WASA to compensate Manzanilla couple after home damaged by leaks

A High Court judge has ordered the Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA) to compensate a Manzanilla couple for damage to their property caused by a leaking pipe.

The authority was ordered to pay $507,000 to Steve and Arlene Papit with 2.5 per cent interest, per annum, from November 4, 2019 – when they filed their lawsuit – to October 29, 2024, when Justice Ricky Rahim delivered his ruling.

Rahim also rejected WASA’s submission that the couple should get no more than $5,000 if it was found liable for negligence.

“Collapse of the claimants’ home is imminent,” he quoted from an engineer’s report.

In their lawsuit, the couple complained that repeated delays in repairing a leaking six-inch pipeline in front of their home caused their house to shift, its cesspit to cave in and part of the yard to crash into the front door. The property is downhill from the Manzanilla North Road.

The Papits said the leaks damaged the foundation of their house so it still floods and spring water seeps into the living room.

In its defence, WASA denied liability for negligence, claiming all reported leaks were promptly repaired. It also maintained environmental conditions and construction deficiencies were the true causes of the property damage.

The authority said infrastructure was there to turn off the water supply to each leaking line to minimise water loss and damage before repairs.

The authority maintained the damage to the Papits' house was not caused by its negligence, but the house was in an area prone to heavy rainfall, rapid soil erosion and flooding.

WASA said the couple failed to protect their house from the effects of living in such an area, by building an appropriate retaining wall and drainage systems, or adhere to approved building plans. It also alleged it received only one report of a leak.

Steve and Arlene Papit gave evidence and called a building contractor, who testified that the couple’s natural terrain was compromised by something other than rainwater flow patterns. He concluded that a leaking pipe was the initial source of the water destruction.

He suggested rebuilding the house, elevated off the ground, for $507,000 – the amount the court ordered.

WASA called three witnesses to support its case, including an engineer for the North-East region.

In his ruling, Rahim said it was reasonably foreseeable that a six-inch main, carrying 200 gallons of water per hour, would damage properties in line with it if there was a leak, particularly to a property lower than the road like the Papits’.

While the judge found the couple’s pleaded case was extremely poor, and he had to do the best he could by drawing references from the evidence about the leaks, he found WASA had breached its duty. He found WASA took more than a reasonable time to repair the first leak, which did not hold, resulting in the second leak.

Rahim also noted that the evidence showed the reporting system for leaks was wholly “dependant on a human being making an entry of that report into a database.

“It follows that if an entry is not made, there is literally no record of the report.”

Attorney Robert Boodoosingh represented the couple. Sashi Indarsingh and Sheen Ragoobar-Ferreira represented WASA.