**Aster Sewerage Plant Charges Update**
Caroline Nokes and I met with Aster yesterday to discuss the sewerage charge issues. My thanks to them for spending the time with us and for what was a productive, positive and frank meeting.
We made a number of points forcibly:
- The charges being levied are unacceptable and must be reviewed
- The tender process for a provider to manage the sewerage treatment plants resulted in a contractor, based in Kent seemingly charging amounts that are in excess of that which local contractors would charge by as much as 100%
- Aster have not maintained their estate in a proactive manner which would prolong the life of the plants. The consequence is increased cost for home owners and Aster alike.
- That this is simply not good business for them. They are paying excessive costs, and having to pick up a considerable portion themselves as a consequence of their not recouping the full cost from their tenants.
Aster’s response was to say that they understood there were serious concerns. In Test Valley there are 350 homes connected to sewerage treatment plants. 203 privately owned. 147 rented out by Aster. I made the point that there are also two schools connected to plants, in Awbridge and Nether Wallop which were causing concern to the County Council.
They had tendered for a national contract of the sewerage services as they no longer were able to provide the specialist support needed in house. They had no quality concerns with their contractor who are a national company, however they recognised the fact that as they were based in Kent, and that they had been sending staff and vehicles from there was an issue. There was a tacit acceptance their costs were higher than those likely to be charged by a local company.
They insisted that Aster tenants are charged an amount equivalent to the charges made by water companies for sewerage services where properties are connected to mains supply. (We pointed out this was still considerably less than the annual amount being charged to all their home owners).
They emphasised that costs were being charged directly by Aster to all home owners. There were no management charges and no credits against the Aster account at the expense of home owners.
In response the Aster representatives made some commitments:
- Aster will re-tender the contract for the sewerage treatment plant maintenance in smaller lots, based on a County basis.
- Each sewerage treatment plant is to be re-surveyed and a repair/renewal schedule established.
- They will allocate capital expenditure for the repair/replacement of sewerage treatment plants in the 2023/24 financial year.
The $64,000 question will be whether they look to recoup any of the renewal/repair cost from home owners. They made the point that infrastructure has a natural life span and that homeowners should be prepared to pay for its renewal in time. My answer to that is that any normal company would have a sinking fund which would put money aside to eventually replace the infrastructure, plant and machinery as it ran out. This has not been the case, there is no sinking fund and there has been no amortisation applied to the estate.
Indeed neglect of the sewerage treatment plants, other than basic maintenance, has resulted in their having a shorter lifespan than they otherwise might have had. The sewerage treatment plants were handed to them in full working order and with complete environmental permits by TVBC in 2000. It is under Aster’s ownership that the plants have deteriorated and they, therefore, to my mind have a moral duty to bear the cost of their renewal and replacement.