Summary
Mr C complained on behalf of clients (Messrs A) about Business Stream Ltd's decision not to reduce the size of their water meter. He claimed that the decision was unreasonable and that it was financially motivated.
On investigating the complaint, we made enquiries of Business Stream. We found from them that although Scottish Water had originally intended to reduce the size of Messrs A's meter, they had changed their decision after assessing it. On assessment, Scottish Water found that the current meter was the most appropriate for the property and that it complied with the water meter policy and met the British Standard. They advised Business Stream accordingly who, in turn informed Messrs A.
During the investigation, we established that when Mr C complained, Business Stream had provided Scottish Water with all the information he provided and they reconsidered the matter. Nevertheless, they maintained the decision they had originally made. Business Stream confirmed this decision to Mr C.
Having taken into account all the information, we concluded that Mr C, on behalf of Messrs A, was attempting to appeal Business Stream's final decision and not pointing to an error in the way it was reached. It is not for our office to question the merits of a decision where there is no evidence that anything went wrong in taking it, nor is it our role to act as an appeal body for decisions. We did not uphold the complaint.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201102378 as a PDF (14.16 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018