Menu

OBJECTIVE

HOLISTIC AND NATURAL HEALTH


Web Journal Saturday 15th March 2008
  • Minister criticises water costs. Those with unmetered water costs and small households are most likely subsidising unmetered others who use large amounts of water.
  • Water costs £268 per year for one person. I will be paying £5.17 per week for water for one person an increase of 5.7% starting next month. I was refused free Thames Water meters by tenant management a decade despite two requests.
  • Sewage costs are part of the water rates. Sewage collection and analysis of all my sewage effluent commenced in December 1999 and went on for years. It might still be occurring for all I know. Who has paid for all of this extraordinary diversion of sewage and its analysis?

1. Minister criticises water costs.

BBC News Saturday, 15 March 2008, 08:26 GMT

Minister criticises water costs

A water meter
People are being urged to install water meters to save money

Environment Minister Phil Woolas has said small households are paying too much for their water, and are subsidising customers with meters.

Water bills are set to rise by about 6% across England and Wales.

Water regulator Ofwat says water meters could be a solution for some customers to help them cut costs.

The government is to review water supplies and charges, which may mean compulsory meters where water is in scarce supply.

Minister criticises water costs

2. Water costs £268 per year for one person. My water bill is quite extraordinary. The amount charged is determined by the Tenant Management Organisation (TMO) perhaps in conjunction with the Lancaster West Estate Management Board (EMB). Water metering is centralised and the costs are allocated to individual flats by some means which I can see as being clearly unfair. A recent letter from the TMO informed me that my weekly charge for water will rise from this year's £4.88 per week to £5.17 per week next year.

I was refused permission to have Thames Water install a free water meter offered a decade ago because of this central metering system. There is no real reason why this could not have been done. Heating and hot water are charged separately which means that my actual water charge is more than the £5.17 per week for next year. My heating and hot water will be £8.77 per week for the next year commencing on 7th April, but I do not know how much of this is hot water.

Each flat in the Lancaster West Estate has separate hot and cold water tanks. There is no reason why Thames Water could not have been allowed to install a free water meter on the cold water tank. In fact, they could do it now at a cost, but the question is who would pay. Certainly not me since I've been refused permission to do this in writing (twice) by tenant management when the water meter was free.

My flat's cold water could be metered so I pay for usage only. Then I and any others who are metered could be eliminated from the central charging process by netting the costs I pay against the overall costs. In fact, this would be an incentive for everyone to get a meter and would have been a splendid idea for tenant management to accomplish when Thames Water was offering them free.

Maybe tenant management would have seen a further complication about which I was unaware and which they have tried to hide from me: my cold water has come from another source for an extended number of years. It has come from a cold water tank located in the flat below. I have noted when this started and verified this rerouting of my cold water. There are several signs of this occurring including the fact that the cold water tank does not fill when I fill the bathtub.

This was done to surreptitiously medicate me starting at least from May 2001. There are indications that this might have started earlier than this date, but clearly surreptitious medication was in full operation as of May 2001. This was confirmed on several occasions by medical health professionals including Richard Evans MD from the St Charles Hospital Acute Psychiatric Clinic. He was exasperated when I switched to bottled water in May 2001 due to the fact that I was being surreptitiously medicated from my cold water rerouted from another tank nearby. He yelled "I can't help it if he won't drink the water" when someone, BS I believe it was, complained "He's not drugged."

On another occasion a male with Richard Evans MD both of whom were using the surveillance technology against me enquired about the precise kind of medication he was using against me. Richard Evans MD did not want to give away the specific name of the medication and only indicated a general category for the medication after a couple questions. On another occasion I was urged to "drink the water but not too much" by another male present with a group of health professionals in the flat below using the surveillance technology.

It is, of course, unlawful to medicate without consent outside a hospital environment for obvious reasons. There is no record or knowledge of exactly how much medication I absorb. It could be too little or too much. Anyone who does this kind of thing is following in the footsteps of Dr Shipman who killed hundreds of his patients by giving them an overdoes of diamorphine. As a matter of fact, one such person administering the surreptitious medication indicated on more than one occasion that morphine was being used.

My question is just how much plumbing cost has tenant management incurred by rerouting my cold water intake pipes from another source and how much has it cost on an ongoing basis to run such a system for surreptitious medication? Are they trying to recover those costs through the allocation of water rates to me?

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Subject: "Minister criticises water costs," and it's entirely justified.
Date: Saturday 15 March 2008 12:42
From: Gary D Chance
To: news24@bbc.co.uk, woolasp@parliament.uk, enquiries@ofwat.gsi.gov.uk, helpline@defra.gsi.gov.uk

My weekly water charge will rise from £4.88 to £5.16 effective 7th April 2008 which is a 5.7% increase.

Paying over £5.00 a week for water for one person when I have always made every effort to conserve water and use very little is outrageous. This means I will be paying £268 per year for water for one person's usage.

It is unbelievable. I live in the Lancaster West Estate in North Kensington part of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, and the water charge is set by the Tenant Management Organisation (TMO).

Over a decade ago Thames Water was offering free water meters. Since I live on an Estate, I had to ask permission to allow them to install a water meter and was refused. I kept getting these free water meter offers from Thames Water and even asked a second time but was refused then too.

It's not that Thames Water has not made an effort to get water meters out to its customers. The problem has rested with the Lancaster West Estate Management Board (EMB) and TMO. These are two tenant management creations by the Kensington and Chelsea Council which have failed miserably.

The reason cited for the refusal by tenant management was the fact that the water was centrally metered and could not be done for individual flats. This should not have been a problem.

Each flat has its own hot and cold water tanks. Meters could be attached to each for individual flat usage at the intake point on each tank. That would mean two meters per flat, but then they would have paid for themselves in short order.

I was told at the time by the then Estate Officer that they were making money from the water charges which was the real reason tenant management would not allow water meters to be installed.

Now there is a big mess with respect to water charging which could have been avoided many years ago. The meters are no longer freely offered by Thames Water. The costs of the allocation of water usage has gone serious askew. I am most certainly paying for someone else's water usage and perhaps even still lining the pockets of tenant management.

This matter needs a thorough investigation and review as is proposed and the sooner the better. Ofwat has said on your broadcast report that water meters were a solution.

You went on to note that individual water meters may not be "practicable" in multiple dwelling buildings. I believe that this can be done at a reasonable cost with Estates like the Lancaster West Estate with its 900 or so units (some 9% of the 10,000 social housing units in the Royal Borough).

Who's going to reimburse me for all these years of water overcharge?

3. Sewage costs are part of the water rates. The following comments about sewage sampling carried out in the flat below for all my sewage effluent from the toilet, bathtub and kitchen are excerpted from a fax sent to the police on 21st December 1999. Does my water rates include the costs for this extraordinary diversion for sewage from my flat which has been going on for years?

Sewage Water Sampling Police Notification 21st December 1999:

"It was very obvious to me on Sunday morning (19.12.99) when I commenced cleaning and doing the laundry that the drains had been tampered with because the outflow was very slow. I do not use anything that could possibly stop a drain. In fact the drainage from the kitchen water appeared in the bathtub as I cleaned each of these rooms thoroughly. I tried some limescale remover to "unblock" them since this was all I had. There seemed to be a little improvement but not much. I was getting a very strong smell of the drain pipe back into each room indicating to me that it was "open". This should not occur at all. Although I have noted "water sampling" being done when I use water, it was not confirmed for me until last night.

"When I took a bath yesterday evening (20.19.99), there was a man present who was talking with a matronly sounding older woman in the Walkway. Her voice again sounded like the one I have heard quite frequently nearby talking with those in flat XXXX. I believe that she is significantly connected with the [Lancaster West Estate Management Board (EMB)] and might even be its former [Chair]. The male told her explicitly "We're going to take a water sample" which he did as I finished my bath. There was much noise below of thuds and thumps in the wall water pipe shaft area below the toilet. When I began draining the bathtub, his connection to the drain pipe below and the filling of a vessel was obvious. The draining of the tub took a long time.

"This process was repeated this morning by two people (a man and a woman) and a child. The child asked the man's name. He responded twice very clearly "Anthony". While taking my bath I heard water running in the pipes from another source and the simultaneous noises of something being screwed ["on/off"] as if to a connector device again in the wall water pipe shaft below the toilet area in the bathroom. My worry in this instance is if this could be a "setup" by drawing off water from the usage in another flat. Again, when I began to drain the tub, his collection activity below was obvious as he filled a vessel(s) for what was the entire tubful of water which took a long time to drain.

"Tampering with the drains in this manner constitutes a life threatening danger to me from bacterial infection since I have no lymph nodes under my right arm due to cancer surgery. Not only did I see extensive drain backup into the bathtub on Sunday which I tried to alleviate, but I noted it this morning before I began my bath and had to rinse the smelly effluent from the tub. This is a grave health threat to me. I have had serious bacterial infections on three different occasions for which my cancer surgeon had already given me an antibiotic prescription which I carried for that purpose. I take every reasonable precaution to avoid bacteria danger. It is one of the problems I have with the inadequate rubbish disposal facilities in this [Estate]. It is obvious to me that the drainage has been tampered with as to block it in order to obtain "water samples" from my usage.

"I take baths like this to soak my right arm to help alleviate the lymph oedema problem that hardens the tissue. I am trying to keep it soft to facilitate lymph fluid drainage so I am resuming taking two baths a day that the harassment has taken away from me in July 1998. Instead, I am now getting a far worse and direct harassment that causes extreme distress, anxiety and disturbance. To remove the essence of any privacy that I might have in the bath is reprehensible beyond words, but to do so in the presence of both a female and child participant is the most despicable thing that I can imagine. When the water sample was being taken Monday evening, a little girl below was shouting "bad" over and over."

Child present when sewage sampling sprays everywhere in the flat below

Later on there was a young guy in the flat below showing off how easy it was to sample the sewage that came from my flat. I heard this male talking with a small girl in the flat below while I was using the toilet. When I flushed the toilet, there was loud yelling from the flat below under the bathroom as evidently he had not done the job properly and the sewage sprayed out everywhere. There was a great commotion and much laughter following after this from the flat below and outside as he waited for an ambulance to take him to the hospital.

There were continuous references to the fact that the sewage had sprayed all over him, and he had to be taken to the hospital as had to be arranged. The most important question is what happened to the small girl who was also present?

All sewage effluent collected and analysed for years

This activity has gone on continuously for years sampling all my sewage effluent that was accompanied by continuous verbal abuse comments from below while this was happening. I could always tell by the noise in the pipe area that this activity was being carried out.

At the end of March 2001 this was still going on with a big uproar from those in the flat below about the sewage with BS shouting as loud as she could at her mother's male partner to "clean it out" referring to the container used to collect the sewage effluent. I had no end of backed up drains with the water flowing into the bathtub from its drain. I've spent a considerable amount of time and money unblocking this drain and even had to bail out the bathtub pending unblocking the drain on a couple occasions.

Who pays for this sewage collection and analysis?

However, there is a much larger question looming over this regarding the cost of this activity and who is paying for it to create this safety and health hazard in the flat below that has put people and especially children at a direct risk for years. Who are all the people involved and who are legally liable for this occurring or allowing it to occur. Such questions will have to be answered by legal processing.

Tenant management has run out of money with the TMO posting a deficit of some £200,000 for its last fiscal year. Here is an example of diverting funds and activity toward criminal and unlawful objectives that put people's health and safety at risk for years while abusing the whole process of management activity. This has impacted the management process itself quite negatively and its responsiveness with regard to addressing real needs and problems concerning the tenants as a whole. There will have to be court proceedings to determine everyone's involvement and allocate liability.

Legal proceedings precluded by surveillance technology abuse benefits tenant management

Such legal proceedings cannot be undertaken until the surveillance technology abuse carried out 24/7 with the intent to destroy human activity and life itself is halted completely with verified and verifiable assurances that it is no longer being used in any manner whatsoever. The surveillance technology continues to be used as a means to stop legal proceedings and pervert the course of justice as occurred seven years ago when I initiated legal proceedings in the High Court against these people, the Council (RBK&C). the Lancaster West Estate Management Board (EMB) and the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (TMO).

Toilet flushing limited due to harassment and sewage sampling accident including presence of children

One of the reasons for my limiting toilet flushing is to avoid such a problem as occurred with the sewage sampling being sprayed all over below especially in the presence of children. Another reason is that it provokes harassment from the flat below for the simple act of flushing the toilet. On one occasion when I was cleaning the limescale from the toilet, I flushed it three times while cleaning. The tenant below went berserk and had a whole group of tenants/residents out front afterwards yelling and screaming about the fact of my flushing the toilet which she was apparently taking as personally directed at her.

Hence, I limited my toilet flushing which has also been for water conservation reasons with good results. That has no impact, however, on my water rates bill since I do not have a water meter, and starting the 7th of April 2008 I will be paying £268 per year (£5.17 per week) for water usage when I am only one person using water in this flat. I limit toilet flushing and all other usage as much as possible to minimise harassment and conserve water. Despite this I am forced to pay an exhoribitant amount for water usage in addition to the harrassment being carried out against me 24/7.

Should I view the water rates amount as harassment?

Go Back

Post a Comment