This was posted 1 year 6 months 14 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

[QLD] $55 Discount for Households Connected to The SEQ Water Grid

900
[QLD] $55 Discount for Households Connected to The SEQ Water Grid
Go to Deal
ciab on 15/10/2022 - 19:11 rdmw.qld.gov.au (1649 clicks)
Last edited 15/10/2022 - 20:34 by 1 other user

You will get a $55 discount on your water bill if you are a household connected to the SEQ water grid, and you are directly billed for your water by:

Urban Utilities, serving the local government areas of
Brisbane City Council
Ipswich City Council
Lockyer Valley Regional Council
Somerset Regional Council
Scenic Rim Regional Council

Unitywater, serving the local government areas of
Moreton Bay Regional Council
Sunshine Coast Regional Council
Noosa Shire Council
Redland City Council
Logan City Council
Gold Coast City Council

Home & Garden Water Supply

Related Stores

Department of Regional Development, Manufacturing and Water, Queensland Government
Department of Regional Development, Manufacturing and Water, Queensland Government

closed Comments

  • Andy01 on 15/10/2022 - 19:17
    +17

    This is a good thing, but how is it a deal ? It is automatic, no-one has to do anything to claim it.

    • bdl on 15/10/2022 - 19:44
      +18

      Ozautobargain

    • Linrules1 on 15/10/2022 - 19:49
      +11

      Some ozbargainer can now spend $55 extra on something.

  • iNeedMoreMoney on 15/10/2022 - 19:40
    +2

    Thanks for your time typing it up anyway

  • Davbar24 on 15/10/2022 - 19:54
    +2

    Woohoo can reduce my autopay by $2 for the next 27.5 fortnights!

  • J6 on 15/10/2022 - 20:03
    +19

    "Your landlord receives the bill for the property. If your landlord is eligible for the discount and passes the cost of water on to you, they are encouraged to also pass on the discount."

    Sounds like a nice free $55 for my landlord then.

    • mun4 on 15/10/2022 - 20:08

      Your landlord pays for connection, sewage etc charges though.

      • Mattec078 on 15/10/2022 - 21:15
        +3

        Thats right… so no free money for alot of tenants i feel

        • mun4 on 16/10/2022 - 07:56
          +2

          That's right. For one, there's no good way to split it. If the gov really wanted tenants to receive the rebate, the amount could have come out as a discount on usage cost.

    • shutuptakemymoney101 on 16/10/2022 - 00:36
      -5

      Your Landlord will just put that $55 towards the increase he/she is now paying for insurance, interest rate rises, tradesman charges Et al.

      • J6 on 16/10/2022 - 07:49
        +2

        That's being covered by the increase I am now paying for my rent apparently haha.

        • tensionday on 16/10/2022 - 09:49
          +1

          Not a great time to be a landlord atm tbh, that rental increase will barely be touching increased interest rates given that most tenants can't afford the rents required to keep up with what would actually cover the interest rates

    • HelpMeiCantSee on 16/10/2022 - 08:46
      -3

      Why the attitude? You don’t own the property nor have to maintain it.

  • toasty on 15/10/2022 - 22:08
    +4

    I’m upvoting this even though I won’t directly benefit.

    I will however leverage my knowledge of this and other discounts when my landlord inevitably insists that the real estate agent increase our rent by another 18% (every six months).

  • ph81 on 15/10/2022 - 23:03
    +1

    As a renter I think this sucks.

    As an owner's… I think this is great for me.

    There's winners and losers in life.

    As sad as it is, life is a game. You're either one or the other.

    • Poor Ass on 15/10/2022 - 23:18
      +1

      Tie bet pays 8 to 1

    • Thaal Sinestro on 16/10/2022 - 00:35
      -7

      In Australia the only way to come out on top is to own property, unfortunately. Everything is rigged against the poor like us that cannot obtain home ownership. If you own a house, every year on average it increases by 10% in value. Free money without having to do a thing. $100,000 annual capital gain.

      • shutuptakemymoney101 on 16/10/2022 - 00:40
        -1

        A lot of property owners will be funding their own retirements, that means more pension money for you.

        • crayner on 16/10/2022 - 00:59
          -1

          That isn't how it works. If it was, we'd have less pension money thanks to the tax breaks given to investors.

      • tonka on 16/10/2022 - 01:19
        +15

        'without having to do a thing'………I worked damn hard and long hours to buy my house. If you don't have to do a thing, why don't you do it? Now the people in public housing on my street that sit around chit-chatting all day, they don't look real busy to me while I get ready for work before the break of day and get home well after dark. And the property prices have dropped 15% over the last 10 years where I am, plus there's rates and maintenance and interest to pay. And I have added pressure to make sure I keep that job because social security isn't gonna pay a mortgage. And I started out plenty poor but still found a way with hard work and compromises to make it happen, no help, no gov't subsidies.

        • Jessie Ryder on 16/10/2022 - 12:45
          -4

          Stop talking smack, there is no suburb in Australia that has gone backwards by 15% over the last 10 years.

          • tonka on 16/10/2022 - 15:58

            @Jessie Ryder: Guess you don't know much then. Check Liverpool units . Prices are down 25% from a peak 6-7 years ago. Markets had a downward adjustment several years ago with rest of Sydney, then oversupply, co-vid iso and reduction of immigration has stopped any recovery and kept them moving lower. You will also find there are places that have boomed and busted especially around regional areas when there was shortage of mining accommodation. Feel free to check this easily obtained info before you talk any more smack.

            • Jessie Ryder on 16/10/2022 - 16:24

              @tonka: You said house not units, show me a house that had give backwards 15% over the last 10 years

              • tonka on 16/10/2022 - 20:00

                @Jessie Ryder: And you said suburb. I also said property where I am now. You assume it's the same house. And no I really don't care enough about your opinion to spend my time proving you wrong a second time. It certainly would be easy to do when places have been smashed by record fire and flood the last few years. I also already gave you the example of the mining housing shortage that caused a bubble that hasn't recovered. I'm not writing a personal news story for you which you'll just try and get me to 'prove' something else. Get real.

                • Jessie Ryder on 16/10/2022 - 20:24

                  @tonka: I feel sorry for your loss.
                  15% must hurt.

                  • tonka on 16/10/2022 - 21:58

                    @Jessie Ryder: Not really. It's not my main investment and others have done very well. I am simply using to make a point that there are many more nuances to the real estate market than what you generally learn at the pub or from the average anti landlord rumblings.

      • HelpMeiCantSee on 16/10/2022 - 08:52
        +4

        For speculators only. I own my home. I give zero shits if it’s worth $1 or $10million. It’s the roof above my head and stability for my kids.

        Being worth something on paper makes zero material difference.

        And “not doing a thing” aside from the many many many hours and thousands of $ keeping it in good condition. Not to mention insurances etc.

        Come to think of it, why did I have to buy my house? Why wasn’t I just given a waterfront house? Why do I have to work? That’s so unfair.

        • Kangal on 16/10/2022 - 14:45

          This is the way.
          Making a base necessity like housing, into a for-profit market is a recipe for disaster. Imagine if we did that for water utility, and the price of a glass of water went to $1. Don't say it cannot happen, because it certainly has for certain cities/countries.

          For many things, competition and open market is a good thing. But for others, it should be closed, regulated, and aimed for people and not profit.

    • shutuptakemymoney101 on 16/10/2022 - 00:39
      +2

      There are no free lunches, anything 'free' from the government will be paid for by all taxpayers somehow.

  • M00Cow on 15/10/2022 - 23:07
    +3

    It's because they decided to release water from some dams in preparation for that pesky Victorian rain. Bloody Victorians can keep their weather,

    Shut the borders!!!

  • cablecol on 15/10/2022 - 23:08

    Will Lot owners in a complex be eligible?

  • tonka on 15/10/2022 - 23:59

    'Each eligible household will get the $55 discount whether they use extra water or not.' I don't understand how this achieves any objective though. They were asking people to use extra water, but that will still cost extra money if I get the saving regardless.

    • M00Cow on 16/10/2022 - 00:41
      +2

      It's cost recovery, they want people to use water to pay for the $55.

    • mun4 on 16/10/2022 - 07:50

      I don't see why everyone keeps saying they want us to use more water by handing out $55. It's just that water is less of a scarce resource right now.

  • corrocoat on 16/10/2022 - 07:27

    Wivenhoe dam is at 80% and caused the last 2 floods in Brissy due to poor management….giving us $55 to get rid of water they cannot manage wisely.

    • Kangal on 16/10/2022 - 14:47

      They rather risk a flood than risk drought ?

      • Russ on 18/10/2022 - 00:45
        +1

        They have to weigh up the overall harm of each.

        Flood only affects a relatively small percentage of the population. In a place like Brisbane, it's an inconvenience to many, a problem for some, and a disaster for maybe 1%.

        Not having enough water affects a much higher percentage of the population. It closes businesses that are water-intensive, and kills farm crops due to lack of irrigation. And can even close down some electricity generation plants, due to insufficient cooling water.

    • Russ on 18/10/2022 - 00:57

      Wivenhoe dam … caused the last 2 floods in Brissy due to poor management

      Well, I think it wasn't so much the people managing the dam, it was the politicians who gave them two conflicting requirements. One was to prevent flooding, the other was to prevent drought.

      What we actually need to do, is not have cities in flood plains. When all our big cities were founded, the main form of transport was by ship, and we didn't have the capability to pipe water long distances. Hence cities were typically founded on rivers, and in the most fertile bits of land - the flood plain. If we were starting again, it would be a good idea to put cities on high, infertile ground. But there's no practical way to change to that system now, at least not for the vast majority of cities.

  • philldo on 18/10/2022 - 13:32

    If anyone else was confused like me when I just got my new bill today, seems it will be applied sometime between now and March 2023:

    Eligible households will receive the discount before March 2023

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join