Unreasonable connection/maintenance fees

Hello Forum

This is my first ever post here, the reason I have sourced an investment property forum is due to my recent dismay at fees being charged by public sector companies when it comes to building new properties.

How could it possibly cost Urban Utilities $150.78 per quarter to maintain an empty pipe in the ground outside a vacant block of land? I was informed today that section 165 of the 2008 Water Supply (Safety and Reliability) Act entitles them to charge for maintenance of said pipe regardless of the use

Also, Opticomm wtf $550 to run a cable through condute that my builder has to have already installed 'inclusive of all knuckles' and at the very specific depth requirements. What the hell do they do then for their $550?

Why do people tolerate these charges from public companies?

When I had the electricity meter installed by a private sector company because electricity supply has now been privatised, the installation fee had been legislated to not exceed $333 to ensure consumers could not be ripped off, but when ot comes to public sector companies ripping us off is perfectly fine?

It is time we started to stand up to such charges, sign my petition to help facilitate change.

Stop urban utilities unreasonable 150 78 vacant land sewerage access charge

 

How else will they pay for maintenance, future upgrades to water infrastructure etc? You're building on the block at the moment would you rather each home owner pay thousands up front for the water infrastructure to be installed (which woud blow the costs out massively) and then pay each time maintenance or repairs occur?

Running a cable through conduit is also a labour intesive process (I hope its fairly wide if there are turns in it) requiring at least 2 workers. $550 isn't cheap but it also doesn't sound hugely exorbitant either.

 

It's not just the actual cost; the company has to pay for the unavoidable costs of running the business (admin, phone staff, website, insurance etc).

And also, they are charging everyone a similar amount in the knowledge that all pipes will need attention eventually and this method 'smooths out' the costs to the consumer.

 

You can pull their pipes out and tap into your own water supply.

It's part of being an organised society and having water delivered to properties by a company. Do you want that service?

 

Hello Tim and Chrissy, thank you for your feedback. However I feel you have missed the point of Urban Utilities being a State Government funded service. Our Taxes "close to the most expensive in the world" are to ensure such services are provided to citizens.

Therefore every household is already paying thousands for infrastructure supply and maintenance.

If I could use the sewerage service they are charging me for, I wouldn't have a cause for concern, however a public company charging citizens every 3 months $150.78 or $603.12 per year for a service that could not possibly be used is ludicrous.

I don't know about you, but for us common hard working Australian's $603.12 is a lot of money for nothing.

 

Hello Xenia, that is my point, I am not using sewerage, I can't utilise the sewerage service because it is a vacant block of land. there are no pipes to pull out, so why do we allow them to charge $603.12 a year for nothing?

 

You can avoid all these charges.

Simply buy further out in an area with no services. You can then live totally off the grid (many do) and be self sufficient in power, water and sewerage.

However, should you choose to have these amenities available to you, you will have to pay. Most utility charges are standardised on the basis that some connections are easy, some take far longer. Otherwise, if each job had to be individually assessed and charged, everyone would pay a lot more.
Marg

 

Marg we shouldn't have to pay exuberant fees for essential services.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" Edmund Burke.

Urban Utilities ripped off Queensland Citizens by $232 000 000 last financial year. Their shareholders which consists of the councils of Brisbane, Ipswich, Lockyer Valley, Scenic Rim and Somerset were very happy with their performance as stated in 2015-2016 Annual Report.

These councils shouldn't be happy about an essential service making $232 MILLION out of their rate payers. They should be asking themselves, can our rate payers really afford that?

Our Mayors are elected by us to represent our needs, if they are losing sight of what is best for their rate payers in favour of greed and profit, then it is time us citizens started to facilitate change.

Sign my petition Marg, as one we can change this.

 

I pay council rates for a vacant lot. They charge for the garbage service which comes down the street. If I want to use it, I have to pay for a set of bins.

Soon the council rates will include a charge for the SES, this is currently a levy on building insurance.

There's a defunct pool, so I must have it registered and pay for inspections and certification.

The site is worth a dollar or two, so I contribute my share to the OSR.

I have an availability fee for sewer and water but they're not connected to the house which hasn't been built.

 

But you are going to use them at some stage? Or have a septic tank?

 

You can use the service, as soon as your house is built. Do their costs cease while each person builds? Of course not, so those costs are passed to the person who will be the beneficiary of the service.

It's a very fair system but I don't think you are interested in alternate viewpoints as you've already made your mind up and created a petition.

 

This is an outrage, an absolute disgrace.

I cant believe we have people in the first world of Australia who can afford property investing expenses after putting a roof over their head, food in their bellies, send their kids off to almost free education and have the hide to whinge about first class infrastructure.

What a horrible thought that we have fully functioning water, sewer and power services, well maintained, and above all lawfully legislated to protect our well being and health.....and we have to contribute to it. Just horrible!

pinkboy

 

Probably good that you're just paying for potential access to an existing pipe. Imagine if it wasn't there and you had to foot the bill to get it put in from scratch.

 

Maybe not. An occupancy certificate may rest on connection of fresh potable water and ALSO sewerage. You might be able to opt out of the connections. One of the conditions to a building approval etc. And without water the insurer may even decline to provide cover. You cant live in a city and live off grid.

Prior to purchasing you had a period of time to do due diligence on the property you now own. Thereafter you are subject to all forms of government or non-govt agencies who can impose charges and change your land use or even compulsorily acquire it. And there is almost bugger all you can do.

Denis Denuto is a good Melbourne solicitor who may assist a complaint. He helped a PCer- Daryl a few years back.

 

I fully agree, a private company can charge you for not providing a service, and it's legal. They say it is because they are providing the infrastructure. In my case I have multiple bills from UU for multiple blocks of land in Marburg Qld that have never been connected to water. They have been charging me for 10 years. and here is the kicker, there is no water infrastructure in the street. Just an asbestos water pipe up the end of the street well away from my land. I am at a loss how they can do this. Also I am surprised at so many replies on this form defending UU, or these people UU employees? Do you pay for power or gas when you are not connected or don't use? I don't , I am in the process of going to war with UU, if anyone is interested in providing your story in this matter please let me know. Chris Bennett