Summary
Business Stream were the licensed provider for Mr C's business for six months. During that time, he questioned his water charges, as his business used only a minimal amount. Business Stream encouraged Mr C to investigate the possibility of a leak on his pipework, but nothing was found. Mr C then registered with a new provider and further investigations were carried out. These showed that his water supply also served a number of neighbouring residential properties, and that he had been charged for the water they used. Although his new provider sorted this out, Mr C said that Business Stream had overcharged him, and he complained that they did not handle his water account correctly or efficiently. He also complained that his business incurred unnecessary expense in paying for a plumber to investigate a non-existent leak.
We found that Business Stream had to estimate the opening meter reading based on historic information, as they were not contacted when Mr C's business moved into the property. This led to inaccurate charges, but these were quickly recalculated when accurate meter readings were available. Given the information available to them at the time, and Mr C's concerns about the amounts being charged, we considered it reasonable for Business Stream to suggest that he ask a plumber to investigate. It was also appropriate that this was done at his business's expense. It was not until after Mr C had left Business Stream that the issue with his pipework was identified.
We did think that in the circumstances Business Stream could have done more to reassess Mr C's account. During our investigation, however, they offered to reduce his bill by an amount that we considered fair, so we made no recommendations.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201301641 as a PDF (11.4 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018