
‘Getting a water meter cut my bill in half'
Water bills are based on an archaic system that hasn't been updated since 1990 and many customers find that switching to a meter can cut their costs in half.
United Utilities, which has 8 million customers across the North West of England, said there had been 44,640 applications for water meters between January and April, up from 23,176 last year. Wessex Water, which has 2.9 million customers across the South West, said it has had 8,000 applications since sending out annual bills in February — double the number it had between February and July last year.
The Consumer Council for Water, a watchdog, said that three other big suppliers had almost 75,000 meter applications between them from January to April, up from about 42,000 last year.
The council has a calculator on its website that allows you to work out if a water meter will save you money — 312,630 used it between February and June, up from 111,763 over the same months last year.
Tim Clarke from the Consumer Council for Water said: 'Suppliers appear to have had unprecedented interest in water meters as customers look for ways to combat the largest increase in bills since privatisation.'
Average annual water and sewage bills went up 26 per cent in April to £603 — the biggest rise since 1989, according to Water UK, a trade association.
And bills are set to keep on rising for the next five years after the heavily indebted water companies struck a deal with the water regulator, Ofwat, to fund infrastructure improvements.
There is unlikely to be any respite even after that. Water companies are under huge pressure from politicians and campaign groups to cut down on sewage leaks that have led to pollution of rivers and seas. The Environment Agency said there were a record 2,801 pollution incidents caused by water companies in England last year, including 75 which posed 'serious or persistent' harm to fisheries, drinking water and human health. This was a 60 per cent rise on the 2,174 in 2023.
With a water meter, you pay for the water you use, and some fixed charges for sewage and infrastructure. If you don't have a water meter, your bills are usually, and rather bizarrely, based on your home's rateable value — an estimation made some time between 1967 and 1990 of how much it could be rented out for. Once you have a meter, your bills are based on your previous year's usage. If you think you have been overcharged, you can challenge your direct debit payments. As with energy bills, you should not need to always be in credit because your usage can vary throughout the year.
• Water companies 'to impose surge pricing' in summer
Households with a meter use about 29 per cent less water than those without one on average, according to Discover Water, an information site run by industry bodies such as Water UK and Ofwat. This is probably because those who choose a meter use less water in the first place and are then more conscious of their usage. The general rule of thumb is that you will save money having a water meter installed if there are more bedrooms in your home than people.
The Consumer Council for Water said that those whose bills were lower after getting a meter saved an average of £150 a year.
If your home is suitable, it costs nothing to get a water meter and your supplier has to fit it within 90 days. You usually have the right to switch back to unmetered bills within two years, but this varies between suppliers.
Victoria Larkou hadn't given much thought to getting a water meter until her supplier, Affinity Water, suggested it, but 18 months after switching her bills have halved.
Larkou, 50, from Bishop's Stortford, Hertfordshire, had a meter put in to her four-bedroom house where she lives with her husband Athos, 47, and daughter Tillie, 21 in 2023.
'We probably wouldn't have done it of our own volition,' said Larkou, a saleswoman for an anaesthetic company. 'Maybe it's through being too lazy, but it's the sort of thing you put off because you think it will be a pain.'
Before the meter was installed they paid £58 a month, £696 a year — £248 more than the average bill in 2023-24. In 2024-25, their first full billing year with a meter, they paid £29 a month — saving £348 a year. They used 278 litres a day, 6.4 per cent below the 297-litre average for similar households, according to Affinity.
'I'm not going to be going on holiday with the savings, but it's the sort of thing that you think was definitely worth doing,' Larkou said.
The share of households with a water meter in England and Wales went from 58.4 per cent in the 2020-21 financial year to 62.7 per cent in 2023-24, according to the Consumer Council for Water. Most of those households without a meter are likely to be on the rateable value system.
If you cannot have a meter fitted, because you live in a block of flats with a shared water supply, for example, you can ask to be moved off the rateable value system to an assessed volume charge. This is where your fixed bill is based on how many people live in your household and how big it is.
In the past, water companies have pushed their customers to have meters installed because they say they can help to detect leaks and encourage lower usage. If you are a high water user, you probably shouldn't get a meter.
Tom MacInnes from the charity Citizens Advice said: 'Switching to a water meter can be a great way for people to only pay for what they use, but it isn't always a practical or cheaper option. While water meters can help some to save money, they are not a silver bullet and we know many people will find it hard to afford their bills regardless.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
7 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Middle-income workers shoulder biggest tax burden increase
Middle-class workers are shouldering the biggest increase in the tax burden thanks to a stealth raid on thresholds, analysis suggests. The share of income tax paid by those who earn between £43,000 and £61,900 rose from 15.1pc to 17pc between 2021-22 and 2025-26, according to the TaxPayers' Alliance. During the same five-year period, the share of income tax paid by the top 1pc, those earning more than £201,000 a year, fell from 30.7pc to 26.6pc, the pressure group found. It comes as Chancellor Rachel Reeves faces a £50bn black hole in the public finances and declining tax revenue as high-net-worth individuals look to move abroad. Analysis by the Financial Times this month revealed there had been a 40pc rise in directors moving abroad since Labour's autumn Budget. The Taxpayers' Alliance report found the proportion of total income tax receipts increased for every group except for the top 1pc of earners, thanks to a series of stealth taxes first introduced by the Conservatives. Income tax thresholds, including the £12,570 tax-free 'personal allowance', were frozen at the 2021 budget by then chancellor Rishi Sunak until 2025-26. A year later, his successor, Jeremy Hunt, extended the freeze until 2027-28. Despite promising not to raise taxes on working people, Sir Keir Starmer has not ruled out extending the freeze further to 2029-30. Keeping thresholds frozen means earners lose a larger share of their incomes to tax, as inflation pushes up wages in a process known as fiscal drag. The stealth raid means almost 2.9 million more people will pay the basic rate of income tax in 2025-26 than in 2021-22, while over 2.6 million more will pay the higher rate. Including other rates, almost 6 million more people are forecast to be paying income tax than in 2021-22. John O'Connell, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: 'This is the sad but inevitable result of successive governments' assortment of anti-affluence tax policies, which penalise aspiration and success. 'The UK is now trapped in a doom loop with the Chancellor desperately scrabbling around for more cash to fill the fiscal black hole and increasingly finding her only option is to come after the middle classes. 'Rachel Reeves needs to now show some humility and reverse the policies that have done so much to drive away high earners.' The respected National Institute of Economic and Social Research on Tuesday warned slowing economic growth, a weak jobs market and Labour's failure to commit to welfare reform meant Ms Reeves was on course to miss her borrowing targets by £41.2bn. When combined with the £9.9bn of headroom the Chancellor has committed to keeping, it means she is facing a £51.1bn deficit in the autumn that will either have to be solved by raising taxes or cutting spending. The study also underlined the importance for the Treasury's balance sheet to keep the highest earners in Britain. Despite the proportion of tax paid by the top 1pc of earners falling, the group still accounts for more than a quarter of all income tax receipts. Analysis of Companies House by the Financial Times found that 3,790 company directors had left Britain between October and July compared with 2,712 in the same period a year earlier. Significant names have included Richard Gnodde, Goldman Sachs ' most senior banker outside the US, Nassef Sawiris, the Aston Villa co-owner, and British property tycoon brothers Ian and Richard Livingstone. It comes after Labour launched a wide-ranging tax raid after coming to power last year. This included abolishing the non-dom status and tightening inheritance tax rules. Laura Suter, of AJ Bell, said: 'Government tax policy in the past few years has had the dual outcome of pushing some of the wealthiest to leave the UK and also landing more taxpayers with higher tax bills at the same time. 'Together, this means that an increasing proportion of the total tax bill of the country is paid by middle earners, rather than the super-rich. 'Looking ahead, any potential tax-raising measures that Rachel Reeves makes in her next Budget could exacerbate this dynamic further.' Trevor Williams, a former chief economist at Lloyds Bank, previously warned Britain was facing a millionaires' exodus. Mr Williams said: 'Since 2014, the number of resident millionaires in the UK dropped by 9pc compared with the world's 10 wealthiest countries' global average growth of more than 40pc. 'Over the same period, the US saw a 78pc increase in millionaires – the fastest wealth growth [among these countries].' The Treasury insisted that under its Plan for Change it would keep more money in people's pockets. A spokesman said: 'This government inherited the previous government's policy of frozen tax thresholds. At the Budget and the Spring Statement, the Chancellor announced that we would not extend that freeze. 'We are also protecting payslips for working people by keeping our promise to not raise the basic, higher or additional rates of income tax, employee National Insurance or VAT. That's the Plan for Change – protecting people's incomes and putting money into people's pockets.'


Times
37 minutes ago
- Times
Bureaucracy is a spoke in wheel of e-bike revolution
Every day, thousands of Londoners choose to travel by e-bike. Whether for commuting, meeting friends or exploring the capital, e-bikes are opening up green, affordable and accessible cycling to a much wider audience. This demand is borne out in the data. Just last month Forest, the e-bike company I co-founded in 2021, reached a record-breaking 1.5 million rides across London, a 60 per cent increase from last year. While the upsides of getting more people cycling are obvious — it promotes healthier lifestyles, eases congestion and is better for the environment — we are acutely aware of the challenges that come with rising demand. No one benefits from e-bikes cluttering pavements or being parked irresponsibly. We know that. E-bikes should complement London's streets, not complicate them. So, what is the issue? Cities like Oxford and Bristol have one coherent operating area, but London has a tangled web of conflicting rules across different boroughs. One council bans parking in certain areas, another permits it freely. Some impose strict fines, others barely enforce regulations at all. This patchwork means riders are often confused about what they can and can't do. And it undermines public confidence in an otherwise transformative mode of transport. • Cut parking for second cars to make room for e-bikes, says rental firm We need consistency across all boroughs. Without it, we're opening the door to operators more focused on market share than street harmony. We're not advocating for fewer rules, in fact we're calling for more of them. London urgently needs a single regulatory framework. One set of parking standards, one enforcement model, and one operational rulebook should apply from Brent to Bromley. A coherent approach would allow riders to enjoy the benefits of cycling without worrying how to end their journey. Part of the challenge lies in Whitehall. The stalled English Devolution Bill has left London, not to mention other major British cities, without the powers to govern its mobility infrastructure effectively. That must change. Transport for London needs the authority to plan and implement a city-wide strategy across borough boundaries. • Chris Hoy joins e-bike revolution . . . but can 'weekend warriors' catch up? Forest is ready to work with regulators, not around them. We want higher standards, better accountability and smarter city planning. But that future cannot be built one borough at a time. Londoners are ready for a change. Let's give them the infrastructure and clarity they need to use e-bikes safely, confidently and responsibly. One city. One set of rules. Agustin Guilisasti is co-founder and CEO of Forest


Telegraph
37 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Alexander Isak not invited to Newcastle players' family barbecue
Alexander Isak's standoff with Newcastle hit crisis point after he was ordered to train separately by Eddie Howe and not included in a player-family bonding day with the rest of the squad. Howe had organised a barbecue with players and their families after the first day back at training, following a pre-season tour in Asia. However, Isak, who has told the club he wants to explore a move away from St James' Park, was told to come into the training after the event in order to be treated for a minor thigh injury. It came just days after Howe publicly insisted Isak needed to 'earn the right' to train with the rest of the squad after missing pre-season matches amid uncertainty over his future and a rejected £110m bid from Liverpool. The Newcastle manager has get-togethers with players' loved ones at the club's training ground throughout the season. This is to include families and help the squad bond. It appears Howe is standing firm over the 25-year-old's conduct during pre-season. On conclusion of matches in Singapore and South Korea, Howe insisted: 'No player can expect to act poorly and train with the group as normal. You have to earn the right.' Howe had sent Isak home from Newcastle's pre-season opener at Celtic after the intense scrutiny over his future and interest from Liverpool. It then emerged that the Sweden international informed the club of his desire to move away from Newcastle this summer, despite having three years left on his current deal at St James' Park. With the club citing a minor thigh injury, he did not travel to Asia but instead flew to Spain where he underwent personal training sessions at his old club Real Sociedad. Howe revealed he heard about the trip to Spain through the media rather than from the player himself. Newcastle's valuation of Isak is £150m and they will stick rigidly to their price. Liverpool, meanwhile, have moved closer to selling Darwin Núñez to Al Hilal in a deal worth £46m plus add-ons.