Tuesday 20 October: Complaint form offline

The supplier of our case management system has confirmed that they are experiencing a significant technical issue.

At present, we have no access to the case management system and we are currently unable to provide updates on existing cases.

We are planning on the basis that this could continue for a period of time including for the remainder of this week.

If you would like to check if your complaint is ready for the SPSO or enquire about making a new complaint, please complete our Complaint Checker.  

Please be assured we are doing all we can and will provide updates on our website. 

For an all service update: Service update | SPSO

Decision Report 201301511

  • Case ref:
    201301511
  • Date:
    May 2014
  • Body:
    Business Stream
  • Sector:
    Water
  • Outcome:
    Not upheld, no recommendations
  • Subject:
    charging method / calculation

Summary

For three years, Mr C's business premises had operated without paying for water and drainage services because he had not identified a service provider and set up an account. When, after an audit, Business Stream became aware that the property was occupied, they issued Mr C with invoices for water and drainage services for the period of his occupation. Mr C asked to pay the bill in instalments. He then complained that Business Stream would not accept his offer and, when he found that he could not meet the payment plan he had agreed, unreasonably refused to agree to renegotiate it. He also complained that: Business Stream were unreasonable in not agreeing to revise their charges after he asked for a reassessment following the fitting of a water meter; that their charges did not reflect the probable usage; and that they had unreasonably refused to agree to take into account that his business premises were closed when there was a leak from an upstairs property, and a flood in his premises.

We did not uphold Mr C's complaints. Our investigation found that when Mr C had not made payment as promised, Business Stream had told him that they were prepared to renegotiate his payment plan to extend the time for payment to 18 months, but he had not responded to this offer. They had told Mr C that they could not apply a retrospective reassessment of their charges, and this is consistent with our understanding of their process. Having considered their policy on what should happen when business premises are closed, we were also satisfied that Business Stream dealt with Mr C's request consistently under the relevant policy.

Updated: March 13, 2018