Thames Water meters now compulsory?
Comments
-
Inner_Zone wrote: »There not SMART meter like electricity and gas meters which use GSM (although there are some GSM water meters) They are battery powered (generally 7 to 12 years life) and when a walk or drive by receiver / transmitter is close to the meter it will read data out of the meter including the meters serial number to identify it.
That's the kind I have already.
The engineer said they usually hang an automatic meter reader on dumper trucks (bin collection), which picks up the readings on its rounds. So reading once a week, at most, hardly frequent monitoring stuff.
I get a statement every six months, good enough for me.
I suppose frequent readings can pick up leaks early.0 -
So long distance canals have never existed? There is no reservoir in Wales supplying Liverpool. 10 miles? the water ring has been extended twice so far and it draws on water further afield. There's pumping and there's pumping. Perhaps it is difficult. Why waste money on HS2 why not divert funds to a water grid and let this place function as a unified country. OfWat's proposal on water company choice will function how?
If the "definitive" evidence is examined for GREATER London,
ca 84% is in the low water stress category
ca 12 % is in the medium stress category
ca 4% is in the high stress category
In SE London they are abstracting water locally.
Curiously meters seem destined only for the private sector.0 -
I seem to remember this same argument being used by Margaret thatcher back in 1989/1990 in the Rate versus Poll tax debacle. The idea being that anyone in a house was using the services and should therefore pay accordingly. This meant single occupied houses paid a lot less than a house with 5 occupants. I remember that ending badly for Thatcher. Fast forward 26 years later and we see the same argument being used here. single occupancy homes will be much better off and therefore the water companies will look to multi occupancy properties to make their profits. Anyone who thinks the water companies are spending all this money digging up the streets for environmental reasons is deluding themselves. This is simply a revenue generation operation that will ensure the companies will recover all the costs of doing it in a short period of time by raising charges. The water companies have one interest and that is to their shareholders, the profits made on a fundamental of life (water) are shared amongst them and the boards of these companies. finally I am considered a "customer" of my water company. since I cannot take my "custom" elsewhere, can someone be kind enough to explain to me what the correct definition of customer is and if this term correctly pertains to our relationship with our water suppliers Thanks
Agreed! They sing in monotone and their lobby have used the environmental arguments for ill gotten gain. TW continue to rattle on about laws and clauses yet sneak about fitting meters as soon as a property exchanges hands. Why can't they touch the people until they move? Silly cowards. Oh and one really needs to catch some of their henchmen at work in the early hours banging away as they do meter changes. They will swear blind they have no connection with Thames Water. Having said all this, little is mentioned how the monopoly still gets away without paying for the leaks they induce outside people's properties. (Something really needs to be said about mains water pressure here) Not to mention the ageing sewers they are failing to maintain. Just two months ago, I witnessed the effects of a sewer collapse in Woolwich Arsenal, SE London. All Buses had to be diverted for several weeks causing delays to peoples commute home by up to 30 mins. It was not the first major street flooding I have seen in the area either. Why does government never ever point a finger at them?0 -
That's the kind I have already.
The engineer said they usually hang an automatic meter reader on dumper trucks (bin collection), which picks up the readings on its rounds. So reading once a week, at most, hardly frequent monitoring stuff.
I get a statement every six months, good enough for me.
I suppose frequent readings can pick up leaks early.
Smart meter will not shout out to you if there is a leak at the meter. Neither will Thames Water. That's exactly the point. Many people with busy lives will not notice the bills rising until possibly years later. After lots of domestic arguments who is having longer than their energy saving '4 minute showers' or taking a dump more than their fair share. Then you will have a nightmare trying to get your money back from TW as well as for the damage that leak may have caused to your front walls or subsidence etc. Then you will call TW and feel the uncanny kindness from Thames Water customer services as they slowly deflect the blame. They will always pas the buck on to you. Do the stop !!!! test yourself, it is on your side of the fence they will tell you. YOU have to prove that you have a leak. They will not cooperate until you do. That's how smart the meter is.
By the way no one has mentioned how smart that person was who would periodically drive by, get out of the van and physically check for leaks before it went wireless. He would get his rod out, stick it near the meter and listen for the hissing sound of you getting conned.0 -
So how do you propose to assign the massive costs of pumping water around the UK? Unfortunately it's a bit more difficult to move than gas.
There is also a point where it isn't economical to deal with leakage below a certain threshold - when it costs more to fix than it would to use existing resources.
At present I strongly believe customers are paying double for their water. Once for their usage and also for covering the cost of collective leaks. After all they are not getting the money from government for fixing their infrastructure, are they? When I spotted the leak at my front entrance and reported it, it took several months of hard negotiation until they sent the diviners around. The next morning I was shocked to see they had marked 5 or 6 meter caps with blue spray along my road. That's a note to some engineer to come and check it because some sound was heard by their divining rod that could indicate a leak. When they smashed up my old meter after changing it, I noted plain plastic tubing connecting in and out joints of the meter. These were fastened using jubilee clips. The engineers can change these meters in 30 mins when there is a leak. However the weakness in the system is spotting a leak. NOW, the dilemma is, do you have faith in 'poor old' TW telling you that you have a leak, or do you monitor it yourself given your busy schedules? How much time will you waste in your life calling TW when you do have a leak.
Well why do I sound so cynical? That's the hell I'm living through now with my family after having a half ton/day leaking outside my front pavement for nearly 2 years! After some probing, I discovered, this was after TW had fitted a faulty meter prior to my moving in 2 years ago. So 2 faulty meters on the same house in under 2 years. Another advisor even lied that the last meter had been fitted here in 1999. Well for that Smart meters can have my middle finger.0 -
Agreed! They sing in monotone and their lobby have used the environmental arguments for ill gotten gain. TW continue to rattle on about laws and clauses yet sneak about fitting meters as soon as a property exchanges hands. Why can't they touch the people until they move?
The Water Privatisation Act made metering compulsory for all properties built after April 1990. Existing properties could elect for a meter or remain on Charges based on Rateable Value(RV). This latter provision was to prevent some larger families having a big rise in charges.
That same Act gave water companies the authority to compulsorily fit meters on change of occupant. However many companies simply did not(and still do not) bother to enforce that provision. The reason is that the financing of water companies, i.e. the revenue they can raise and hence profit made, is controlled by the Regulator Ofwat and therefor companies had no incentive to pay for fitting meters and any extra revenue that metering brought in made no difference to their profit.0 -
Hi. Just moved to a property that was built mid-1920s. The water company is referring to a Change of Occupancy metering scheme whereby they will only install water meters to new occupants who moved in after 2005. So there maybe only 20% of my neighbours who are on a meter.
What makes it unfair is that older properties (before 1966) may require replacement of all metal pipework which were used for earthing appliances. Surveys and replacement costs would bear the owner and not the water company who wants to install the meter?
My point is: If this is a fairer way why don't they install it to EVERY HOUSE?
and 2ndly, as they initiate the scheme to selective owners why they do not carry out all the associated costs?
Can i push back and stick with the fixed rate?
Could i use the DEFRA note that states that the Smart Water meters are not compulsory?
Cheers
koul100 -
Welcome to the forum.
'The Water Act' introduced compulsory water meters for all properties built after April 1990.
Apart from the impossibility of installing some 20 million meters on that date, it was realised that some properties with a low Rateable Value(RV) and high occupancy would face a steep increase in charges. Thus it was decided that existing properties could retain charges based on RV. However on change of occupant the water companies could(and should) make a meter compulsory. The aim of the Act was that the vast majority of properties would be metered.
However this provision to compulsorily install a meter was enforced by some companies, and not by others. The reason for not enforcing this provision of the Act lies in the way water companies are financed. In simplistic terms it doesn't matter to the water company if a property is metered or not. They are allowed by the Regulator(ofwat)to raise £xmillion and make £ymillion profit. So if they get additional money by installing meters(and thus save water) they still can only raise that £xmillion. Conversely if fitting meters costs the company revenue, then other charges can be raised to compensate.
The water company will fit the meters for no charge. I would agree that all properties should be metered, but that would need an amendment to the Water Act.
However I fail to see the justification for the water company(i.e. other customers) to pay for replacement of metal water pipes?
The privatisation of water supply introduced a whole host of unfair practices, that have still not been addressed.
The DETRA note on 'smart water meters' does not cover 'normal' water meters - these have been compulsory since 1990 on new properties.0 -
Does anyone know about this petition by 38 Degrees?
As a new member I am not allowed to post links, apparently, but you can find it by typing "Stop smart meters petition" into google.
I've just signed.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.6K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards