World

New homeowner in Texas hit with unexpected $10,000 water bill

Seth Priestner thought there had been a mistake when he first saw the bill

Not one company achieved the regulator’s top category of ‘leading’
Seth Priestner, who lives in San Antonio, Texas, was confused after receiving a water bill totalling almost $10,000. (Rui Vieira/PA)
By Mark Robinson

A new homeowner in Texas has described his confusion after being hit with a water bill totalling nearly $10,000 just months after moving in.

Seth Priestner moved into his new home in San Antonio, Texas, with his family in April.

Just five months later, his usual water bill of around $115 each month had swelled to $9,707.

More: Disney’s new fast passes can cost more than a park ticket

Speaking to CBS affiliate KENS, Mr Priestner said that he had initially thought there had been a mistake after getting charged for using around 355,000 gallons of water that month.

Join the Irish News Whatsapp channel
Alamy
Mr Priestner was charged for using over 355,000 gallons of water (Alamy Stock Photo)

“At first we thought they sent us the wrong bill,” he said.

“Like maybe they sent us a commercial bill.”

However, after checking with San Antonio Water System (SAWS), the bill was confirmed as his.

SAWS suggested that Mr Priestner might have had a leak and so the family hired a plumber - they had had a leak repaired in June but that the plumber was unable to find a leak this time around.

After informing SAWS, his bill was reduced but still stood at around $6,500 – this included a Stage 3 drought surcharge of $3,500.

Water early in the morning or late in the day
The bill included a $3,500 Stage 3 Drought Surcharge, which equates to an excess 337,000 gallons of water being used over the 20,000 limit. (Alamy Stock Photo)

The area regularly experiences drought and a Stage 3 surcharge of $10.37 is applied to every thousand gallons of water used in a month over 20,000 gallons.

The surcharge would indicate that Mr Priestner used around 337,000 gallons of water over the limit.

“That is strictly there to discourage people from using excessive water,” Mr Priestner said regarding the charge.

“I don’t think that’s the case here.

“It doesn’t make sense to fine someone,” he added.

Local broadcaster KENS contacted SAWS and discovered that the provider hadn’t physically checked the Priestners’ water meter in June or July.

Anne Hayden, a spokesperson for SAWS, said that they had “estimated” their summer usage.

She told the broadcaster: “Because there were two estimated reads we couldn’t be sure when that water use was happening in those two months, so we did give him a partial credit.”

SAWS later decided to drop the fine after pressure from the news outlet and Mr Priestner.

“We decided, just to be careful, to give him credit back on the surcharge,” Ms Hayden said.

SAWS has since swapped the family’s analog meter with an electronically monitored one – both homeowner and provider will be able to monitor water usage via an app.