Water meters - pros and cons?

phsci

Cardew wrote: »

If they can't fit a meter, then you are entitled to an assessed charge which according to their website is either £384 or £434 pa for multi-person occupancy.

If you think that's a disgrace, you may be even more amazed that the charges you quote are only for sewerage services; you need to allow an additional £287.50 to cover the water supply element of the whole bill. So, up to £721.50 in total !!

Cardew

phsci wrote: »

If you think that's a disgrace, you may be even more amazed that the charges you quote are only for sewerage services; you need to allow an additional £287.50 to cover the water supply element of the whole bill. So, up to £721.50 in total !!

Sorry missed that - even more of a disgrace!

glittermonster

So I checked my bill - I'm with thames water

water is 266 @ 74.44p (198.01) with a fixed charge of £30 (£228.01)
waste water is 266 @ 40.22p (106.99) with a fixed charge of £42 (£148.99)

So total annual bill is £377

I'm out (with my son) Monday - Friday from 6:30pm - 6:30pm if that makes any difference.

mycar37

Cardew wrote: »

Th main factor in determining if you will save is the Rateable Value(RV) of your property.

RV was supposed to be calculated on the notional letting value of your property and had little to do with size or value of a property. Thus an old large property could have a lower RV than a modern(i.e. late 1980's) smaller property.

If you have a very low RV, and use a lot of water, you will proably be worse off with a meter. However I believe the majority of households will be better off with a meter.

What is a very low RV? - or even a high RV?

Cardew

glittermonster wrote: »

So I checked my bill - I'm with thames water

water is 266 @ 74.44p (198.01) with a fixed charge of £30 (£228.01)
waste water is 266 @ 40.22p (106.99) with a fixed charge of £42 (£148.99)

So total annual bill is £377

I'm out (with my son) Monday - Friday from 6:30pm - 6:30pm if that makes any difference.

OK you have a Rateable Value(RV) of £266 and live in the Broxbourne area of Thames Water's patch - you have one of the lowest charges a total of 114.66p per £1 RV. Other areas can be as high as 161.7p per £1 RV.

If you were metered, the average annual consumption is approx 55 cubic metres per year, per person; so say 110 cubic metres for you and son. - although many people say they can use much less water than that amount.

The cost of metered water is 122.63p and sewerage 64.73p per cubic metre.(total £1.87) Taking a figure of 110 means you would pay £205.70. (110 x £187)

In addition you will pay standing charges of £28 and either £29 or £52. So your annual bill would be £262 or £285.

So I would think that you should save around £100pa by being metered. Even more if you can use less than 110 cubic metres.

Also as stated above - if you find that metered is not cheaper, you can revert to your current method of charging.(must be within 12 months)

glittermonster

thank for working that out cardew - much appreciated.

guess I'll be calling them tomorrow then.

I think it would be cheaper as I'm often not at home!

Cardew

mycar37 wrote: »

What is a very low RV? - or even a high RV?

Firstly bear in mind that most older properties were last assessed in 1973.

I have seen RV's as low as £50 for nice large modernised properties - that weren't modernised when assessed.

An RV of £400 - £500 would be higher than average.

silentotter

I am considering going to a meter as I am on the rateable system at the moment and pay £140 per quarter. There is only two off us in the house and we are out at work all day during the week.

However we do have a combi boiler with means that at times you have to run the hot water tap a few minutes before you get any hot water. Would it be worth going over to a meter given the above?

The previous owners of the house were the same as us just a couple without children and worked all day. The water company (northumbrian) advised that even with a moderate water usage we would pay £26 per month instead of the current £46.

We aren't in to have that many cups of tea in the day, we shower during the week and I have 1 bath per week. We don't use the dish washer and the washing machine does 4 - 5 loads per week. As it is winter we haven't watered the garden or washed the as yet but intend to use as much water from the water but as possible for that.

Any advice would be grateful.

Cardew

silentotter wrote: »

I am considering going to a meter as I am on the rateable system at the moment and pay £140 per quarter. There is only two off us in the house and we are out at work all day during the week.

However we do have a combi boiler with means that at times you have to run the hot water tap a few minutes before you get any hot water. Would it be worth going over to a meter given the above?

The previous owners of the house were the same as us just a couple without children and worked all day. The water company (northumbrian) advised that even with a moderate water usage we would pay £26 per month instead of the current £46.

We aren't in to have that many cups of tea in the day, we shower during the week and I have 1 bath per week. We don't use the dish washer and the washing machine does 4 - 5 loads per week. As it is winter we haven't watered the garden or washed the as yet but intend to use as much water from the water but as possible for that.

Any advice would be grateful.

Unless you use huge amounts of water for the garden etc, then a meter will be considerably cheaper.

However in the unlikely event it doesn't turn out to be cheaper, you can revert back to your current charging method on the Rateable Value as long as you do so within 12 months.

analyst_2

I think most people get lower meter costs in the first 12 months because at that stage its a novelty and they have become very conscious of the need to 'go careful' with the water.

As time goes on, and sensitivity diminishes, the meter charges tend to rise.
By that time your 12 months have passed. :sad:

I am not, by any means, stating this as a case for not having a meter.
If anything, I'm stating the bleedin' obvious.