closed #61379
Water Utility Billing Problems
3807 E Callery CT
- Case Date:
- 9/29/1998
Mr. Guerrettaz called and talked to Kathy Grubb-Britton. He received an excessive bill this month and wanted an explanation.
Mr. Guerrettaz called and talked to Kathy Grubb-Britton. He received an excessive bill this month and wanted an explanation.
Mr. Noble called and stated that the amount on his utility bill was wrong. The amount should have been $27.25 + $2.35, but the total amount showed $40.00+.
Mr. Raney called and stated that his bill showed the wrong balance due. The bill should have been $27.25 + $2.35 but showed a total balance of $40.00+.
Ms. Gregory talked to Kathy Grubb-Britton and indicated that her bill was in an excessive amount.
Customer states he received large bill for service from 7/1-7/31 and was very upset - has not had such a large bill before. States he was told by Cust. Rel. Dept. that he no longer gets summer sewer averaging. Feels he should have lower bill.
Mr. Wright feels that a large bill he received was fault of his water meter. Meter was checked & found to be working properly. Mr. Wright wants to take this matter to USB for review.
Customer feels he was "ripped off" because we charged him an $18 service fee to shut off his meter when he ended his service. He feels after being a customer and paying for our services for some time that we should not charge them to stop their service.
Customer is very upset about the fact of having to pay a higher rate for their irrigation water vs their house water. Also, they were surprised about the $18 fee to have the meter s/o in the fall because we used to not charge a "disconnect" fee only a "reconnect" fee in the Spring. I explained to her the policy had changed, and to avoid paying the service fees over the Winter she would have the $18 s/o in the Fall and the $18 turn on in the Spring. I let her know each trip was a svc call.
MS. BARKLEY WROTE ON 9/5/97 AND REQUESTED A REFUND FOR WHAT SHE FEELS ARE OVERCHARGES FOR HER APARTMENT BUILDINGS.
Jeff Delaplane owns the building at 425 N. Walnut St. He complained that he is actually not hooked on to sewer but has been paying sewer charges. He would like to be reimbursed the paid sewer charges and excavation charges.