apparently this is in sole discretion of United Utilities and the local
valuation office tell me that their system regards to this is outdated.
United Utilities tell me that they are enforced to use the RV via the
goverment, I say United Utilitys are telling porkies and are using this
policy because they know that sod all can be done by the end user to change
their rates if it's too high against a property of the same ilk further
down the road.

Balls!

As far as i'm concerned they go on about having a meter installed but won't
take it out after 13 months and therefore if the property is sold on then
the new occupants still have pay their bill via the meter, this wrong and
they should levy a charge of 15/20 to have the meter taken out and then
payment should go back as umetered.

Why the hell should Joe public pay for waste water that runs down the
council sewers when Joe public is already paying council taxes for this?
house owners don't own the roads thats down to the council.

What a f**ked up country we live in.

Rant over, going to take a shower. :-)

>
> What a f**ked up country we live in.


So you'll be leaving us.

<waves>

On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 14:43:20 GMT, "ben"  wrote:


>apparently this is in sole discretion of United Utilities and the local
>valuation office tell me that their system regards to this is outdated.
>United Utilities tell me that they are enforced to use the RV via the
>goverment,


There exists only 2 basis for them to bill you on. The RV or via a
water meter.


> I say United Utilitys are telling porkies and are using this
>policy because they know that sod all can be done by the end user to change
>their rates if it's too high against a property of the same ilk further
>down the road.


AIUI the RV was set yonks ago and you are out of time to appeal.  :((


>
>Balls!
>
>As far as i'm concerned they go on about having a meter installed but won't
>take it out after 13 months and therefore if the property is sold on then
>the new occupants still have pay their bill via the meter, this wrong and
>they should levy a charge of 15/20 to have the meter taken out and then
>payment should go back as umetered.


AFAIUI people who have meters installed usually benefit from lower
bills. But I can see it would be a caution in the mind of a
prospective purchaser.


>
>Why the hell should Joe public pay for waste water that runs down the
>council sewers when Joe public is already paying council taxes for this?


Water rates were always a seperate item on the rates bill.

Notionally you are paying for treatment of the water at the sewage
works. However it's not as simple as that. My small office has to pay
water rates, but we have no water supply. ?-))  

Hey, we should insist on a meter!  But where would they put it ?


>house owners don't own the roads thats down to the council.


AAMOF in England the house owners usually *do* own the roads (or at
least the land they sit on),  out to the middle of the road in front
of their house. Commonly the road and drains get "adopted" by the
council once they meet the required standards, and the council then
pay for their continued maintenance. 


>What a f**ked up country we live in.


That's absolutely true, but have you by any chance been to Nigeria?

>
>Rant over, going to take a shower. :-)
>


DG

In article <c6YTe.104803$G8.101301@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
 "ben"  wrote:


> apparently this is in sole discretion of United Utilities and the local
> valuation office tell me that their system regards to this is outdated.
> United Utilities tell me that they are enforced to use the RV via the
> goverment, I say United Utilitys are telling porkies and are using this
> policy because they know that sod all can be done by the end user to change
> their rates if it's too high against a property of the same ilk further
> down the road.
> 
> Balls!
> 
> As far as i'm concerned they go on about having a meter installed but won't
> take it out after 13 months and therefore if the property is sold on then
> the new occupants still have pay their bill via the meter, this wrong and
> they should levy a charge of 15/20 to have the meter taken out and then
> payment should go back as umetered.
> 
> Why the hell should Joe public pay for waste water that runs down the
> council sewers when Joe public is already paying council taxes for this?
> house owners don't own the roads thats down to the council.
> 
> What a f**ked up country we live in.
> 
> Rant over, going to take a shower. :-)


Not exactly.  It's not at anyone's discretion per se.  Water rate levels 
used to mirror domestic rates, which was calculated by the Valuation 
Office in ye olde times, but domestic rates ceased many years ago when 
the poll tax kicked in.  Those values haven't been maintained since, as 
there is no longer any need for legislation to be in place to do so.

But this is not a Valuation Office issue any longer.  This is an issue 
between the water utility companies, and the powers that be that allow 
them to use these old, defunct numbers as a stopgap until they can 
'persuade' everyone to get a water meter, which from their point of 
view, is the ideal.

-- 
Cheers
Scotty

"Derek ^"  wrote in message
news:h101i15n0amgrvlsu0nps9a6gknn74e2pk@4ax.com...
My small office has to paywater rates, but we have no water supply. ?-))

Just for the hell of it I would get them to come out and fit a water meter
and see what happens?

If you have not wash basin or toilet then your paying for the water that
runs along the guttering and down the pipe.

Ridiculous in it.

ben wrote:

> "Derek ^"  wrote in message
> news:h101i15n0amgrvlsu0nps9a6gknn74e2pk@4ax.com...
> My small office has to paywater rates, but we have no water supply. ?-))

> If you have not wash basin or toilet then your paying for the water that
> runs along the guttering and down the pipe.


which runs into a dranage system and has to be treated. you pay for 
disposal as well as supply.


-- 
David Clark

$message_body_include ="PLES RING IF AN RNSR IS REQIRD"

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 23:01:19 UTC, DJC 
wrote:


> ben wrote:
> > "Derek ^"  wrote in message
> > news:h101i15n0amgrvlsu0nps9a6gknn74e2pk@4ax.com...
> > My small office has to paywater rates, but we have no water supply. ?-))
> 
> > If you have not wash basin or toilet then your paying for the water that
> > runs along the guttering and down the pipe.
> 
> which runs into a dranage system and has to be treated. you pay for 
> disposal as well as supply.


Some of us even pay different water companies for disposal and supply!

-- 
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
   http://laminateflooring.oncloud8.com

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
DJC   wrote:


> ben wrote:
>> "Derek ^"  wrote in message
>> news:h101i15n0amgrvlsu0nps9a6gknn74e2pk@4ax.com...
>> My small office has to paywater rates, but we have no water supply.
>> ?-))
>
>> If you have not wash basin or toilet then your paying for the water
>> that runs along the guttering and down the pipe.
>
> which runs into a dranage system and has to be treated. you pay for
> disposal as well as supply.


There's a difference between the treatment requirements for foul and surface
water, though. Under normal circumstances, your water rates pay for:
* supply of clean tap water
* removal of foul water (same volume as that of clean water supplied) to the
treatment works
*removal of rain water into the nearest river (assuming separate foul and
storm drains)

The office with no water supply should logically only have to pay for the
third of these three items. Don't know whether it works like that in
practice!
-- 
Cheers,
Set Square
______
Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid.

"Derek ^"  wrote in message 
news:h101i15n0amgrvlsu0nps9a6gknn74e2pk@4ax.com...

>>
>  ...  My small office has to pay
> water rates, but we have no water supply. ?-))


You use a bucket?

Mary

>