Water Meter Fitted without my Permission

GingerBob_3

lstar337 wrote: »

I don't know about envy. I would rather it were a level playing field. Either we all have one, or nobody has one.


Or water wasters who don't have a meter are pushing up the bills of those of us who are careful with their usage. Could look at it either way.

Fair point. I'd prefer no one had one. There's more than enough water in this country to support such a proposition. The water companies need to sort out leaks more than they are doing, and there's a need for a national water grid.

Cardew

So is he fed this copious supply of rainwater without treatment?

Similarly is his sewerage untreated?

GingerBob wrote: »

No. I'm sure they pump all sorts of chemicals into it (e.g. fluoride) that he might not want.


Not sure about his sewerage. Maybe he has a septic tank. In any event, sewerage and rainwater drainage isn't metered.

The Government has decreed fluoride will be used.

Sewerage for the vast majority of customers with a meter is effectively metered; a percentage of between 90% and 95% of supplied water is deemed to have entered the sewerage system - and needs(thank goodness) to be treated.

robin58

Well I had a water meter put in 2000. My yearly water bill went down from £240 a year to £80 all in.

Rateable value in my area now would get me a bill of about £600.

So I am happy.

GingerBob_3

robin58 wrote: »

Well I had a water meter put in 2000. My yearly water bill went down from £240 a year to £80 all in.

Rateable value in my area now would get me a bill of about £600.

So I am happy.

Nice one. But for other people it's the reverse.


I suspect that I might be better off with a water meter, but all things considered, I'd rather have the peace of mind of not having to bother about my consumption. I don't purposely waste water, but if I had a meter I'd probably be flushing the bog just once a day or something like that.

BobQ

OP needs to understand that most of the water he uses has to be disposed of somewhere and when it is it needs to be processed at some considerable cost.

The plan is to transfer everyone to meters but whether you are metered or not I do not see the problem. A meter encourages responsible use and for some people will be cheaper than not having a meter. Why should single people and couples subsidise households with four + adults or several children?

GingerBob_3

BobQ wrote: »

OP needs to understand that most of the water he uses has to be disposed of somewhere and when it is it needs to be processed at some considerable cost.

The plan is to transfer everyone to meters but whether you are metered or not I do not see the problem. A meter encourages responsible use and for some people will be cheaper than not having a meter. Why should single people and couples subsidise households with four + adults or several children?

They don't have to. It's their choice. They can have a meter fitted if they want.

LittleVoice

GingerBob wrote: »

They don't have to. It's their choice. They can have a meter fitted if they want.

Having a meter to your own property doesn't prevent unmetered customers using more than appropriate in theirs.


It is the potential over-consumption by the unmetered households which is then subsidised by the metered households because the total cost of supply (plus profit) has to come from all water bill payers, both metered and not.

Azil87

Choice of supplier for water is being looked at. It's been agreed for commercial properties and is due to be introduced next year or 2017 with a view to bringing it in for domestic properties at some point after :T

spiro

Azil87 wrote: »

Choice of supplier for water is being looked at. It's been agreed for commercial properties and is due to be introduced next year or 2017 with a view to bringing it in for domestic properties at some point after :T

But I bet you won't be able to switch without a meter which I think are a good thing. It may rain a lot in the UK but we are a very densely populated country without vast water storage capacity.