A merchant notices that his water tax bill for 2012 is twice as high as the previous ones.\u00a0 He complains to the City.<\/p>\n
In March 2013, the City notes that the water consumption showing on this water meter is the same as in November 2012: clearly, the water meter stopped working and must be replaced.<\/p>\n
Once the new meter is installed, in June 2013, the water consumption measures drop drastically.\u00a0 The City adjusts the water bill for the first months of 2013, based on the consumption measured by the new meter.\u00a0 It refuses, however, to also readjust the 2012 bill.<\/p>\n
The citizen asks for our intervention.<\/p>\n
According to the City, it is almost impossible for a defective meter to show a consumption which is higher than the actual one.\u00a0 In its opinion, therefore, the quantities shown on the old meter must have been consumed.\u00a0 The City believes that the high 2012 consumption must have been caused by an unusual event such as an increase in trade activity, a broken pipe, a water leak.<\/p>\n
The City did not conduct an investigation to show such a cause or specify the nature of the meter\u2019s defect.\u00a0 On the other hand, the citizen insists that no unusual event had occurred in 2012.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
A merchant notices that his water tax bill for 2012 is twice as high as the previous ones.\u00a0 He complains to the City. In March 2013, the City notes that the water consumption showing on this water meter is the … Continue reading