Tap Room Barristers Required

[Deleted member 26715]

There is a long backstory to this, not sure if you'd all want to read it, but the upshot is we have been having flooding on our drive from the surface water, we have been paying the water company for the last 38 years to take away our surface water. They have now eventually got to the bottom of the flooding from our surface water by finding out our pipe was never connected to the main sewer 50 years ago when the house was built. They are currently rectifying that at the moment by digging up the road to make the connection.

But here's the question, are we due all our money plus interest back from the water company for the past 38 years we've paying them to take the water away when it has simply been soaking away?

 

[Dave7]

There is a long backstory to this, not sure if you'd all want to read it, but the upshot is we have been having flooding on our drive from the surface water, we have been paying the water company for the last 38 years to take away our surface water. They have now eventually got to the bottom of the flooding from our surface water by finding out our pipe was never connected to the main sewer 50 years ago when the house was built. They are currently rectifying that at the moment by digging up the road to make the connection.

But here's the question, are we due all our money plus interest back from the water company for the past 38 years we've paying them to take the water away when it has simply been soaking away?

A 15 minute meeting with a GOOD solicitor sounds like a good bet.
I could do it cheaper but there is a slight chance I may give you bad advice

 

[swee'pea99]

On the face of it, the water company has been doing what you paid it to do - can't see any claim against them. The fault, surely, lies with the builders.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

On the face of it, the water company has been doing what you paid it to do - can't see any claim against them. The fault, surely, lies with the builders.

I agree with you the fault lies with the builders, however the water company has surely been taking money under false (although unwittingly) pretenses.

 

[Arjimlad]

You should ask/complain, you might get six or twelve years' worth of money back (due to Limitation issues) , if they won't pay then complain to the consumer council for water http://www.ccwater.org.uk/

Your surface water charge has apparently been paid under a mutual mistake.

 

[newfhouse]

I agree with you the fault lies with the builders, however the water company has surely been taking money under false (although unwittingly) pretenses.

Think of it like paying for gym membership but never going. Would you be owed a refund?

 

[Deleted member 26715]

They "might" say that the surface water has been cleared, albeit not in the manner you expected.
They "might" also ask if you will be contributing to the cost of works that should have been carried out by your builder.
They "might" ask why you were not aware of the fault on your property.
It "might" be better just to accept that the fault has now been corrected.

1, 2, & 4 agreed
3 Fault is not on my property, although they have dug on my property twice, which is another issue, the quality of the reinstatement is not satisfactory

 

[Bonefish Blues]

I've been p*ssing water away via a leak, now resolved, for a long time - and metered... Thames Water limit refunds to 2 years. Yours may do similar - worth checking.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Contact a lawyer versed in this area of law.

As already mentioned upthtead a claim beyond a certain period of time may be statute barred.

 

[postman]

I have been passing excessive water for four years causing me great inconvenience,can I sue God.He made me in his likeness.So he knew of the fault.

 

[T4tomo]

I have been passing excessive water for four years causing me great inconvenience,can I sue God.He made me in his likeness.So he knew of the fault.

good luck in tracking him down...

 

[cougie uk]

good luck in tracking him down...

I think this is the plot of a Billy Connolly film.

 

[figbat]

Well, on the basis that you can usually apply for a rebate if you can show that your roof run-off water goes to a soakaway rather than into the drains, I’d say you have a case.

 

[PK99]

There is a long backstory to this, not sure if you'd all want to read it, but the upshot is we have been having flooding on our drive from the surface water, we have been paying the water company for the last 38 years to take away our surface water. They have now eventually got to the bottom of the flooding from our surface water by finding out our pipe was never connected to the main sewer 50 years ago when the house was built. They are currently rectifying that at the moment by digging up the road to make the connection.

But here's the question, are we due all our money plus interest back from the water company for the past 38 years we've paying them to take the water away when it has simply been soaking away?

We had a similar problem. In around 1985.

House was built on bomb site many years after war. 1980?

In the interim, new sewer had been laid. But the street stub to the bomb site was not connected.

Builder connected the drains to the plot end, as one would.

So, for around 4 years we had had a sort of soak-away in the ground below the pavement and street.

Fortunately the guy in the adjoining semi was a local solicitor.

We got a refund on the portion of water charges identified as sewage change as the service had, demonstrably, not been provided, and the council picked up the tab for investigation and remedial works in the street (after initially putting a charge on the property deeds and not telling us) as they has unintentionally fibbed on the property searches.

 

[Cycleops]

You would do well to seek out a solicitor who deals in this area of law as it would require specialist knowledge.
My wife who is a lawyer thinks you have a very good case as they have been charging you for a service which they haven't provided.

Good luck.
If they pay you out in full plus interest can I have a percentage?