There are several types of meters and they don't all work the same way - the unit displayed on the meter dial (or face) isn't always a one-to-one representation of the energy or water used a the property. Customers who receive a significantly higher bill after a meter is exchanged should ask their retailer to check whether a 'multiplier' is, or was, being applied - and whether that is being done correctly.

The issue

Ms J's bulk hot water bills were around $30, so she was very surprised to receive a May-July 2009 bill for $571.52 and a July-September 2009 bill for $323. Ms J lives in a high rise government flat, with her hot water supplied through a central bulk hot water system heated by gas. A water meter measures the amount of hot water used by her flat. The gas retailer then sets a 'price' on the hot water by reference to cost of the gas used by her flat. The gas retailer then sets a 'price' on that hot water by reference to the cost of the gas used to heat the water.In January 2010, after Ms J received a disconnection warning notice seeking payment of some $416 within 24 hours, she contacted EWOV. She said the most she could afford to pay would be about $20 a fortnight.When she contacted us, Ms J said she'd tried several times to resolve the issue of her unexpectedly high bills with her gas retailer. She said that, at one point, the retailer told her it would check the meters in her building, but this didn't happen.


The investigation

Contacted by us, Ms J's retailer agreed that the bills were unusually high. It also detected that the increase occurred after the bulk hot water meter was exchanged in May 2009. The retailer arranged a meter test. Based on our experience of meter exchanges leading to high bills, we suspected the meter exchange may have caused a problem. We asked the retailer whether it was applying an incorrect multiplier to the water meter reads. The retailer looked into this aspect and found it had continued to apply a multiplier to the reads taken from the new water meter, when this was no longer necessary. The old meter had measured a tenth of the water actually used, so Ms J's meter readings needed to be multiplied by 10 to work out her actual usage. As a new bulk hot water meter installed in May 2009 measured her actual one-to-one usage in litres, the meter readings no longer needed to be multiplied by 10 to calculate her water use.

The outcome

The retailer apologised to Ms J, re-issued her bills and applied a customer service credit of $45.58, leaving her account with a nil balance. As Ms J lives in a multi-unit Department of Housing dwelling, this issue may have affected many more customers. We're having discussions with the retailer concerned about the potential systemic implications. G/2010/266