Another question about communal sewage treatment plants

Where I live the sewage treatment plant recently broke down and needed a new pump. Householders each had to pay a relatively small sum of money in order to avoid tapping into the contingency fund which is really there for replacing the entire plant in 20 years' time.

And then a number of residents refused to pay, for whatever reason I don't know. Those who had paid got their money back and the bill for the new pump plus labour etc was paid from the contingency fund instead.

It seems to me that many residents are just not aware of what might happen if the pump failed and was not replaced. Now, I don't know the details, but what if this did happen, what would the Environment Agency do? Obviously, at first there'd be some kind of warning (verbal, then letter) to the estate management, but thereafter? What powers does the Environment Agency have if sewage is backing up and overflowing because some residents are too stubborn to pay?

I should think the EA has maximum powers, including sending in the local water company to pump out the sewage at some considerable cost to be borne by the residents. Can the EA declare the estate unfit for human habitation or some such?

I am only a resident and am not on the management board, but I'm fed up with the constant argy-bargy that has been going on since I moved here in late 2004. I want to bring this up at the next annual meeting with some kind of impressive sounding message, of what the authorities could or would do in the event of an emergency, to try and put the fear of God into these late/non-payers. They all knew (they signed on the dotted line) what they would be responsible for when they moved to the estate, so there's no excuse. Also, many residents have new or nearly new cars so they are not exactly poor.

A new plant for 40 houses would cost around £35k at today's prices.In

20 years from now it could be double or treble that, so building up the contingency fund is vital.

MM

Reply to
MM
Loading thread data ...

I don't know if EA can, but Building Control can certainly issue enforcement notices to that effect, and to require remedial work to be done and be charged back (at council contract rates) to the owners. A charge (mortgage) would be taken on the houses until the money was repaid to the council. Repossession would not be impossible.

Owain

Reply to
Owain

...

Does rhis imply the householders don't pay a sewage charge to the water companies?

I'd not treat the money as a contingency fund for a new plant. There should be an annual charge, payable by all (possibly based on ratable value), which will cover all costs related to the sewage system. This includes maintenance costs and capital costs, ie building up reserves if necessary. You'd need something to administer this - whether it's an existing company or a new one. They'd need to be able to take out loans to pay for significant capital expenditure if their reserves were insufficient, or to insure for the same costs.

When people balk at setting up such a thing, work out how much they'd pay for the sewage charge to a water company.

Or of course get a utility to take on the whole thing for a one-off cost.

Reply to
Clive George

I don't know if EA can, but Building Control can certainly issue enforcement notices to that effect, and to require remedial work to be done and be charged back (at council contract rates) to the owners. A charge (mortgage) would be taken on the houses until the money was repaid to the council. Repossession would not be impossible.

Owain

It's probably not Building Control but the Environmental Health department. Pumping station, generally, are a nightmare for maintenance issues

Reply to
DIYer

Ah, the big "R" (reposession) might do the trick, because some of the residents must have a screw loose, thinking it'll be someone else's problem to sort out.

MM

Reply to
MM

Correct. My water bill (singleton household) is around £90 a year.

Oh, we do pay £375 each per year mainly to cover the emptying three times a year, plus electricity for the pumps and for the plant maintenance engineers to do their checks every so often, plus electricity for street lighting. What is left over goes into the contigency fund intended to fund the cost of replacement when the plant is due to be scrapped, not to fund emergency repairs that can fall due at any time. "Contingency" is perhaps not the right word to describe this fund, but everyone now knows it as such. This is the arrangement set out in legal documents that all residents sign when they agree to purchase a property so they haven't got a leg to stand on when they refuse to pay, or pay late.

I'm told that the annual service charge will have to rise considerably for 2012 because of this latest reluctance by some to pay, and I expect that announcement will again be greeted by blank refusal by several residents. At least one person had to be taken to court before they paid the service charge, claiming they weren't liable because they had sub-let the property.

Last time I checked it would add around another 100 quid to my bill, and a lot more for families. But many people don't see beyond their noses. Mind you, I'd rather pay Anglian Water a 100 quid, plus say only 50 quid to the estate management, but we're miles from any mains drainage, so it's not an option.

We already went down that road once, using a professional management company, and it was a shambles. People moving home couldn't get the right documents out of them in timely fashion for their solicitors to look at and so on. We were paying 20% VAT on electricity instead of 5% which is what we're now paying, and lots more besides.

But it's just a few residents who ruin it for everybody else, sadly.

One last thing: If ANYone is contemplating moving to an estate which depends on a private sewage treatment plant, my advice is to STAY AWAY! Just drive on, even if the house is fine in all other respects. It's not worth the continual hassle which has plagued this estate since 2004.

MM

Reply to
MM

And therein lies the truth. Given any random bunch of neighbours, a non trivial percentage will be tightwads.

The only way I would entertain such a "system" is that everyone pays a tiny monthy fee into a fund in a legally watertight way that means non payers can quickly be dealt with.

If there's ever a significant operational surplus, pay everyone back a "bonus".

Reply to
Tim Watts

I assume there is a management co involved and some agreement between owners/leasholders and the mgmt co. Check the deeds and covenants on the property, you may find that failure to do maintenance will will breach such covenants which will have consequences for anyone with a mortgage.

I run the mgmt co for a small block, the most effective way to deal with owners who don't pay their service charge is to inform their mortgage co.

Reply to
djc

+1 I've managed a small block of leasehold flats for over 25 years. If I succeed in moving before I'm carried out in a box, it won't be into anything that depend on such co-operative management structure.
Reply to
djc

Well the OP will not give you the steam off his piss. Does that make him a tightwad?

Reply to
ARWadsworth

No, it makes me grateful ;->

Reply to
Tim Watts

Absolutely there is all that. But some residents just think the legal documents somehow don't really apply to them. They must think, when they signed, that it was just another piece of paper their solicitor thrust at them. If they were too thick to read it, that's their problem. Ultimately, the management company has to threaten them with the county court (and actually go through with it in one case) before they come to their senses.

It is no different from when a plumber or other tradesman does some work and then the householder refuses to pay on spurious grounds, or just because he doesn't feel like it. The tradesman then has a battle on his hands that could tie him up for weeks, months even, yet it happens every day of the week across the country because there is a certain category of human that thinks it can just go its own merry way and not be held to its legal responsibilities.

I believe that's what our management board did in one particularly egregious case and the mortgage company stepped up to the plate and the outstanding bill was paid.

Of course, not all the properties are on a mortgage, mine for instance. I reckon at least half are owned outright.

MM

Reply to
MM

I don't think the original planning permission allowed for that. Several people have enquired, but got a big N O from the local authorities.

MM

Reply to
MM

Yes, well, originally I bought the property as a stop gap because I'd sold my house and this one seemed fine. I had only intended to be here for a few years after which I'd downsize to a 2-bed bungalow. That was the plan. I made extensive enquiries about the private sewage treatment plant, including in this newsgroup, and didn't get any serious warnings off, so I went ahead, thinking ah well, the plant is subject to legal agreements between residents so what can go wrong? That's before I (re-)discovered human nature!

And then the recession and world market crash happened and now the house is worth less than I paid for it and hardly any houses are selling anyway, not just on this estate, but in rural Lincolnshire generally. Plus, bungalows, because they are sought after, are holding their price whereas houses are not, so the differential is nothing like as significant as it would have been if the housing market had carried on like it had been doing for two decades.

So I'm pretty much resigned to staying put for at least another couple of years. This is partly why I'm so pissed off with the few residents who keep pissing INTO the tent, because if they'd only pay up when asked, as per the legal agreements they signed, then life would be sweet. The estate itself is excellent. Good quality builds and very tranquil place to retire to. After seven years much greenery has been established so that in spring and summer the estate looks really nice.

MM

Reply to
MM

Building Control can't. Building Control would regulate the installation of or alterations to a drainage system, but have no continuing powers over existing ones.

Reply to
Hugo Nebula

Might be different in E&W then; I think they can in Scotland, if the drains deteriorate to the point the property becomes uninhabitable

Owain

Reply to
Owain

But, with the Planning Department is a unit called Planning Enforcement. They'd be the ones to take action.

Reply to
charles

On the one hand if the manic desire of everybody to move house every few years is tamed by the recession more people will be around long enough to care about the long term consequences of not maintaining the property. OTOH not moving means people wont be forced to pay up because they need the paperwork in order before the sale can be completed.

Reply to
djc

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.