Cheaper Water Bills Article Discussion

mullsy

Hi Gothicfairy,
I too agree that it is an unfair charge and agree with your comment that it has to be paid somewhere. Surely we are already paying for this service in our council tax as it is they who empty, service and clean these facilities. The private utility companies are the ones benefitting from this and that is not right.

I found it interesting that you quote from Robert Service, I am from his birth town Preston in Lancashire and recently bought a first edition of his works at a local book store.
Small world!!!!!

Gothicfairy

A first edition.... jealous muchly, lucky you.

The council might empty some of the drains but the water company do a lot more and they are the ones that service the pipe work and clean the actual water.

It is a hard one though as someone has to pay and people want it to be fair which is maybe the bigger problem.

lawfulhippo

Whilst the local council are responsible for the physical drain on the highway, they sewage company are still responsible for the sewers underneath and for treating that water. In any case, it's irrelevant to the WASCs what they charge for any given circumstances. The only reason these charges show up is because OFWAT demanded they be separated from the standing charges so only those people that received that service were paying for it.

I think the main problem is that it's obviously a service that's needed, and we, the public, are going to be the ones that end up paying for it, it's just a matter of how it's split up and who we pay it to.

Some sewage companies don't charge a highway drainage charge, but their SWD or Sewerage standing charges are higher (than they would be if they charged highway drainage). I'd probably argue that, once you accept you're going to pay for it somehow because somebody has to, the fairest way is to charge highway drainage, surface water drainage and sewerage standing charges separately. At least that way, everybody that benefits from a service will be sharing the burden, and those that aren't needn't pay.

homeed

Gothicfairy wrote: »

"There use to be one standing charge for a meter with included clean and waste and was there to pay to cover the cost of metering and maintenance etc
The problem with that was that some people were billed twice by two different companies and thus got two full standing charges so it was agreed by OFWAT and all the water companies to split the standing charge into waste and clean ( the amount still comes to the same as when it was one charge) and that means that customers only pay for the service they get."

Have I got this right - that Im only meant to be paying one standing charge if I have two different water companies?

For the last 5 and a bit years I've been a flat, therefore cant have a water meter. I checked the rateable value which was wrong and it took me so much effort that I spent the difference on telephone calls and postage of sending items to the water company - only to find the next year I had to redo it all again to get the right rateable value for that year. They don't seem to "fix" the rateable value when you have found them to be wrong.

At present I am in 2 bed flat and am paying Southern Water around £22pm and South East Water around £26 per month - both of them include a standing charge. Is this roughly what I should be paying around this area? As it was much cheaper where I was before most probably because it was covered by one company.

Would appreciate any help, as I seem to be going round in circles.

Cardew

homeed wrote: »

Gothicfairy wrote: »

"There use to be one standing charge for a meter with included clean and waste and was there to pay to cover the cost of metering and maintenance etc
The problem with that was that some people were billed twice by two different companies and thus got two full standing charges so it was agreed by OFWAT and all the water companies to split the standing charge into waste and clean ( the amount still comes to the same as when it was one charge) and that means that customers only pay for the service they get."

Have I got this right - that Im only meant to be paying one standing charge if I have two different water companies?

For the last 5 and a bit years I've been a flat, therefore cant have a water meter. I checked the rateable value which was wrong and it took me so much effort that I spent the difference on telephone calls and postage of sending items to the water company - only to find the next year I had to redo it all again to get the right rateable value for that year. They don't seem to "fix" the rateable value when you have found them to be wrong.

At present I am in 2 bed flat and am paying Southern Water around £22pm and South East Water around £26 per month - both of them include a standing charge. Is this roughly what I should be paying around this area? As it was much cheaper where I was before most probably because it was covered by one company.

Would appreciate any help, as I seem to be going round in circles.

How do you, or the water company, deduce the Rateable Value(RV) is wrong? I assume you are not confusing RV with Council Tax band?

That was set as long ago as 1973, and certainly before 1990. That was assessed by the local council and the water company had no influence on the value of your RV and had(and have) no power to change the RV. Indeed the Council have no mechanism to determine if it was wrong.

If a meter cannot be fitted in your property you can be offered an assessed rate; but first you must apply for a meter.

homeed

Thanks for your quick reply.

The ratable value on my flat, that was set in 1974, was not the same as what the water company was charging at. When I sent them a photocopy of the rateable value that was kindly supplied by my council - they gave me a rebate for that year, but the following year promptly put the rateable value at the previous rate. As it made a difference of around £5, when I phoned the second year they said they had no record of it and I would have to resend everything. The amount of phone calls and recorded delivery for doing this each year (and the hassle) far outweighs the amount I would save.

MTDancer

My son lives in York. 2 young lads in a flat. they do NOT understand saving water.
They pay £26 per month and are £82 in credit.
We live in Devon. 2 of us. Sooo careful with water. We pay £47 a month and are £67 in arrears!
It just isn't fair

Moneymatta

Wash your car in the rain

stewartjrl

As others have stated, in some areas we have no choice. Meters have been installed and are awaiting being put into action later this year - with the threat that any undiscovered leaks will be the responsibility of the householder. This is of course another blow to the worst off - the "wealthy", who probably use more water anyway, will not care two hoots about their bills. Already frightened to run their over-priced heating or switch on an electric appliance, the elderly and poor will now be terrified to boil a kettle, water their vegetables (which of course negates the "green" self-sufficiency idea), wash themselves and ... well the list goes on, and there will be a real danger of worsened hygiene and consequent health problems. Your list of water-saving tips will do little to reassure many of these people - even if they do manage to access them or equivalent suggestions. And frankly, suggesting that children should have to share baths all the time is a totally retrograde step in child health ! (You may as well add urinating in the garden to save flushing while you are about it ... )

On another tack, it wasn't that long ago that everyone was being encouraged to install "efficient" power showers as opposed to using baths. There is little if any difference between a long shower and a bath but it's a lot easier to judge how much water is in a bath so here is another complicated judgement for individuals to have to make.

All right, perhaps we have had it too easy for too long, but I really resent this compulsive measure for individuals whilst the water companies continue themselves to waste thousands of gallons a year through their own undiscovered or unrepaired leaks and their inefficient actions to deal with those reported. As usual it appears that the onus has been heaved onto the "people" to make up for high-level wastage and inefficiency in order to bolster share prices and bonuses, many of which now seem to relate to foreign companies that have bought out our own utilities. I think the general public would like a good deal more assurance that many other measures are really being taken to limit heavy usage in such areas as industry, swimming pools, private estates and health spas to name but a few.

Khan_Malomir

After having a bath, why not save the water to flush the loo, just use a jug to throw it down, job done as they say! Saves a fortune on paying for water twice.