Complaint about high water bill query upheld

A bed and breakfast business owner encountered “unreasonable delays”trying to persuade a Perthshire water provider to get to the bottom of why they were being charged“disproportionately high”sums of money for their supply, an ombudsman has found.

The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) said in a decision notice Rattray-based company Castle Water’s delay in responding to the individual’s complaint in turn contributed to a delay in getting a suspected leak fixed which eventually cost the complainer over £10,000.

The body investigated the complaint after being told it took the business owner“a number of attempts”to get through to someone at Castle Water to flag up the unusually high bills they had been receiving.

It upheld the complaint but opted not to make any recommendations for the company to address its shortcomings in the case as company representatives were said to have already apologised to the complainer for their“poor service”.

The SPSO’s decision notice, which referred to the bed and breakfast owner only as C, said:“C operated a bed and breakfast business from their home. Castle Water were appointed as the licensed provider for water and waste water services at the premises.

“Scottish Water fitted a water meter to the pipework supplying the premises so that water usage could be measured for commercial water charges. C subsequently received water bills that were disproportionately high for the number of residents and guests in the premises.“Following a number of attempts to speak to someone at Castle Water, C was eventually able to raise their concerns around four months after the meter was fitted. A representative of Castle Water attended the premises and it was established that there was likely a leak on the pipework between the meter and the premises.

“C was advised that this pipework was their responsibility and that they would need to appoint a contractor to locate and repair the leak.

“Ultimately, C’s contractor replaced the full length of pipe from the premises to the meter at a cost of over £10,000. Whilst no leak was found, the water usage dropped to an acceptable level following the works.

“In replacing the pipework, the contractor found that a length of narrower pipe had been used to connect the meter to the premises’ pipework. C said that, had Scottish Water made them aware that the narrower pipework had been used, the contractor could have passed a similarly narrow pipe through the existing supply pipe, negating the need to excavate the ground and saving C a substantial amount of money.

“C attempted to recover the cost of the excavation works from Scottish Water through Castle Water. C complained that Castle Water failed to reasonably assist them to do so.

“C also complained that the staff failed to adequately communicate with them regarding their water account and the issues relating to the leak. We found that Castle Water took reasonable steps to assist C to resolve the leak problem and represented C’s side of the matter appropriately when dealing with Scottish Water.

“We found that their actions in relation to the leak and C’s account were entirely reasonable once the presence of a leak was identified.

“However, we found that C faced unreasonable delays initially when attempting to query their high water bills with Castle Water and that this contributed to an overall delay in the leak being fixed.”

The PA has approached Castle Water for comment on the case.