WHAT HAPPENED?
One of Alberta’s largest cities asked Brayden W. to keep his water running while they worked on a water line near his property. While the City did not specify how long the work was expected to take, they assured Brayden that he would be reimbursed for the additional expenses incurred by the increased water usage.
Brayden cooperated with the request and opened up his taps. Weeks went by with no word from the City about the status of the project. After a month, he stopped running the water.
Brayden’s next utilities bill reflected the increased water use but when he brought the bill to the City, he was only partially reimbursed. The City informed Brayden that they were only responsible for the two weeks that the construction took place. Further, the City claimed that they had communicated this to Brayden.
Brayden complained to the Ombudsman, arguing that he was unfairly billed for the water usage.
WHAT DID THE OMBUDSMAN’S OFFICE DO?
Our office spoke with both Brayden and the City, reviewed all relevant documentation, and determined that the City had failed to clearly communicate with Brayden. We suggested that the City update their template letters to notify residents about the expected duration of projects, update their process for reviewing appeals, and reconsider their decision about reimbursement for Brayden.
WHAT WAS THE OUTCOME?
The City adopted our suggestions to improve their communication to residents and review their appeal processes. They also reconsidered Brayden’s complaint and reimbursed him for half of the outstanding expenses.
WHY DOES IT MATTER?
While Brayden may not have gotten everything he asked for, the Ombudsman facilitated a positive outcome. And by improving the fairness of how the City administers construction projects that require residents to run water, the Ombudsman helps prevent a flood of future complaints.
