31 March (Part 1) - Water torture
It is often said that most people are only interested in local politics
when their bins don’t get emptied and in Bexley that is not one of the borough’s
problems. (Don’t move to Greenwich, it is what fills their Facebook pages.)
It probably explains why a lengthy BiB report on a Council meeting which
I see as important because it would otherwise not go on the record, almost never provokes reader comment while
a rant on rubbish bus services or Thames Water will fill the Inbox. Well maybe
not fill but at least provoke a flurry of activity.
Very irregular intervals are not unique to the 301 and the SL3 and maybe TfL is
unconcerned about it; they usually dodge attending the Transport Users’
Sub-Committee meeting but they are apparently interested in the number of times
the bell is rung. Do drivers mentally opt out at so many warning bings and bongs?
Next Tuesday TfL is running a seminar in Vauxhall for passengers to voice any
concerns they may have about warning messages and noises off. They would particularly like the elderly and the
wheelchair bound to have their say.
You may apply to attend here and if selected be paid £150 for your trouble.
Thames Water continues to be Public Enemy Number One, not so much for the gridlock
they impose on Sidcup and elsewhere but for attacks on customers. They
still won’t tell me why they think my water consumption is direcly related to the number of bedrooms I have or why I
should pay in full if I spend a month in hospital and do not use a drip, or what
I am supposed to do if there is a leak when they refuse to provide me with a
stopcock in the street outside.
The Inbox revealed someone with a meter that leaked from the outlet joint and
caused an £800 bill on which TW has refused to compromise.
Another had a boundary wall damaged by TW contractors which they denied causing.
They claimed that in the unlikely event there was any damage their contractor
must be pursued, not them. A Subject Access Request produced nothing of interest
but a carelessly written email suggested that the contractor knew they had
damaged the wall and photographed it. Their apologetic report to TW acknowledged
the damage caused and eventually the photo they initially denied existed and the
accompanying report reached the complainant. But TW continued to insist that their contractor must pay up and not them.
They appear to entrust customer care to a bunch of thickos.
The case went to Court a couple of days ago.
Another resident faced with a massively increased bill was told that meters
never fail. Under pressure Thames Water sent an ‘engineer’ who had been working in a pet
shop until the previous week. His suggestion was to use an egg timer to limit the length of showers.
OFWAT said the meter could be replaced at the customer’s expense and it would be
tested off-site. It was faulty. The customer agreed an estimated bill.
Following that, TW would not accept the meter readings because it had the wrong
serial number. They had not updated their records. For the next year they sent estimated bills based on the usage recorded by the old and broken meter.
Obviously far too high again. Their incompetence knows no bounds.
It reminds me of when my old Aunt in East Ham was taken to Court by Thames Water
for not repairing her allegedly leaky pipes. She lived in Springfield Road and you
can guess what they eventually discovered their listening device had found under the road. They absolutely refused to
apologise to her for causing so much unnecessary stress. Never forgive, never forget.
I left my garden tap running from last Saturday lunchtime until the middle of
Sunday morning. An accident, I forgot all about it. Perhaps I shouldn’t
campaign for a stopcock and the meter which would inevitably follow.