Laterals
October 30th, 2006 at 3:50 pm by David FarrarWhat is a lateral? I used to have no idea. But it seems they are what connects properties to the city stormwater and sewerage systems. So quite important wee things.
Now in Wellington the Council used to cover the cost of repairs and maintenance to these out of rates. However with very little publicity it seems they changed this recently, so now the property owner has to pay some or all of the cost.
This means that you may now suddenly be liable for any faults that occur to something you have never seen or interacted with.
I’ve been getting copies of some correspondence on the policy change, and the lack of publicity or consultation around it. If anyone else out there has had any dealings with the WCC over laterals and suddenly being landed with a bill for them, please feel free to comment with any relevant info.
Related posts:
- Have your say on .nz domain names
- Parliament TV blog
- Kiwisaver and arrogance
- Universities not consulting students
October 31st, 2006 at 5:43 am
The council in our district did something similar with footpaths and driveway crossovers. Property owners are now liable for any repairs on them. This really irritates me as the two crossovers on our properties are badly damaged and were long before we purchased them. The council were going to fix them and, in fact, repaired the crossovers of a number of local business including one just a few properties up from us in the week before they made this change. I have refused to pay for any repairs to them.
It irks me because property owners have no control over who uses these crossovers but are expected to try and recover any repair costs from those who damage them – assuming they can identify whoever did it.
Vote:October 31st, 2006 at 7:10 am
I hada a call from the Council a few months back saying that a water main had burst on one of my properties in Wainui. Six houses are fed off the same toby down at the road (back sections). The Council Water guy was standing there talking to me on his cell phone, telling me that a big hole was being excavated by the water. I said well, can you turn the toby off until I get a plumber there. His response “Because that toby supplies water to all six houses the Council cannot turn it off”. I had to get a plumber to drive there (meanwhile water was pouring out for another 50 minutes – flooding down the hill into the neighbours garage) and he could turn the toby off and fix the pipe. Why do I hate Councils even more than the government?
Vote:October 31st, 2006 at 8:23 am
And I wonder brian if you have ANY idea at all just how a minority of the public will perform if a Council worker does ANY little thing to upset them. You would think that the majority of people would have accepted that the water needed turning off in that situation…but from long and bitter experience that Council Water guy also knows that there is a fair chance some very “special person” in one of those six houses would nut off, get on the phone to the mayor, and be making grief in his life. From first hand personal experience I can assure you that Council workers and contractors have to put up with this sort of shite on a routine basis; and the leafier the suburb, the worse it gets. In order to minimise their exposure to this sort of risk, their managers have put in place rules they must work to,
He wasn’t being a bastard just to piss you off brian…he was just following long established operational procedure that he has to work under.
Vote:October 31st, 2006 at 9:28 am
> Now in Wellington the Council used to cover the cost of repairs and maintenance to these out of rates. However with very little publicity it seems they changed this recently, so now the property owner has to pay some or all of the cost.
Is this why the gaping holes in streets and footpaths that were dug up all over the Wellington CBD to fix the gas problem weeks and weeks ago have not been filled in?
Is there an argument with the council over who will pay?
It was, after all, a council water pipe that caused the problem in the first place.
Vote:October 31st, 2006 at 9:51 am
Redrag “He wasn’t being a bastard just to piss you off brian…he was just following long established operational procedure that he has to work under.”
Absolutely, He explained that he was working under SOP. The guys above him were the arseholes. But given that there were neighbouring properties being actually damaged, any normal person would see that turning off the toby was a priority. I am sure that the owners would prefer no water for a few hours to a flood. Some rules are stupid.
Vote:October 31st, 2006 at 9:58 am
It seems that those people who moan most about the level of their rates, the amount Council workers get paid, and who seem to consider people who work for Councils as leeches on society etc. are also those who moan loudest when they discover they have no water, when their roads deteriorate, when there are neighbourhood issues which need to be sorted out by Councils, and so on. There does seem to be a correlation between these moaners, whiners and whingers and their generally higher than average income level.
Vote:October 31st, 2006 at 10:37 am
Well of course they do Thrash. They’d prefer not to pay lots, but having been forced to pay lots, they’re going to expect their money’s worth.
Vote:October 31st, 2006 at 11:11 am
The problem with laterals is of course; like council management, they are often full of shit.
Vote:October 31st, 2006 at 1:51 pm
Aren’t these laterals on council land? And in fact, installed by councils?
I had what amounted to a small stream flowing onto my property – a little exploratory digging revealed that it seemed to be coming from the direction of the toby at street level.
the council told me that if it was a problem with the toby, of from the street side of the toby then they’d fix it. However, if it was a problem on the property side of the toby, they’d fix it, but I’d pay.
Turns out it was their side, and the toby had never been correctly connected up.
Does all this mean that now, I’d be liable for that too?
Vote:October 31st, 2006 at 6:48 pm
Andrew – I am unsure about the water lateral situation however the post DPF refers to is the sewer lateral.
It hasn’t affected me but I know of someone whom it has affected and it has cost them alot of money. Of all the people I have discussed this with – none were aware that they were now responsible nor this change in funding occured.
What this means in plain english is that if the pipe from the main sewer gets blocked or breaks, you are responsible for its repair. Even if it’s in the footpath or a metre from the main in the road, it is now your responsibility to repair it. Therefore it is your cost too.
Up until 2005 the council funded the repair of these laterals. In 2005 they ceased this funding which means individual house owners are now repsonsible. The cost of digging a footpath & / or a road is very expensive. Therefore be prepared to fork out a few $$$$ if you end up in this predicament.
The part that is somewhat concerning is that this change in funding was never widely or extensively notified to property owners. Especially since it shifts the costly repairs on to the ratepayer.
Vote:October 31st, 2006 at 9:31 pm
If they are going to charge property owners for this, they should at least do it fairly. i.e. if the lateral is broken on council land (road reserve) then it should be up to them to pay for it. And this is after they have paid for the investigative work (CCTV, plumber, what-have-you) to find where it lies.
And agreed, poor PR work and advertising on the council’s part. Lets hope its not a benchmark that other councils now aim for…
Vote:November 1st, 2006 at 12:33 pm
Hey RedRag right on, that was one of the most intelligent points I’ve heard for a long time. Council workers are worth a lot more and their committee crawling bosses are worth a lot less. The middle class socialist who complain that they can’t have a cup of tea if the power goes out for an hour once every few decades are the same ones that got away with imposing this system on us – bitter irony.
BTW Bye Bye tricky dicky cant say it was nice having you up my (*^*)^ for a term but thank god it wont be two terms.
Vote: