Shock Letter from Water Authority

Beachbaby

I saw your original post and thought my story might be of interest to you. We were on rated water (no meter) when we moved into our current house (it's over 100 years old!) May2013. We then opted for a meter to be installed in October 2013 after paying £79 a month on rated water.....when we got our first bill on the meter we were in for a shock! £9000.00! Not kidding. We obviously had a leak but United Utilities (we're Liverpool) asked us to try the above methods to determine if it was or not. After lliterally all water was turned off the meter was moving like crazy so we had to apply for a burst water allowance. The water company came out to take a look, couldn't find the leak and left us with a form. We were told to get a builder/plumber in to find the leak. Found it, the water pipe between the meter and going into the house was "like a sieve" and letting out the equivalent of about 12 baths a day! After following all UU procedures we've now finally (today) been given a credit and had the huge amount wiped off our account after getting the leak fixed. They give you a certain amount of time to fix it, think it was 2 weeks? Since then, after a few correct meter readings by ourselves we've had normal readings which for the 2 of us who shower only, no baths, both work everyday so only in mornings, evening and weekends, works out at roughly 0.14 cubic metres of water a day (approx 142 litres of water) which costs us 80 pence a day in combined water & waste water. Hope this long post was of some interest to you and I hope your water issues get sorted.

rollon65

Hello Beachbaby,

Thank you for coming in on this one - appreciate your very kind contribution.
In your own (deplorable) circumstances, however could your water company not establish that the leak was between your stopcock and the meter? The source of a torrent of a leak like yours should have been immediately identifiable.
In my own situation, I am very suspicious of the entire plumbing run of the mains supply to the four properties on our stretch of the road, but I have been assured on a number of occasions now that the goings on either side of me can't possibly be influencing our own exaggerated water consumption. However, when I hear tales like your own, I can't put that thought entirely out of my mind.
I am still waiting for a date for my man to come and take a look at my hot water tank again, and on the basis that he will be doing the work for me for next to nothing, I don't feel that I can put any undue pressure upon him to do it any time soon. I know that he has family commitments that should quite rightly come first. He will get here fairly soon, I'm sure of it.

Kind regards - rollon65.

Cardew

With regard to 'Beachbaby's' post #52 may I suggest you read from post #10 onwards in this thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4948662

The reason for raising this is that incorrect advice is given about the water company's responsibilities.

Also it is implausible that a water company could not discover a leak of 960 litres an hour - every hour for 5 months. So the OP had to get their own plumber.

rollon65

Hello to all contributors,

Whilst I wait for my man to find me a slot in which to overhaul my hot water tank, I can report that my water authority has had their man out, on foot, to inspect and take manual readings from the meters three doors downstream from me today.
He also took a look at the next one upstream, towards me.
I was befuddled for a bit but decided to butt in and ask for some details, but as I turned around to confront him he struck out up the road at a gallop and the opportunity was lost.
I have not had my expected May water consumption statement yet and am beginning to wonder why, but there is an old adage that goes "Let sleeping dogs lie" - so I am.

Best regards - rollon65.

rollon65

Hello again all,

I have now pursued my central heating installer man to try and fix a date for his attendance and unfortunately encountered his wife who gave a non-commital "We're quite stretched at the moment" response.
This could be interpreted as "There's plenty of jobs around this place that I want sorting first". I don't know. However she did say that she would ask him to call me.
Before anything further takes place - in the light of what I have described taking place at water meters up and down the road from me, I need to establish what our current situation is, subsequent to those works.
Yesterday, I had a 7 hour window during in which no water was used in the bungalow but the stopcock was left open.
What I want to is an impartial interpretation of how much water was recorded by my meter under the circumstances that I have described please - but I don't know if images can be attached here, or how to do it (if anyone can enlighten me).
The "Insert Image" icon above, when clicked, asks me for the URL of my image and as the photos that I have are only on my PC, I can't quite get my head around that one.
Cardew: You have provided a meter image in this posting - I wonder how you did it? Are you able to assist once again please?

Best regards - rollon65.

rollon65

Hello All,

With the help of the guys over at the Techie section, I hope I am now able to post the photos that mention in my preceeding post.
I am after an impartial total water passage through our meter for the 7 hour period.

Many thanks in anticipation - rollon65.

PS: Don't think I've got this right - the icon shows the 2 flikr file locations, but no actual photos - so I have included the links.

If you just double click on the links the photos will be revealed.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/46203975@N08/14420562445/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/46203975@N08/14233917509/

Cardew

First meter reading 302.470 The smallest pointer(.001)is slightly out of line; but the .01 pointer is clearly at '7'


second meter reading 302.472


So I make that 2 litres consumed.

rollon65

Hello Cardew,

Good to have your input again, thank you.
Well - it does seem that "something" has influenced the recorded passing water volume since the initial thrust of my posting.
I certainly agree with you on the kind of figure we are currently looking at (and who knows, if I get the hot water tank cistern put to rights we may even lose the "meter creep"?).
I saw the meter shot in the image number ending in 509 as reading 302.4727 and that of the image number ending in 445 as 302.4797.
Either way, the dials are not in perfect synchronisation in the 445 shot as EITHER the pointer on the 0.001 dial should approaching the 2 digit, OR the pointer on the 0.01 should not have passed the 7 digit, in which case the reading would be 302.4697.
I fear I shall have to revert back to my camera for the exact sequence of shots as once they are on my PC they are all credited with the date that I transferred them to it. I have merely assumed for the natural ascendency of the numbers.
I shall indeed do that in order to try and get to the bottom of this conundrum and post back here.
Would you imagine that this state of affairs would substantiate a request for the meter to be replaced? After all, the dials are hardly likely to be intermitently asynchronous and if that particular rendering is out of kilter, then so are all the rest.

As ever, grateful for all your contributions - rollon65.

rollon65

Hello again Cardew,

As I thought - I had presented the links in chronological order.
So - the photo link ending in 445 shows the first reading and was taken at 11.09hrs. The second photo link ending in 509 was taken at 18.11hrs. Therefore, as I pointed out in my previous post, it's all down to which of the two dial pointers is not correctly aligned as to what the correct water passage volume is: 2 litres or 3 litres.
Both of these figures are a great improvement on the 6 - 7 litres over a 4 hour period that was previously registering and I'm still puzzled as to why there was no overflow in the overnight test.

Best regards - rollon65.

Cardew

I would certainly ask for a new meter; as yours is ancient. My meter is the same as that shown in post#20 - and that is 25 years old.


Your problem is that the 'leak' or 'meter creep' appears to be variable. If that 2 or 3 litres in 7 hours was maintained all year it is still amounts to 2,500 litres or 3,750 litres 'missing'.