Thames Water said we have a water leak

[KS23]

thank you both that has made me feel better - fingers crossed 

[Soylent Green]

We had a similar letter in August.  Took readings before we went away for a few days and as soon as we got back.  Meter had recorded water usage, so we know that there is a minor leak.  We have started the process of getting it checked out...

[vladi]

Since having our  water leak fixed, I have been checking the meter readings as shown  online in our a/c with TW.

I noticed that for a two week period the account was showing "no readings available".

Went out and checked the meter and found that the transmitter had become detached from the lid  and had fallen down into the bottom of the hole. The transmitter box should be attached on the underside of the lid.  With it being 3 feet down the hole it obviously couldn't send the signal to TW.

It appeared that TW had installed an insulation pad to prevent frost getting to the meter itself. When that was done, they stamped on the lid to fix in place. They stomped rather too hard and dislodged the transmitter.

I guess it pays to check the  readings online regularly!
 

[Sally Eva]

On 09/10/2024 at 19:24, vladi said:

Suggest you don't rush to get it fixed at your expense.

There are circumstances under which TW will fix the underground leaks within your boundary so if you get onside with their representative and appear helpless/impoverished,/vulnerable there is a very chance that they will fix the problem by replacing your old lead pipe with 25mm plastic at no cost to you.
It worked for me!

We have a shared drain and TW was responsible for fixing it when it was blocked. It was hard to get them to do accept their responsibilities but they did in the end

[Jenijenjen]

This is for waste water OUT though, not clean water IN

[malumbu]

Perhaps the OP could change the title of this thread as clearly nobody is being scammed.  Or Admin.

[ianr]

2 hours ago, malumbu said:

Perhaps the OP could change the title of this thread as clearly nobody is being scammed.  Or Admin.

Why should anyone want to alter the true record of the conversation?

[Dulwichway]

2 hours ago, malumbu said:

Perhaps the OP could change the title of this thread as clearly nobody is being scammed.  Or Admin.

Why do you have to dis nearly every post?? At least it might help the vulnerable folk to keep on their toes and be aware of potential scams!

[malumbu]

Because it obviously was not a scam, and the subject quickly changed to the matter in hand, ie a leak.  I've contributed positively to the discussion but I am finding the title misleading,  It was put up in good faith, and perhaps time to change it.  Sensible suggestion?  If you didn't like what I said would have been easier to ignore it rather than get into a pointless argument.  

[Sue]

13 hours ago, Dulwichway said:

Why do you have to dis nearly every post?? At least it might help the vulnerable folk to keep on their toes and be aware of potential scams!

But how was this thread helping anyone vulnerable to be aware of potential scams?

I think it's your post which is unnecessary! Particularly as the thread title has now been changed, so clearly Malumbu's post was helpful.

How do you interpret  giving an opinion and contributing to a discussion as "dissing nearly every post"?

Now please do feel free to have a go at me as well 🙄

Edited October 22 by Sue

[Penguin68]

Whilst not, technically, a scam, as such, the desires that Thames Water had to put us all on water meters, with the ability then to raise revenues on a household basis (whilst pretending that some houses would see charges fall) - they said this price rationing would 'save' almost as much water as if they actually repaired their own pipes which lose so much annually - combined with the inaccuracy of 'smart' meters in general - is as close to a corporate scam as it is possible to get without actually breaking the law! 

Indeed Thames Water is about as squeaky clean as the filth they pour into our rivers on a regular basis.

[malumbu]

Oh dear, I thought conspiracy theories were left to transport section

Water companies by law have to manage drinking water resources and promote/deliver efficient use.  Water meters are one way of helping to achieve this.  We, like most on water meters, have saved money doing this.  Whist we use a bath, we do not water the grass and use grey water and water butts to water the plants.  We do not have a swimming pool, do have a water saving toilet, and whether we choose to flush it for number 1s is our business! 

What's not to like?  Bills were compared before and after, before we switched.  The leak happened some time after we had switched and Thames Water not only replaced our lead pipe, to the boundary with the house, but discounted our bills to normal during the time of the leak

No fan of the company, the wastage of water through the ageing system, illegal discharges of sewage, the continual big leaks and roadworks, the business model and the privatasation of this and the other utilities.  But there is no sinister dark arts/they are "they are trying to control you".

Recommend some reading https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7342/ 

Edited October 22 by malumbu

[Penguin68]

So I'm sure, Mal, you are 100% behind Thames' current bid to raise water bills by over 50%. After all, you obviously don't begrudge their current and former overseas investors loading the firm up with debt and siphoning off billions of pounds in 'dividends'. They are just modern day saints. And their gifts to us, constant leaks and filthy rivers. But they, like all your local heroes  can do no wrong! 

They exercise their rights as commercial companies, but having myself worked for a very big one, I can assure that commercial companies do everything they can, within the law, to maximise their profits, and that is particularly true of public service monopolies with weak and ineffective regulators. Getting customers to choose suboptimal tariffs, coercing them when you can, is absolutely the name of the game. 

Edited October 23 by Penguin68

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

...all of which has got sod all to do with the topic of this thread. 🤣🤣

[Penguin68]

The OP was concerned that he was being scammed, realised that this wasn't technically a scam and changed the title. However, whilst Thames was not actually scamming, I suggested that it nevertheless, with its drive for water meters, was not necessarily always acting in its customers best interests, if technically legally. Hence what might be seen as a diversion, particularly after the thread title was changed. I however make no apologies for riding a hobby horse, as others have also done. 

[malumbu]

Penguin you state that water meters are some sort of rip off, they aren't,  Probably the most respected consumer journalist Martin Lewis/MSE: https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilities/cut-water-bills/    If there are more bedrooms in your home than people, or the same number, check out getting a meter.

However bad a company is, if they do something right (ie my water leak) then this should be acknowledged.  I worry with all the negativity posted on EDF people cannot read up on the subject, to get a more informed and balanced view. 

[vladi]

Under the Water Industry Act 1991, Thames Water was able to get the South-East of England designated as a "water-stressed" area. Such  a designation, the government allows water companies to implement compulsory metering programs. This law gives TW the right to install water meters in some cases, but it does not mandate that all customers must be moved onto meters.

This means Thames Water can legally require customers to have a water meter installed as part of efforts to manage water resources more efficiently.

Doubtless TW has been able to identify high consumption users, like us, who have a large garden that needs watering.

Profit motive guarantee that TW will benefit financially if it switches high consumption clients on to smart meters. Hence they target these and they are quite willing to incur the cost of replacing old lead pipes within the customer’s property boundary even though technically it’s the home owner’s responsibility. Whether there is a minor leak or not, the high consumption home owners goes on a meter – like it or not.

In principle, I have no desire to pay TW any more that I need to, so have installed a rainfall collection and bulk underground system – with the added benefit that our plants now got fresh water rather than chlorinated water from TW.

[malumbu]

More fool you.  I replaced the old lead pipes in the house myself.  No house in this day and age should have lead.  It's not a heritage thing.  TW replaced the old lead mains FOC, so the leak actually worked in my benefit. I got a geezer from North Kent to do the final section into my property and as I am technically competent he charged me a good rate.

Plant a drought garden if you are bothered about watering it and the cost.  Or sort out some grey watering recycling.

We were given the option of a water meter.  It's worked for us.

I don't like TW.  Something else I don't like is scare stories to get you to insure your pipes and drains, other utilities like BG do similar for your boiler.

But this, confident, well informed customer has no issues with a meter.

 

[Penguin68]

1 hour ago, vladi said:

This means Thames Water can legally require customers to have a water meter installed as part of efforts to manage water resources more efficiently.

Ironically the amount that Thames Water said they needed (some years in the future and  which they would achieve by using price rationing to reduce demand) was actually less than the amount they lost each year at the moment through leaking pipes! Just undertaking the repairs to the network which our current charges are meant to meet would obviate the need for any price rationing on their own estimates. And of course we're well aware of the drought situation we have been in this year, to need price rationing at all!

If they met the regulator's current requirements on water loss through leaks they would not need to price gouge and ration for the future.

[malumbu]

So despite Thames water dire record, we should wash our hands (ha ha) of playing our part?  That seems to be a rather selfish view.

[Penguin68]

29 minutes ago, malumbu said:

So despite Thames water dire record, we should wash our hands (ha ha) of playing our part?  That seems to be a rather selfish view.

It seems not unlikely that Thames will default and fall back into public administration, so we will have no opportunity to wash our hands. And as a local monopoly we have no choice anyway. 

[Uker]

On 20/10/2024 at 15:18, Soylent Green said:

We had a similar letter in August.  Took readings before we went away for a few days and as soon as we got back.  Meter had recorded water usage, so we know that there is a minor leak.  We have started the process of getting it checked out...

Hi, just wondering if you got anywhere with fixing the leak. Did you contact Thames Water or your insurer?