I purchased my home in 2006. It was never disclosed to me by the seller, selling agent nor the selling broker nor was it discovered by the title company; that my water services bill would be more than $240 per month because of a deed restriction put on the property by the builder(discovered by the local water service manager after my many complaints). The home is next to an active oil well and the cities fire department required that a fire sprinkler be attached to the home. Because of this fact; 2 x 2 inch water meters were installed on the property; therefore the city water services department charges me for water service at what I calculate to be 6 times the normal residential property rate. I am basically being charged for a service that I am not using nor ever have used.

I don't know where to turn. I have been down to city hall several times; contacted the local city councilman for help, went in front of the water bureau, contacted the fire marshal; filed a complaint with the California PUC and also requested a meeting with my city mayor. It is the most frustrating thing imaginable. I am not big on litigation but I feel that I absolutely need to sue everyone involved (Title company, seller, selling agent, broker, city water services, the builder) to recoop my money and have the unfair deed restriction lifted. I need a lawyer to work on contingency. What would be my first, second... steps?

BTW another home 1 block away from me; built after mine and closer to an active oil well than mine is not subject any such restriction.

Sue them all. Drill a well and disconnect any city water.

I do not follow how a deed restriction (which of course the tilte company should have found) relates to the fire department's requirements for water service.

Any deed restriction should have been found by the Title Company. If you purchased Title insurance, then the insurance should cover your fighting this.

I don't see how the size of your metter would affect the rate charged for your usage. Can you further explain

It is a stated requirement on the deed restriction document that I have a sprinkler system be installed. The fire marshal from the fire department stated to me that indeed the sprinkler is required but I should not have to pay unless a fire were to occur(he backed track quickly when I put that statement in writing). The water service department sees it differently, their system only sees 2x2" water pipes; which incurs the ridiculous charges. This by the way raised my sewer charges to $60+ every month. The water service is tied to the sewer charges. That is the only charge that they (the water service) was willing to bring down to realistic charges of $6 per month.

So, in other words, you would have been required to install the sprinkler system whether or not the deed restriction was in place. Under those circumstances it is at least arguable that the deed restriction didn't cause you loss and the title company is not liable.

No, the deed restriction caused the fire sprinkler as a requirement. Keep in mind once again that a home exactly one block from my home; built in 2004 has no such requirement.

The deed restriction has caused me loss; I would not have agreed to buy a home where I was informed up front that the deed restriction requires a sprinkler system exist and that the restriction would cause my bill to be 6 times normal.

Ballenger,

Here is where it gets even more confusing. According to the city city planning department where I live; their rate sheet that was provided to me shows that anyone who has a 3" or 4" pipe (mine is 2x2") will be charged a daily rate of $3.60 per day for water service); $2.06 per day for sewer service. My neighbor pays .41 cents per day for water service and .238 cents per day for sewer service.

Understand that the past three years I have let my grass die because I can't even afford to water it.

Have you thought of a consumer advocate at your local newspaper or TV stations?