68,000 complaints about Severn Trent...I wonder why?

It was reported this week that Severn Trent had more complaints than any other water company last year. PAUL HINDLE thinks he has the reason

I read in my Evening Post this week that complaints to Severn Trent Water (STW) rose 90% in the last year.

Apparently 68,874 of us felt sufficiently peeved to drop the company a line.

As a serial complainer to STW, this news came as no surprise to me.

But this year I have to admit I wasn't one of the 68,000.

It wasn't that I had nothing to moan about, I just thought I'd do something more satisfactory with my time than complaining to STW... like shutting my head repeatedly in my car door.

The list of gripes deluging STW offices this year include those on supply, quality and pipes.

But many of the grumbles were about charges... and that was precisely the subject of my annual exchange with STW.

You see, I could not get my head round the fact that while STW was making hundreds of millions of pounds in profit every year, my bills were going through the roof.

My lack of understanding was very frustrating for STW, who had to write many lengthy explanations of why millions of pounds of profit for them didn't amount to a better deal for me.

My annual letter exchange began in 2004 when my bill rose by 16% to £333.11.

In 2005 it was a 24% rise - up to £414.04.

And in 2006 the bill was £461.42 - an 11.4% rise.

I could have started to understand these rises had I installed an irrigation system in my back garden or maybe turned my twice-annual washing of the car into a twice-daily event.

But my useage had hardly changed - I know because I'm on a meter.

It wasn't even as if the country was living with hyper-inflation or some other market force that would send prices soaring.

These increases coincided with long-running low inflation and stable market conditions. What they also coincided with were massive STW profits - for example a mere £400m in 2006.

In their missives to me STW justified the increase by arguing the need maintain its infrastructure and a safe, reliable water supply.

It had been instructed by regulator Ofwat to invest more in its pipes, sewers and treatment works.

But couldn't the £400m of profit have been used for that?

When I took my complaint to the then water watchdog, WaterVoice, they backed STW, saying high profits were necessary to give STW shareholders a return on their investment.

The value of the company as an investment had to maintained, and had to compare favourably with returns available from other investments.

And so therein lies the crux.

To keep STW shareholders happy, my bills have to go sky high.

STW and the regulator may have justified this arrangement but the man on the street is always going to find this hard to understand.

Hundreds of millions of pounds of profit surely has to mean a better deal for the consumer.

If it doesn't, then I guess we had better keep on complaining... or maybe I could switch off my supply and just drop a bucket in the Trent!

WWE's missed opportunity

Exasperated parent and Evening Post journalist Paul Hindle experienced the stage-managed world of WWE first hand in Nottingham last night.

IT'S been a tough few months for the usually slick operation that is World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE).

In June wrestler Chris Benoit killed his wife and son before hanging himself.

When his autopsy suggested he had been injecting steroids the shadow of drug abuse, never far away from professional wrestling, reared its ugly head again.

Then in August former WWE star Brian "Crush" Adams was found dead in his Florida home - and he was subsequently linked to a pharmacy under investigation for steroid prescription.

WWE appeared to act quickly - suspending ten of its wrestlers while the steroid issue was investigated and insisting it randomly tests its 180 athletes at least four times a year.

So with this lurking in the background, the WWE roadshow rolled into Nottingham Arena last night.

And when muscle-hewn superstars Chris Masters and Matt Striker were put up for interview, it seemed like an ideal opportunity for WWE to set the record straight.

Not so.

Masters and Striker may have wanted to talk, but their bosses weren't letting them.

Journalists were briefed beforehand not to ask about drugs and, indeed, anything controversial, like the merits of stage-managed bouts and faux violence, was off the agenda.

A shame, as Masters and Striker were eloquent and would have been quite capable of putting a lucid argument for wrestling being clean.

It's a message I, as a worried parent of a nine and ten-year-old growing addicted to the stage-managed world of WWE, wanted to hear.

I am not alone in seeing my children get hooked on WWE and adopt its stars, such as the Undertaker and The Great Khali as role models.

With impressionable youngsters hanging on WWE's every word, the organisation has a responsibility, and indeed a wonderful opportunity, to steer children away from drugs and tragic wastes of lives such as Benoit and Adams.

Blog posted by Paul Hindle on Friday October 19