Nearly two months ago I contacted Southwest Water to report a leak of potable water from Southwest Water’s pipework, under the pavement, adjacent to our house. No response! A couple of weeks later I phoned again.

This time someone eventually turned up, confirmed the approximate source of the leak, and I hope measured the rate of leakage of the water. In addition, he/she spray-painted a blue line, outlining the boundary, within which the maintenance crew would need to excavate the road/pavement in order to uncover the defective pipework.

The rate of leakage of potable water (a conservative estimate) is about 15 to 20 l/hr. Given a week comprises 168 hours: this equates to a leakage rate of 3,500 plus litres. Thus, the total loss of drinking water to date is in excess of 20,000 litres. This leak is unlikely to be fixed in the next month, given Southwest Water’s record to date.

The monthly loss of potable water is 13,500 litres. The cost of producing a litre of potable water is significant (we are paying). I suspect that if I were using drinking water at the rate of 13,500 litres per month (plus sewage charges), South West Water would require me to set up a large monthly direct debit. Water companies want their customers to go over to ‘Smart’ water meters. With a leak of this level on a customer’s side of the pipework, what would be Southwest Water’s incentive to fix the problem, given they don’t seem very interested in fixing the leaks in their water supply network? You can guess. Employing a much larger maintenance crew to fix leaks translates into higher costs and reduced profitability.

Not fixing leaks, discharging sewage into the rivers and the sea keeps investment down and lowers overheads. Let’s face it, bigger water bills and lower maintenance costs translate into higher company profitability, thus bigger bonuses for the Directors and higher shareholder’s dividends.

John Marriott

Menheniot

• What do you think? Write to us at [email protected]