San Juan businessman sues WASA over sewage backup

A business owner in Petit Bourg, San Juan, has taken legal action against the Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA) after he had to close for 45 days because of a sewage backup.

Matthew Edwards, trading as Sure Bros Enterprises, alleges negligence by the Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA) led to significant financial losses and property damage.

Justice Frank Seepersad is expected to give his ruling on March 6.

Edwards and WASA’s sewer systems manager Terron Cobham testified at the trial on February 25.

Edwards’s lawsuit stems from an issue on October 27, 2021, when he noticed water flooding his business at No. 41 Eastern Main Road.

What initially appeared to be a minor plumbing issue quickly escalated as sewage began gushing from the toilet, spreading throughout the store and damaging electronics, gaming consoles and other merchandise.

The overflow persisted despite efforts to contain the flooding, including manually plunging the toilet and channelling water away from products.

Edwards and his landlord later discovered the problem stemmed from a damaged main underground pipeline outside the premises.

They reported the issue to WASA’s office in St Joseph on October 28, 2021 and were told a team would be dispatched within three days, but no one arrived. Over the following weeks, sewage continued to flood the premises, and Edwards had to close his business indefinitely.

Edwards said he made 42 phone calls to WASA between November 3 and November 5, 2021,but with no response.

On November 7, 2021, WASA’s sewer systems manager visited the site, and Edwards claimed he confirmed the issue was with the main, but said the issue was “up to management.”

By November 24, 2021, WASA workers tried to address the issue by pouring dirt into a sinkhole in front of the business. However, this made the situation worse, making sewage flow onto the main road and creating an even stronger stench.

After nearly six weeks of complaints, a repair team finally arrived on December 10, 2021, and fixed the damaged pipeline. The business was able to reopen the following day, though the road outside remained dug up for another month before being properly paved.

Owing to the prolonged closure, Edwards claims to have lost approximately $19,890. Additionally, numerous items in his store were damaged by sewage exposure, resulting in further financial strain.

In December 2022, Edwards contacted WASA’s legal department, providing documentation of his losses and seeking $75,000 in compensation.

His lawsuit said he received no response.

His attorneys served a pre-action protocol letter in June 2023, but WASA only acknowledged it and is yet to respond or offer a settlement.

Edwards’s lawsuit asserts WASA failed in its statutory duty under the Water and Sewerage Act, which mandates the proper maintenance of sewerage infrastructure. Edwards’s lawsuit accused WASA of failing to inspect and maintain the underground pipeline, delaying in its response to his multiple complaints and taking inadequate measures.

In its defence, WASA said there was an overflow of sewage at the premises on October 27, 2021. It admitted a report was made the next day and on November 7, its sewer systems management visited. A crew then used a Vactor (a sewer cleaner) to rod and clear the sewer main on November 24.

WASA’s defence said a mud-like substance emanated from the main, indicating a suspected collapse. A crew then filled a sinkhole on the road with mud. On December 2, WASA said an attempt was made to remedy the sewage flow, but was unsuccessful because of a lack of equipment.

By December 10, WASA repaired a damaged sewer connection from the premises to its sewerage infrastructure along the EMR. The authority admitted the overflow was caused by a collapse of its sewer infrastructure caused by age.

WASA’s defence attorney denied the authority was negligent, insisting it has a proper system for maintaining underground pipelines and detect failures and faults in its underground lines.

He also said the overflow occurred not because of a failure to maintain the pipeline, but because of the age of the infrastructure along the EMR. He also insisted that WASA did repairs in a reasonable time as its capacity and resources allowed.

Attorneys Javier Forrester and Kern Edwards of the Legal Aid and Advisory Authority represented Edwards. Kirk Bengochea represented WASA.