|
W/2007/1014
Mr W was concerned that his water bills had been too high since he moved into his unit six years earlier. The unit was one of two, both attached to the main meter. The other unit also had its own meter. Mr W understood that the water company calculated his bill by deducting the meter reading on the other unit’s separate meter from the meter reading on the main meter.
According to his bills, Mr W’s unit used around 730 litres a day (for two adults and two children), while the other unit’s bills showed usage of around 70 litres a day (for two adults). It appeared that Mr W’s usage was 10 times higher than his neighbour’s — and he didn’t see how this could be so.
Over the past three years, he’d several discussions with his water company about his water usage. The company suggested he may have a leak — so he checked this by reading his meter before he went out (and while the other unit was vacant) and again when he came back. When his meter reading didn’t change, he discounted this as the cause.
The water company also suggested he look into his water efficiency — Mr W did so, replacing his taps and toilet. This didn’t address the high bills either. In the end, Mr W concluded that one of the other meters was faulty — he wanted this assessed independently.
Responding to EWOV’s investigation, the water
company confirmed the configuration of the meters and the basis for
calculating M r W’s bills. A meter test revealed that the check meter
was faulty and reading slow — as a result, Mr W was being billed for
more water than he used. The check meter was replaced that day. A
separate meter isolating Mr W’s usage was also installed.
The water company acknowledged that M r W should be compensated. The
separate meter installed at his unit showed his daily average usage to
actually be 263 litres. On this basis, Mr W’s usage from March 2001 to
July 2007 was recalculated — and he was issued with a refund cheque for
$1,728.35.
This case illustrates the detective work, by customers and on the part
of water companies, which can be necessary to resolve some high bill
issues — in this instance with a substantial outcome.
Return to Water case studies
|
|
|
|
|