does the same thing it is extortion because none of us has any choice about who supplies our water (unless we are lucky enough to have our own well). Like many people I have switched to a meter because I believe in paying for what I use. Unfortunately, this leaves me open to Yorkshire Water ‘choosing’ what I will pay them.

Two years ago they tried to overcharge me by bumping up my monthly direct debit payments by a huge amount on no basis whatsoever. In the end it cost them £166 in compensation.

But that has not stopped them trying again. On New Year’s Eve I received a bill for 2013 which presented me with a figure for expected charges for the year but unsupported by any calculations. No doubt they hoped that, it being the holiday period, I would not notice. However, a bit of simple math on my part showed that, even allowing for a 5% rise in April (though no actual information on this is available), they would be overcharging me by £30 on what should be a bill of around £250. Repeat this over the 1000s of households in Yorkshire on a water meter and the company has provided itself with a handsome interest free loan.

If this is happening across the country it will be very profitable for the water companies as more and more people move on to water meters.

HappyMJ

camelseye wrote: »

It’s bad enough when the energy companies decide to help themselves to our money because they have access to our bank accounts because we pay by direct debit but when a water company does the same thing it is extortion because none of us has any choice about who supplies our water (unless we are lucky enough to have our own well). Like many people I have switched to a meter because I believe in paying for what I use. Unfortunately, this leaves me open to Yorkshire Water ‘choosing’ what I will pay them.

Two years ago they tried to overcharge me by bumping up my monthly direct debit payments by a huge amount on no basis whatsoever. In the end it cost them £166 in compensation.

But that has not stopped them trying again. On New Year’s Eve I received a bill for 2013 which presented me with a figure for expected charges for the year but unsupported by any calculations. No doubt they hoped that, it being the holiday period, I would not notice. However, a bit of simple math on my part showed that, even allowing for a 5% rise in April (though no actual information on this is available), they would be overcharging me by £30 on what should be a bill of around £250. Repeat this over the 1000s of households in Yorkshire on a water meter and the company has provided itself with a handsome interest free loan.

If this is happening across the country it will be very profitable for the water companies as more and more people move on to water meters.

Don't pay by direct debit.

Water bills can be paid quarterly by direct debit in full in arrears or by cash.

yangptangkipperbang

Hardly "extortion" - when all they are trying to do is make sure that you pay for what you use.
There are plenty of people who DON'T pay for what they use - that is why the energy/water companies often "overestimate" to make sure that they stay solvent.

If you don't like this method, just pay in full on receipt of a 6 monthly bill - unlike gas/electric the price is the same.

camelseye

It is extortion when my water usage has remained the same every year that I have had a meter and unlike energy use my water usage does not vary with the seasons.

There is no reason for utility companies to inflate future usage other than to generate surplus cash: I cannot say that I have seen any of them suffering any loses to justify this, in fact quite the opposite.

Cardew

camelseye wrote: »

There is no reason for utility companies to inflate future usage other than to generate surplus cash: I cannot say that I have seen any of them suffering any loses to justify this, in fact quite the opposite.

You are accusing the water company of criminal behaviour in that they are deliberately and knowingly defrauding customers.

If you believe that to be the case, why not report them to Ofwat. They recently fined a water company £millions, and instigated criminal procedings against the company, for a less serious case than your accusation.

You might of course be asked to provide some proof.

The accounts of customers these days are handled by 'The Computer' and untouched by human hand. It means that for your accusation to be upheld, the computer algorithim would have to be written by someone planning such a fraud.(the algorithm is independently audited, so the auditor either would not have spotted the error or colluded with the fraud)

The algorithm should also adjust your Monthly DD upwards or down during the year if the Computer 'thinks' the initial sum incorrect.

As others have stated, you can of course elect not to pay by DD; and a company cannot 'help itself to your money without informing you in advance. You incidentally sign the DD mandate.

Of course 'The Computer' can get it wrong and not even adjust your DD during the year. However to accuse a company of fraud because you calculate a potential overpayment( with no downward adjustment of your DD) of £30, does seem a little harsh!

samsmoot

As you quite rightly perceive, camelseye, they are a bunch of crooks.

Odd thing, isn't it, how billing errors always seem to be in their favour...

MaryJo987

yangptangkipperbang Hardly "extortion" - when all they are trying to do is make sure that you pay for what you use.
There are plenty of people who DON'T pay for what they use - that is why the energy/water companies often "overestimate" to make sure that they stay solvent.

If you don't like this method, just pay in full on receipt of a 6 monthly bill - unlike gas/electric the price is the same.

"when all they are trying to do is make sure that you pay for what you use"- now that is one big joke, isn't it, when single occupancy households are paying more than £200 over and above what they use under some outdated rating system. Ironic, when people living alone are entitled a 25% reduction on their council tax but that doesn't apply to water companies, yet they are using the old rating system for their despicable scam. And even more despicable when the government provides a £200 heating grant to the elderly every October yet 554 people died in Surrey from hypothermia last winter. Now work that one out.

Of course there is always the water meter option but compare the difference between gas and electric meters and water meters. Gas and electric meters are sited on your property, recording the amount of gas and electricity you use. Water meters on the other hand are sited in the public highway on pipework that the water companies are responsible for. So what happens if there is a leak in the public highway? Well your public highway meter will record it, won't it? And if you live in a flat your public highway meter will record leaks under someone else land as well. A poster (mart.vader) called the water companies rapacious b*stards. Spot on, mart.vader, spot on!

keystone

Tiny little fonts are challenging to read so I didn't bother past the first line. Never mind.

Cheers

Cardew

MaryJo987 wrote: »

"when all they are trying to do is make sure that you pay for what you use"- now that is one big joke, isn't it, when single occupancy households are paying more than £200 over and above what they use under some outdated rating system. Ironic, when people living alone are entitled a 25% reduction on their council tax but that doesn't apply to water companies, yet they are using the old rating system for their despicable scam. And even more despicable when the government provides a £200 heating grant to the elderly every October yet 554 people died in Surrey from hypothermia last winter. Now work that one out.


A poster (mart.vader) called the water companies rapacious b*stards. Spot on, mart.vader, spot on!

Of course a charging system based on the Rateable Value(RV) system that finished nearly 23 years ago is a nonsense. As indeed was the RV system itself, - you can get a mansion, worth £millions and now has a Band H Council Tax, with a lower RV than an Band A estate semi.

However if you want to blame anyone, start with Maggie's Government and the various governments that followed. The simple fact is the Water Companies have absolutely no option but to use the RV system for non-metered households as it is mandated in the Water Privatisation Act(of Parliament!) and enforced by the Government appointed Regulator - Ofwat.

The second point is that it makes absolutely no difference to the water companies what system of charging is used. Ofwat determines how much revenue each company can raise from charges and thus their profit margin.

A company can raise £xxxmillion in charges and make £yymillion in profit. So if Ofwat stipulated that, say, RV charges be reduced by 20%, then the company would be authorised to raise other charges to compensate. Thus they would still raise £xxxmillion in charges and make £yymillion in profit. Put simply under the current legislation the water companies cannot lose.

I don't understand your point about ' when single occupancy households are paying more than £200 over and above what they use under some outdated rating system.'

You can elect for a meter and pay for what you use. If a meter cannot be fitted then you will get an assessed rate for which a single person rate can be allocated.

If you don't like the metering system - for the valid reasons you explain - then as stated earlier, blame Maggie etc. The water companies have no discretion in this matter.

It is pertinent to ask, if you don't agree with the RV system, or the metering system, what system of charging would you propose?

Personally I believe the whole system of water supply in this country is deeply flawed, and the industry should never have been privatised. The Water Companies have been placed in a win/win situation. However they can only operate within the constraints placed upon them by law; and your arrows are aimed at the wrong target.

P.S.

Your reference to 554 people in Surrey dying of Hypothermia in a thread about water companies, doesn'tseem to make much sense.

yangptangkipperbang

"Extortion"
"rapacious b******s"
"bunch of crooks"
"fraud"

............what puerile language, how do you expect ANYONE to take you seriously ? Grow up !!

samsmoot

yangptangkipperbang wrote: »

"Extortion"
"rapacious b******s"
"bunch of crooks"
"fraud"

............what puerile language, how do you expect ANYONE to take you seriously?

As all of the water companies I have had dealings with are crooks and fraudsters I take camelseye's comments very seriously.