Six major UK water providers are under legal scrutiny due to allegations of not fully disclosing sewage releases into natural water bodies, which might result in substantial compensation demands.
This collective lawsuit speaks for over 20 million homeowners and claims that firms like Severn Trent Water, Thames Water, and United Utilities did not truthfully reveal the extent of sewage pollution to the Environment Agency and Ofwat.
The first lawsuit, valued at £330 million, singles out Severn Trent Water, representing its eight million users.
Further anticipated lawsuits against other corporations could tally up to £800 million in the near future.
Environmental expert Professor Carolyn Roberts suggests that these supposed non-disclosures might have influenced customer rates. As per her statement in The Guardian, the frequency of reported pollution impacts the rates set by water firms.
This spotlight on the UK’s water monopolies, which became privatized in the late 1980s, raises concerns. Previously, local authorities managed these utilities until the 1989 Water Act, which shifted control to private companies.
Over time, questions regarding transparency, fairness in pricing, and accountability in these monopolies surfaced.
The lawsuit, initiated by Leigh Day, might mean compensation for those who have been billed by the accused firms since April 2020.
Zoë Mernick-Levene, a partner at Leigh Day, mentioned in The Guardian that they seek recompense for numerous users affected by heightened water rates and also aim to make it clear that companies should not degrade water quality and misguide their regulators without repercussions.
Severn Trent, however, dismissed these allegations as baseless.
Similarly, Water UK, an industry representative, argued that a vast majority, over 99%, of sewage operations abide by the law.
A representative from Thames Water, currently grappling with financial challenges, acknowledged being informed of the claims by Roberts. They mentioned their open dialogue with Prof Roberts and emphasized the lack of merit in the proposed lawsuit against them.”
