I. About This Article
Challenging Unlawful Water Tariff accrual is an especially important issue for consumers and businesses that receive a significant charge from a water supply company on the basis of alleged unlawful consumption of drinking water or unlawful use of the wastewater network.
In practice, such charges are often very high. When calculating the amount, companies may use the pipe diameter, flow capacity, presumed consumption period and daily consumption regime. Incorrect determination of these data may result in thousands of GEL of alleged debt for the consumer.
At the same time, establishing the fact of unlawful consumption does not automatically mean that the charged amount is correct. A consumer may fail to fully disprove the administrative offence, but may still achieve reduction of the charged amount if the company calculated it by an incorrect method or for a disproportionate period.
This article discusses how unlawful water tariff accrual may be challenged, what importance evidence has, how the burden of proof is distributed, what role the Georgian National Energy and Water Supply Regulatory Commission has, and what a consumer should check when a water supply company charges a fee for alleged unlawful consumption.
The article is relevant both for household consumers and for businesses, especially where the alleged unlawful use is linked to a hotel, commercial space, production facility, construction site or another object where the company applies a high-volume calculation formula.
II. What Is Unlawful Consumption of Drinking Water?
Unlawful consumption of drinking water, in general terms, refers to cases where a consumer uses drinking water in violation of the procedure established by law.
This may include unauthorised connection to the water supply system, consumption bypassing the drinking water meter, unauthorised consumption without a meter, or a situation where consumed water is not recorded through the relevant metering system.
Unlawful use of the wastewater network may be connected with use of the network without proper registration, agreement or procedure established by law.
In such cases, the water supply company usually draws up an administrative offence protocol, issues a decision on imposing an administrative sanction and charges the consumer for unlawfully consumed water.
However, in practice, the most important issue is often the amount of the charge – how much the consumer must pay and whether the company calculated this amount correctly.
This distinction is important because water-related disputes often contain both legal and technical elements. It is not enough to determine that a connection existed or that water was not properly metered. It is also necessary to determine how much water could reasonably have been consumed, during what period, under what operating regime and by using which tariff.
III. Challenging Unlawful Accrual and the Fact of the Administrative Offence Are Not the Same Issue
In cases concerning unlawful water consumption, the consumer should distinguish between two issues.
The first issue is the fact of the administrative offence – whether there was unlawful consumption of drinking water or unlawful use of the wastewater network.
The second issue is the amount of the accrual – whether the company correctly calculated the fee for unlawfully consumed water.
This distinction is very important in practice. The Commission may consider that the fact of the administrative offence has been confirmed, but at the same time determine that the amount charged by the company is incorrect.
This was the situation in one decision of the Georgian National Energy and Water Supply Regulatory Commission, where the Commission left the administrative sanction in the form of a warning in force, but considered the charge of GEL 32,821.40 unfounded and instructed the company to make a new calculation.
This approach is especially important for consumers because the purpose of the dispute is not always to fully deny the fact of the administrative offence. Sometimes the real legal result is achieved by checking the calculation method, period, hours or tariff used by the company.
Therefore, when assessing such a case, the consumer should not stop the analysis at the question of whether a violation can be denied. Even where the violation is difficult to dispute, there may still be a strong argument against the amount charged.
IV. How Is the Accrual Calculated?
In case of unlawful water consumption, calculation of the charge depends on the specific circumstances.
If it is impossible to determine the exact date when unlawful consumption began or the actual daily volume of consumption, the accrual must be made according to the method defined by the relevant rules. In such cases, importance is attached to the consumer’s operating regime, the flow capacity of the equipment used, possible load and seasonality.
In practice, companies sometimes calculate charges on the basis of maximum assumptions – for example, pipe flow capacity, 180 days and 24-hour daily consumption. Such an approach may cause a very heavy financial consequence for the consumer.
However, the accrual must be reasoned and must correspond to the consumer’s real or reasonably determined consumption regime.
If the object did not operate 24 hours a day, if the nature of the activity does not confirm continuous consumption, or if the company does not justify such a regime, the consumer may have a basis to request reduction of the charged amount.
For this reason, the calculation formula is often the central part of the dispute. It is necessary to check what pipe diameter was used, what daily flow capacity was assumed, how many days were included, how many hours per day were calculated and whether the tariff was applied correctly.
A formally correct finding of unlawful consumption cannot justify an unreasonable calculation. The amount must still be based on a lawful, proportionate and factually reasoned method.
V. GNERC Practice – From GEL 32,821.40 to GEL 2,735.12
In a case from our practice, one decision of the Georgian National Energy and Water Supply Regulatory Commission concerned an individual entrepreneur to whom the water supply company charged GEL 32,821.40 for alleged unlawful consumption of drinking water.
According to the company, at the object – a hotel – drinking water was consumed without a meter through a 25 mm diameter polyethylene pipe, and the wastewater network was used unlawfully. The company calculated the charge based on the flow capacity of a 25 mm diameter pipe, a period of 180 days and a 24-hour daily operating regime.
The Commission considered that the evidence submitted confirmed the fact of the administrative offence. Accordingly, the decision imposing an administrative sanction in the form of a warning remained in force.
However, the Commission separately assessed the amount of the charge and found that the GEL 32,821.40 accrual had been made without compliance with the applicable rules.
The Commission indicated that the accrual had to be made by taking into account the drinking water consumption regime. As a result, the new calculation formula was determined as follows:
1.764 m³ × 12 hours × 30 days × GEL 4.307/m³ = GEL 2,735.12.
The practical significance of this decision is clear: even confirmation of the fact of unlawful consumption does not exclude the possibility of challenging the amount charged, if the amount was calculated by an incorrect method.
This case is important because it shows that the dispute before the Commission may have a partial but commercially significant result. Even where the warning remains in force, the financial burden may be substantially reduced if the calculation is legally and technically incorrect.
VI. What Should the Consumer Check After Receiving an Accrual?
If a water supply company charges a consumer on the basis of unlawful consumption, the first step is to check which documents the accrual is based on.
The consumer should request or study the administrative offence protocol, accrual act, photo and video materials, inspection report, decision on imposing an administrative sanction and other documents relied upon by the company.
After that, it should be assessed whether the fact of unlawful consumption is actually confirmed. For example, whether there is evidence of unauthorised connection, consumption without a meter or unauthorised use of the wastewater network.
Then, particular importance should be given to checking the accrual method. The consumer should determine:
- what pipe diameter the company used in the calculation;
- for how many days consumption was calculated;
- what daily consumption hours were used as the basis;
- why the company considered that regime correct;
- whether it corresponds to the actual activity of the object;
- whether seasonality was taken into account;
- whether there is evidence of 24-hour consumption;
- whether the relevant tariff was applied correctly.
In many cases, the main argument for reducing the accrual is found exactly in these data.
A consumer should also check whether the company’s documents are internally consistent. For example, the inspection report, technical description and calculation sheet should not contradict each other. If the technical data is unclear, if the pipe diameter is not properly confirmed, or if the calculation period is selected mechanically, these circumstances may become important arguments in the complaint.
VII. Importance of Evidence
Evidence has special importance when challenging unlawful water tariff accrual.
Imposing liability in an administrative offence case and confirming the validity of the accrual must be supported by relevant factual data. This may include an inspection protocol, photo, video, technical description, pipe diameter data, information confirming the operating regime of the object, the specific nature of the consumer’s activity and other circumstances.
At the same time, the burden of proof is often decisive in practice. If the company argues that the consumer unlawfully consumed water under specific technical conditions and during a specific period, these circumstances must be confirmed.
The consumer, in turn, should submit evidence that weakens the company’s position or shows the incorrectness of the accrual. Such evidence may include the actual working hours of the object, seasonal activity, real consumption needs, technical inconsistency or other information showing that the 24-hour or long-period model used by the company is not reasonable.
For a business, useful evidence may include internal working schedules, booking records, electricity consumption data, tax or operational records, staff schedules, technical documentation of the object, photographs of the system, expert assessment or communication with the water supply company.
The main purpose of this evidence is to show that the company’s calculation does not reflect the actual or reasonably presumed consumption regime.
VIII. Filing a Complaint with GNERC
A decision or accrual issued by a water supply company may become the subject of a dispute before the Georgian National Energy and Water Supply Regulatory Commission.
The Commission is authorised to review disputes falling within its competence between licensees and consumers. A consumer may apply to the Commission if they consider that the water supply company’s decision, accrual or administrative sanction is unlawful or unfounded.
Special attention should be paid to deadlines. Legislation establishes a specific deadline for appealing a decision on an administrative sanction, and missing that deadline may worsen the consumer’s legal position.
At the same time, the issue of accrual may be assessed separately. In practice, it is important that the complaint be clearly structured and include arguments related both to the fact of the administrative offence and to the amount of the accrual.
The complaint should indicate:
- which decision or accrual act is being challenged;
- why the consumer disagrees with the fact of the administrative offence;
- why the consumer considers the accrual incorrect;
- what evidence the consumer relies on;
- what result is requested – cancellation of the decision, cancellation of the accrual, new calculation or reduction of the amount.
A complaint should be drafted in a way that allows the Commission to separate the legal issues clearly. If the consumer challenges only the offence but does not separately address the calculation formula, the possibility of reducing the amount may not be presented strongly enough.
Therefore, in water tariff disputes, the structure of the complaint is important. The legal position should explain not only why the consumer disputes the company’s conclusion, but also why the amount charged is not properly calculated.
IX. Is It Possible to Reduce the Charged Amount?
Yes, it is possible.
GNERC practice shows that reduction of the charged amount is possible when the company calculates the fee for unlawfully consumed water by an incorrect or insufficiently reasoned method.
The argument for reduction is especially strong if the company uses a maximum regime — for example, 24 hours per day and a long period — but does not justify why it should be assumed that the consumer actually consumed water in that way.
It is also important that the period of unlawful consumption should not be determined mechanically. If it is possible to establish a more realistic period or working regime, the accrual should be based exactly on those circumstances.
Therefore, the consumer’s main goal may be not only full cancellation of the accrual, but also reduction of the amount to a reasonable and legally compliant figure.
In many cases, this is the most realistic strategy. A complete denial of the violation may be difficult if the inspection materials confirm unauthorised connection or unmetered use. However, even in such cases, the amount may be challenged if the calculation is excessive, unsupported or does not reflect the consumer’s actual activity.
This is why a legal assessment should include both lines of defence: first, whether the fact of unlawful consumption is proven; and second, whether the amount charged is lawful, proportionate and properly calculated.
X. What Mistakes Do Consumers Make?
In cases related to challenging unlawful water tariff accrual, consumers often make several practical mistakes.
The first mistake is delayed reaction. Many consumers pay attention to the accrual only when the amount already appears as debt or when the company demands payment. By that time, appeal deadlines may already have expired.
The second mistake is relying only on emotional arguments. Statements such as “this amount is unfair”, “I could not have consumed that much water” or “the company calculated it incorrectly” are not sufficient unless supported by documentary and technical reasoning.
The third mistake is confusing the administrative offence with the accrual. A consumer may fail to disprove the fact of unlawful consumption but still have a strong argument against the amount charged.
The fourth mistake is failing to request evidence. The consumer should know which photo, video, protocol or technical data the company relied on when making the accrual.
The fifth mistake is not checking the calculation formula. Often, the main problem is visible exactly in the formula — number of days, hours, pipe flow capacity or tariff.
The sixth mistake is failing to present the real operating regime of the object. For example, a hotel, café, shop, warehouse or production facility may not operate 24 hours a day or may have seasonal activity. If the company uses continuous consumption in the calculation, the consumer should present documents showing the actual regime.
The seventh mistake is treating the case only as a utility dispute and not as an administrative-law dispute. In reality, such cases may involve administrative offence rules, regulatory procedures, evidence, deadlines, burden of proof and proportionality of the financial consequence.
XI. How TB Legal Can Help
Our Law Firm assists consumers and businesses in disputes with water supply companies, including cases related to challenging unlawful water tariff accrual, administrative sanctions, accrual acts, complaints before GNERC and utility service disputes.
Our services may include:
- legal assessment of the water supply company’s accrual;
- analysis of the administrative offence protocol and decision;
- checking the accrual method and calculation formula;
- preparing a complaint to GNERC;
- legal organisation of evidence;
- communication with the company and the Commission;
- preparation of legal arguments for reduction or cancellation of the accrual;
- representation before administrative authorities.
In cases related to challenging unlawful water tariff accrual, quick reaction, correct legal strategy and precise assessment of the technical basis of the accrual are especially important.
TB Legal can assist at different stages of the process: immediately after inspection, after receipt of an administrative offence protocol, after issuance of the decision, after the accrual appears on the consumer’s account, or at the stage of preparing a complaint before the Commission.
For more information about regulatory and utility-related legal support, see our page: Energy Law.
If you need direct assistance, see: TB Legal Will Help You.
You may also contact us through the page: Contact Us!
XII. Conclusion
Challenging unlawful water accrual is an important legal mechanism for consumers, especially where a water supply company charges a high amount.
Establishing the fact of unlawful consumption does not automatically mean that the charged amount is correct. The amount must correspond to the method established by law, the consumer’s actual or reasonably determined consumption regime, pipe flow capacity, period, working hours and applicable tariff.
If the company makes unlawful water tariff accrual based on maximum assumptions and does not justify the period used or 24-hour consumption, the consumer may have grounds to request reduction of the accrual or a new calculation.
If you or your business have been charged an amount on the basis of unlawful consumption of drinking water or unlawful use of the wastewater network, it is important to assess the documents, deadlines, evidence and calculation formula in time.
A properly structured complaint may not only challenge the administrative offence, but also show that the charged amount is excessive, unreasoned or calculated in breach of the applicable rules.
TB Legal assists clients with legal assessment of water supply charges, preparation of complaints before GNERC and protection of their interests in regulatory disputes.
XIII. Sources Used
This article is based on the following sources:
- Decision of the Georgian National Energy and Water Supply Regulatory Commission in the dispute between individual entrepreneur Vormizdukht Arakelyan and LLC Georgian United Water Supply Company.
- Administrative Offences Code of Georgia.
- Rules on Supply and Consumption of Drinking Water approved by GNERC Resolution No. 32 of 26 November 2008.
- Dispute Resolution Rules approved by GNERC Resolution No. 24 of 4 June 2020.
- TB Legal’s practical perspective on utility service disputes and disputes before regulatory authorities.
Disclaimer
This article has been prepared for general informational purposes only and does not constitute individual legal advice or a legal opinion. Issues related to unlawful water consumption, unlawful use of the wastewater network, administrative sanctions, accrual acts, complaints before GNERC and reduction of accrued amounts must be assessed in light of the documents, evidence, deadlines, technical circumstances and factual position of the specific consumer.
In a specific case, it is recommended to obtain individual legal advice.
