Imagine finding out you've been paying nearly 40 years for rights to water you're not only not getting, but that you can't get, because the pipes for it don’t exist. Read more: ksltv.com/651907/get-gephardt...
It really depends how it happened. I could think of something like it was planned expansion 40 years ago but failed to materialize and they messed up paperwork or something like it. Either way the people that paid for "water rights" to water they don't get should be allowed money back if they have proof of the payments.
Exactly. I just love how the city manager says he'll refund 9 years' worth, but not 100% of those back charges. His explanation: "there has to be some personal responsibility on the part of the individual. This man had this charge on his property taxes for years & did nothing about it" How convenient! Justify the irresponsibility of your tax office by blaming the individual for your mistake. Then he talks about how this man didnt pay for nothing. He & his neighbors have access to secondary water, if they can afford to dig up the streets & put in the plumbing. Ridiculous! He paid & he got nothing, liar!
....Including damages in the form of his lawyers dues, too. When corporations & governments force ordinary people to defend themselves in another "david-and-goliath" conflict, they should be made to pay for the people's lawyer
Wow! "Personal responsibility"...hmmm. Seems like someone needs to accept personal responsibility for ripping people off for 37 years. That spokesman has an impossible job of trying to sound rational while justifying ripping the public off. This should be a class action lawsuit!
Especially since you KNOW that if the roles were reversed, and the water company found out he had been using something without paying, they would have a bill due in full ready ASAP
@@LygerTheCLawahh so as long as someone adds a charge I’m fine print then it’s okay to steal? So you wouldn’t mind paying for a service that you know is impossible to use?
Mail fraud,tax fraud,theft of services. Full criminal charges against everyone involved and RICO charges against the water district and all employees with full clawback of past wages and retirement payouts. Make it a customer owned utility,one share per property owner.
While I do not agree with the situation, technically he has rights to the water. The water does exist, it's just that the infrastructure to get access to the water is not in place. They would have to pay for the infrastructure to gain access to the water.
@@snowflakehunterHe is being charged for it even though the water company is not providing access to the water... so how do they charge him for something they don't have? I was charged for 911 service for many years. The problem is that 911 was not available in my area. The phone company said that they could charge for it up to 5 years prior to service being provided. I paid for over 20 years and still didn't have 911 service.
@@cicada38 what part of this do you not understand? He is paying for the rights to the water. But he has to provide the infrastructure to get it brought to him. Pretty simple to understand if you ask me. The video was self-explanatory on that whole subject.
@@snowflakehunterlol “technically” doesn’t make it right. Clearly the water company put the infrastructure in place at other locations just not his because it’s most likely too much money. I’m sure the water companies figured they can charge that small water rights fee and no one would notice. Now add that up with 100 plus houses and that’s free revenue for the company for doing absolutely nothing
@@thagabej evidently you didn't watch the video very well. He opted in to the secondary water source without the infrastructure being in place. A secondary water source can be anything from raw lake water or groundwater. The secondary water source is to be used for irrigation purposes. He was even told that it would be up to the neighborhood to put the infrastructure in place. He was basically buying the rights to the water but did not have the infrastructure in place to gain access to the water. This really is not the water company's fault. It is his fault for not looking over his taxes. It wasn't "just his place". By the way, it is not the city's responsibility to put the infrastructure in for secondary water sources. Irrigation is a privilege. Educate yourself. Under Texas code chapter 11 when you buy water rights you have the right to acquire the water. But it is up to you on how you get it. In Utah it is title code 73. I think it's under chapter 5 if I'm not mistaken. Like I said, educate yourself.
Looks like "class action lawsuit" time!! On a side note, we can see why the water company has such a nice office....imagine, being able to charge for a service you don't have to provide!
The district is not worried about one homeowner’s potential refund. It’s ALL HOMEOWNERS’ refunds for which they may be liable that has them concerned. They don’t want to set a precedent. As for that spokesman, he needs to be slapped into next week for spewing those specious canards.
The water "rights" do NOT have a positive value. It's only a NEGATIVE value. The man would have to PAY every year, whether the 'rights' were realized or not. If he wanted to "use" or realize the 'rights' then he'd have to spend more than the house and property are worth. Finally, if he did realize the rights -- he'd have to pay more for the water USED. If he didn't have the rights, then there'd be no loss because that spineless water guy realizes he'd never have said NO to someone asking to use their water if the person was willing to foot the bill for infrastructure.
Bruce just needs to take him to court before jury who is which will rule in his favor and all of his neighbors. Just another example of bureaucracy and overreach by government.
All the home owners that have been charged for secondary water that can not be accessed from their properties should band together and do a class action lawsuit against the water company for fraud, ( they are charging for a service they cannot provide )
If all the stolen money was returned the community would be able to pay for the infrastructure to bring in the secondary water but to keep charging people for a not-available service is a crime. You might as well start charging people for road maintenance in China, then claiming it's the communities fault that they don't drive on the roads that they are wrongly being charged for!
They don't want to pay it all back, because a lot of other people will get in line behind him. I paid extra for years because my valve was larger than my neighbors'. When the meter reader told me I didn't need the larger valve, he also told me I was paying extra for it. I didn't get any money back, but they changed valves so I paid less afterwards.
If a vendor/contractor is caught doing the same to the government, they will lock you up and have you pay back restitution and fines on top of it. Why is it different when government does it?
Same happened to me. I have well water. They said there is a fire hydrant at the end of my street. I measured it and a fire hose wouldn't reach my house. Got refunded for the years I was charged.
"This water is valuable"? Yeah, something you can bill a whole bunch of people for, even though you're providing nothing, is certainly valuable, and it's a SCAM you don't want to give up.
So if i rob a bank but give back roughly 25% i can blame them for letting me in, you know, personal responsibility and all, but since I offered to give back 25% of my ILL GOTTEN GAINS, i can get away with it. DEAL sign me up!
"valuable water rights"... city dude sounds like he's trying to sell NFTs and come up with an excuse as to why something that is not tangible is "valuable".
"There's some personal responsibility here." And what about the district's responsibility to not scam customers? "Yeah, we've been charging you for something you can't have, but you didn't notice it until now so we're keeping your money." That dude is ridiculous. 🤬
Here in california its on your property deed for water rights, you dont have to pay for it until you use it, this sounds like a scam he should sue them along with his neighbors
It’s the same here in Idaho. I paid for years for water I could never access. I was told by the water district it’s important to keep that right with my property.
Here’s how it works: The city installs a second meter for secondary water, which is charged at a lower rate because it doesn’t go into the sewer. However, the city decided against this system because it’s less profitable. Instead, they make everyone use a single meter, allowing them to charge for sewer services even if the water only goes into the ground. This approach maximizes their profits because they can apply sewer charges to all water usage, including lawn watering, despite it not entering the sewer system. Essentially, they profit more from charging for sewer services on all water usage, whether it’s for lawn irrigation or showers.
By offering a partial refund, they have admitted fault ! He needs a full refund, with interest for the 37 years ! Not to mention the needless stress he's being put through ! $$$🤔$$$
Oh sorry you're spending money on a service you can have if you invest possibly millions of your own money to build the infrastructure... that's some underhanded sneaky bs!!
A few years ago the little town i was living in received a fine because of the water so they raised the rates to make up the difference one gentleman looked at his bills and figured out that he was charged triple compared to the month before so he filed a lawsuit the water company turned his water off he won the suit but he still doesn't have water.
Personal responsibility for a company falsely charging for a service they actually don't provide? The man already HAS water rights - all water from the high to the low water mark [the bottom of the aquifer] belongs to the PEOPLE.
Having water rights gives you the legal right to access the water on your land, he had the legal right to install a well on his property as a secondary water source which could be used to run sprinklers or be used to water his garden, etc.
There is a solution. The residents start a class action against the water supplier. Have whoever signed off on the charges for the water charged by the police with theft.
Maybe instead of the neighbors "pooling their resources to purchase the infrastructure" to have access to the secondary water, they could pool their resources to get really good lawyers to sue the water district!
I’m not sure he should have cancelled his water rights. I’m curious to see what those entail but there’s certain water rights in places worth quite a bit.
Okay this is a crazy idea. But if someone has the "right to water" as they say. Then the city or county should install the Infrastructure that will make it available to them. And the city or county should foot the bill. And if someone is paying for a service they literally cannot receive. Then they should get fully refunded.
The manager : "personal responsibility" Okay pay the 9 years and than for the 9 year a huge amount for their misbehaviour to cover their personal responsibility !
Oh I forgot about appeals... And supreme Court hearings... And them judges that's on big business side... They would never vote for the little man to win.... Better off just the vote them out...
It sounds like the tax assessors office is one of the culprits. If they can prove the tax was assessed at the request of the water company for each billing cycle that would exonerate them.
Wow… If the district has been collecting this money yearly from all the people in his area then THEY should have the funds to install the infrastructure by now.
If you were behind 40 years on taxes the city would sure want every cent plus interest and fees. You couldn't tell them too bad, it was their responsibility to catch the error.
Personal responsibility that the homeowner should have? But where is the fiduciary duty that the water board should have taken care of their customers and not stolen their money this is what’s wrong with America
Listening to that spokeperson spouting on about why he was paying is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. What "water rights"? Then he double downs and says if the owner can "build" the infrastructure then he can access the water?! OMG, the government tries to charge you for anything they can. What next, charge you for air?!
So the water company representative said its up to the customers to know and be accountable for what they're paying for. But it's ok to take their money when the companies know something that the the customers obvious do not know. And as long as the customer doesn't know, the company knows it can still keep billing them for it. Very shady. The company has every penny this man has paid them unnecessarily all these years. Why then only "offering" to pay him 9 years out of the 37 he's been paying?! Representative acted like this should make the customer feel better about the whole situation. Company needs to stop acting like it's doing this man a favor. And give him all his money back. So the customer can feel better, instead of the water company.
So, if I have a bar in my house that noone knows about and I have no trespassing signs all over my lawn I still have the right to send the Mayor of my town a bill for the beer he didn't drink? He never drank it, he had no access to it, but he does occassionally drive through my neighborhood so he could theoretically have called me up and ask for a beer... I agree that th e man didn't do his due diligence on inspecting his tax statement. (NOTE: NEVER EVER believe anything that some bureaucrt or politician sends you claiming you owe anything! Check it yourself, read the laws if you have to!) However, the city should admit they screwed up and refund the money. How can you have a "right" to something that is inaccessible to you? Then they are denying him his "rights"
Regulated industries owe when mistakes are made. Typically the legal thought is, you could question a bill at any time so usually one-years worth is all you can expect as a refund. Rate setting includes losses & gains. To make up for shortages when a community doesn't question a water bill for 40-years likely has millions at stake affecting current owners bills, so limits are needed.
3:18 he’s talking out of his butt because they don’t want to refund the money to all those people that they overcharged for close to 40 years. I would love to know how far back this really goes. This is not a ranch where you own water rights to whatever water that exists on that land. This is a completely different scenariowhere the city has infrastructure to bring water to the houses on that street. They are not providing the service that he is paying for, therefore it should all be refunded. I don’t care what this guy says, you don’t buy water rights in a city.
So what there saying is you are paying for the right to get that water if you want it but the city they live in won't put in the piping to do so it and the secondary water company knew this all along so the city has a monopoly and if you want the other water company's water you have to pay for the infrastructure .
