Hosepipe bans and motorhomes

The weight of the water is of no consequence in comparison to the weight of the vehicle.

Peem wrote:With the cost of fuel, why travel with a full water tank? I fill the water tank of my Nuevo (2002) using a water carrier and a funnel. The funnel has a flexible spout and I fitted a sucker to the rim of the funnel, this fixes to the side of the motorhome, so it's hands free. Just enough water for day needs and no pfaffing around getting the van in the correct position for filling.

Firstly, fuel consumption with a full tank as compared to an empty one would be so small a difference as to be near impossible to calculate.
Secondly, what is your plan B when your planned destination is closed, you have to wild camp and have no water?

I wouldn't consider going anywhere with less than a full tank. Same applies to diesel btw!

same as above

There is a principle that if something is not needed for a trip, it shouldn't be taken to lessen the load which reduces the chance of overloading and improves both performance and fuel consumption.  The latter is important due to cost and damage to the planet.  It's no different to moderating speed and acceleration, avoiding unnecessary journeys, regular vehicle maintenance, turning lights off at home if there is no one in the room, not leaving TVs on standby, unplugging microwaves chargers and motorhomes when they are not in use and so on.  Individually a saving might be small but collectively and over time it wont be.

Back to water - if there is a reasonable chance of wild camping at the end of the day, water needs to be carried.  If there isn't, it doesn't.  Over 30 years of camping with a caravan and now motorhome, we have planned every trip in advance and pre-booked every site which always came with free water and so far, fingers crossed, we have not had to wild camp or carry more than a few litres of water with us.

Neat solution Al, but its use could be misunderstood by some......

Think it is the third time this summer we have ended up polarised over full vs empty debate for fresh water, think we should agree to differ as what everyone is doing seems to be working for them.

Where would we be without rules and regulations drawn up by ........ !! 

Surely:
A motorhome is used for recreational purposes but the water therein (your honour) is there to ensure life is sustained.
Therefore, don't water your motorhome using a hosepipe but do use a hosepipe to fill the tank with water essential to life!

Otherwise:
The occupants will shrivel and die creating smells and maggots !!   ..... which must surely contravene The Health and Safety Act of ..... Section .... Paragraph .... 

50,000 people just attended boardmasters in Newquay and SW water tankered in loads of water, cost to the users, zero. I pay water charges to the same company and am restricted what I can use? 
Get caught using a hosepipe and according to SW water the penalty is "You will be reminded it is against the rules" persistent abusers will be fined. This is a water company ban and therefore as a private company surely THEY would have to sue you? How many ordinary people have actually been fined for using a hosepipe?
I believe according to the law the water company should also give you a "reasonable reduction in charges" under the flood and management act, anyone ever asked I wonder? 
I have just filled the tank on the van using a hose even though the ban is not in force here for a few days, would have made no difference had it been, I would have still done the same thing. It is still 60 litres of water whether I wheel it in 25 litre containers or it comes from the hose From Friday I will be using French water but will be arriving with a full tank plus 25 litres in a can just in case, that is for my safety and wellbeing.
I have three outside taps covering an area of nearly two acres, each has a hose attached, I am not planning on removing them. Do I take the hose to where the water is needed, fill a can from the hose and water the new trees or must I carry a watering can from a tap 200 feet away a dozen or more times? I am allowed to water plants with a hose up to two weeks old but none older. That might be fine for small plants but my new Rohan and Walnut trees will need watering long after two weeks to survive without rain.
Logic must come in to this somewhere and I doubt whether a civil case would ever stand up in court unless you are blatantly breaking the contract.
Just my thoughts I may be totally wrong

It would be a criminal prosecution, not civil action/being sued, as there is an Act of Pariament covering this.  

However it has seldom if ever been used - see here:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The same act of Parliament that says you are entitled to reasonable compensation for restricted services? I wonder if that has ever been used?

I'd be interested to know if that has ever been used, although I have seen references in the past to fixed compensation amounts being paid automatically for total loss of some utilities.

In the case of a hosepipe ban, per my earlier post in this thread showing that less than 2% of water typically used in domestic settings would be via a hosepipe, I guess the water companies would argue that that is not a significant loss of service. Or if pushed refund 2% of your typical pro rata daily billed amount for the duration of the ban. Of course, if you're on a meter then you're not paying for what you're not using anyway! 

One way or another, I'm sure they'd wriggle out of it.

I pay £18 a month (just me in the house) with a meter. I don’t use a jet wash or even a hosepipe, generally.  I’m sure they will have worked it so unmetered usage is more expensive on average by now.

bikeralw wrote:At the risk of going off topic (again!), whilst on the subject of water, we've never been on a meter but are thinking of going on one. Linked to the old rates, at present we pay about £550 a year,  but we have no worries of running up huge water bills, I know it'll always be a tenner or so a week even if I leave the taps running all day. I use my power washer frequently on the paths and patios, sprinkler on the garden, hosepipes for washing car, van and bikes, refill the spa maybe more frequently than necessary etc.
Two in our household, how does this compare to those with a meter? 
Al.

Al

£28 per month incl sewage, meter, Anglian water 10 months only so £280

Holy Moly , ours is £74.89 a month and that is with no sewerage charges but unmetered! Two of us but in the summer months the hose gets used quite a lot and we are bath people not showers, not sure a meter would reduce the bill.

Just a reminder Hog, tonight is the left side, from memory!!

groundhog wrote:Holy Moly , ours is £74.89 a month and that is with no sewerage charges but unmetered! Two of us but in the summer months the hose gets used quite a lot and we are bath people not showers, not sure a meter would reduce the bill.

We’re in the dearest area of the country, Hog. Ours is metered and we pay £48 p/m all in after the Govt rebate of £50 p/a is taken off. However, we (2 of us) shower rather than bath and don’t have the Hog Towers estate to water.

Thanks Peter
That is most interesting, will have a look at it when we get back from France, that is a huge difference.

Ditto same as Cymro, water, sewage, standing charge £28 x 10 months £280 per annum

To clarify, ours is £48 x 12 = £576 and includes everything. It would be £626 but customers of South West Water get a Govt rebate of £50 p/a in recognition of the high charges applicable in this area due to the vast sums needing to be spent on the environmental issues of our extensive coastline.