http://www.thecabin.net/stories/010300/loc_0103000010.html

Link

Couple receives shock with $27,700 utility bill By DAVID BENNETT Log Cabin Staff Writer Monday, January 3, 2000 E-Mail this story to a friend Respond to this story Print this story

Does $27,705.64 sound a bit much for utilities on a one-story, 1,800-square-foot house? That's what Anna Ruth Milam and her husband, Tass Milam, think.

Mrs. Milam said they received their December utility bill from Conway Corp. on Friday. Since their previous bill ran under $100, they were, she said, a bit shocked with the total on the latest bill.

"We've always had our bills real low," she said. "I called down there and the lady working there said, 'Wow, I guess that is wrong.'"

Contributing to the whopping total is $10,513.30 for water use and $16,494.90 for sewer. Plus $636.45 sales tax. Mrs. Milam knows of no excessive water or sewer use at their Navajo Trail residence that would account for the higher charge.

Because Friday was New Year's Eve, no one at Conway Corp. was available to figure out how the Milams' bill ended up so high.

This morning, Conway Corp. CEO Richard Arnold said the bill was a mistake, and was not caused by a computer problem.

"It was human error, plain and simple," Arnold said. "Somebody just made a mistake."

Arnold said a corrected bill was sent to the Milams this morning.

He said he could not discuss the bill further without the Milams' permission. He said he asked Mrs. Milam and did not receive that permission.

(Staff writer David Bennett can be reached by phone at 505-1260 or e-mail at dbennett@thecabin.net)

-- Homer Beanfang (Bats@inbellfry.com), January 03, 2000

Answers

I will admit to some curiosity as to why this is posted on a Y2K forum. After all, the bill was generated, and in fact received by the couple in question, during December of 1999. Furthermore, it was obviuosly not a systemic problem or there would have been many other customers receiving such outrageous bills.

So, Homer, why is this here?

-- Paul Neuhardt (neuhardt@ultranet.com), January 03, 2000.

It's here because, since it's a problem, it MUST be related to Y2K! We all know that every difficulty we have from now on is proof that Y2K is going to cause the end of the world as we know it.

-- Realist (don't@want.spam), January 03, 2000.

Paul, we don't know that this problem wasn't caused by Y2K changes, or that any other people in the community even knows about the forum.

But, apparently erroneous software change occurred for whatever reason. We want to be able to report billing problems of all kinds so that we can determine if there is a trend.

Remember, all the events that are being reported in the news says that "these problems aren't Y2K related".

Well enough data will help us to determine the facts.

-- M.C. (mountaineer60@juno.com), January 03, 2000.

I'm sure if you went looking, you'd see that there are normally a lot of glitches. today is no exception.

-- Realist (don't@want.spam), January 03, 2000.

Realist,

Since you evidently don't want anything posted to the forum that is not accepted by the "main stream" press and business as "not a Y2K problem", why don't we place you in charge of getting a refund on all the wasted money that business and govt spent on this "non event."

Unless I am sadly mistaken, govt and/or business (or both, I don't recall) made it very clear that there would be no admission of any Y2K problems. As they made their actions clear with the statements they gave, they left themselves open to having all problems occuring within a specific timeframe brought up for debate. If you don't like what they decided to do, take it up with them, not those that are posting what is obviously "problems".........

Sorry if this sounds grouchy, but I'm irked at the double standard being applied.

-- me (me@me.com), January 03, 2000.