Phenix City Utilities

On January 24, the customer at [redacted] called our dispatch office statnig they had a sewer stoppage the customer was advised of a potential service charge of $as per City Ordinance No2012- which expressly states: "The following service charges will be assessed only if the problem is determined to be a plumbing malfunction on the customer's property" Those charges are as follows: Service calls during working hours $per hour Emergency service calls after hours $per hour Our field crew inspected the sanitary sewer main to verify it had no blockage and was flowing freely Addtionally, they ran water thru the main to furhter verify it was flowing without restriction This sewer main runs along the back of the customers lot and is actually within the property line of her neighbor Due to the fact that our main was functioning properly and a determination made that the customer's service line was the problem, she was informed that she would have to pay a $service charge fee On January 31, the customer called dispatch and was again informed of a posible service charge fee Our crew returned to the residence and videoed the service line connecting the home to the sewer main During this inspection it was shown that there were roots in this service line causing the blockageBen Franklin Plumbing was on site and had excavated the service line As both homes were built in and 1992, no one on our crew would have known if building code or utitlity regulations allowed or disallowed two service lines to be connected together prior to entering the main They further do not speak to customers regarding such matters The supervisor did inform me that the people with Ben Franklin Plumbing had been talking about if it was legal or not As the trees that were causing the root problem were on the customer's properety at [redacted] and it was this customer's service line alone that was affected, it would be the sole responsibility of that customer to be responsible for the charges When the City has to dispatch service crews for calls such as this, it comes at an expense The cost of paying wages, the vehicles used and the video equipment used in conducting the investigation in addition to the making of final reports and time to burn the video onto disks to be filed with the required paper must be paid for If the problem is with our infrastructure, there is no charge made, but when we are working to provide inspection of the customers lines, the customer is responsible for the charges made, just as with any service someone requests from a service provider It is not the City's responsibility to separate customer service lines as the City did not install those lines The customer notes in their "Desired Settlement" statement, "My neighbor is not experiencing any problems" That's because the problem was not caused due to the two serivces being tied together, but because roots were blocking this customer service line These two home have been served by this same sanitary main for the last and years respectively without issue and have been tied together the entire time Only until the customer at [redacted] had roots that eventually blocked their service line did they have a problem with service line blockages The Phenix City Utilities Department followed both procedure and the City Ordinance in addressing the issue at [redacted] *** These same procedures are applied City wide without exception It is unfortunate that the customer had this experience with their service line being blocked by roots, but the City is not responsible for this Please advise should you have need of any other information

As previously noted, there was no service line issue with either homeowner for twenty-two (22) plus years until this individual had roots block her service line This was not the result of the two service lines being connected together This is an unfortunate incident for the homeowner, but the City of Phenix City considers this matter closed

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[Thank you to the Revdex.com for reaching out. Your vehichle serves well and I am sure it will get public notice as more than likely this will happen to someone else and if enough of us are impacted, we will warrant they city move to make corrections they should own up to. Due to the fact that I feel the City should acknowledge that each household should have their own main, and they are not trying to acccomodate what should be a code, I will continue in other avenues. I was advised they would quote me a price to seperate the lines (which are in one neighbor yard and a different neighbor home) is where I really felt they were not being responsible. I do not in any way feel I should have to pay to have that corrected , as everyone seems to agree its wrong. They could have least corrected the problem they know is wrong.  I shouldered full financial responsibility of the roots.
Thank you in advance for your time.
Regards,
[redacted]

On January 24, 2014 the customer at [redacted] called our dispatch office statnig they had a sewer stoppage.  the customer was advised of a potential service charge of $75.00 as per City Ordinance No. 2012-18...

which expressly states: "The following service charges will be assessed only if the problem is determined to be a plumbing malfunction on the customer's property".  Those charges are as follows: 
Service calls during normal working hours   $75.00 per hour
Emergency service calls after hours.          $112.50 per hour
Our field crew inspected the sanitary sewer main to verify it had no blockage and was flowing freely.  Addtionally, they ran water thru the main to furhter verify it was flowing without restriction.  This sewer main runs along the back of the customers lot and is actually within the property line of her neighbor.  Due to the fact that our main was functioning properly and a determination made that the customer's service line was the problem, she was informed that she would have to pay a $75.00 service charge fee.
On January 31, 2014 the customer called dispatch and was again informed of a posible service charge fee.  Our crew returned to the residence and videoed the service line connecting the home to the sewer main.  During this inspection it was shown that there were roots in this service line causing the blockage. Ben Franklin Plumbing was on site and had excavated the service line.  As both homes were built in 1990 and 1992, no one on our crew would have known if building code or utitlity regulations allowed or disallowed two service lines to be connected together prior to entering the main.  They further do not speak to customers regarding such matters.  The supervisor did inform me that the people with Ben Franklin Plumbing had been talking about if it was legal or not. 
As the trees that were causing the root problem were on the customer's properety at [redacted] and it was this customer's service line alone that was affected, it would be the sole responsibility of that customer to be responsible for the charges.  When the City has to dispatch service crews for calls such as this, it comes at an expense.  The cost of paying wages, the vehicles used and the video equipment used in conducting the investigation in addition to the making of final reports and time to burn the video onto disks to be filed with the required paper must be paid for.  If the problem is with our infrastructure, there is no charge made, but when we are working to provide inspection of the customers lines, the customer is responsible for the charges made, just as with any service someone requests from a service provider.  It is not the City's responsibility to separate customer service lines as the City did not install those lines.  The customer notes in their "Desired Settlement" statement, "My neighbor is not experiencing any problems".  That's because the problem was not caused due to the two serivces being tied together, but because roots were blocking this customer service line.  These two home have been served by this same sanitary main for the last 22 and 24 years respectively without issue and have been tied together the entire time.  Only until the customer at [redacted] had roots that eventually blocked their service line did they have a problem with service line blockages.
The Phenix City Utilities Department followed both procedure and the City Ordinance in addressing the issue at [redacted].  These same procedures are applied City wide without exception.  It is unfortunate that the customer had this experience with their service line being blocked by roots, but the City is not responsible for this.
Please advise should you have need of any other information.

As previously noted, there was no service line issue with either homeowner for twenty-two (22) plus years until this individual had roots block her service line.  This was not the result of the two service lines being connected together.  This is an unfortunate incident for the homeowner, but the City of Phenix City considers this matter closed.