Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
Investigatesmuddied watersTHOUSANDS OF PEOPLE are missing out on compensation from Uisce Éireann by complaining to their public representatives rather than the company itself.
New figures show there were just 166 complaints made by individuals to Uisce Éireann in the first half of 2024 – but in the same period, TDs and councillors raised almost 8,500 issues from constituents with the company, bypassing the compensation process.
Customers can only apply for a payout if they have complained directly to the company.
Uisce Éireann - formerly known as Irish Water – initially refused a request from The Journal Investigates under the Freedom of Information Act asking how many customers had received compensation.
The state-owned company argued that it “would not be in the public interest” for the figures to be reported, as it could lead to an “increase in the number of claims made”.
After being challenged on this by our reporter, it provided the figures.
If the number of people who complained to their public representatives instead complained to Uisce Éireann, the company could end up paying out tens or even hundreds of thousands more every year.
While the number of payouts has almost doubled in the last two years, the figures remain low: there were just over 160 payouts for the whole of 2024, totalling just €4,895 in compensation.
Customers who complain to Uisce Éireann and do not get a response within 5 working days with a plan to solve the problem, or do not get an update after 10 days – are entitled to a €30 payout – but many don’t know that.
The complaints section of the Uisce Éireann website does not mention that compensation is available to people who have to wait too long for their issue to be addressed. Instead, it is buried in a link on the page.
Additionally, if someone makes a claim and Uisce Éireann doesn’t send them the €30 within 30 working days, they’re entitled to an additional €15.
The number of people complaining to the company and to public representatives shows the scale of water problems in the country – and issues in how the complaints are being dealt with.
€30 is an insult really when you have to live with bad water quality. Even the €100 they sent me was an insult.
Rebecca*, who lives in Leinster, had significant issues with the water in her home for three years before it was resolved.
She says it’s not about the money, but rather how Uisce Éireann treats its customers.
The water never ran clear from the time she moved in, in 2021. “So many white items were discoloured in the washing machine, some of them nearly turned orange.”
She estimates that she sent “hundreds” of emails to Uisce Éireann in that time. They assured her they were taking it seriously and would fix the problem. She was not aware that there was compensation available.
Rebecca enlisted the help of a local councillor. Eventually, she says, Uisce Éireann stopped responding to her and would only respond to the councillor.
“You were never given a time frame or even a ballpark of when any work was going to take place,” she told The Journal Investigates.
“I thought that this was us forever. I was even thinking, are we just gonna have to sell the house and move out? Because you can’t go on with water like this. It’s just utter madness.”
The company randomly sent her €100 for the inconvenience – more than the usual €30 payout – but by that time she had spent over €500 on filters and replacing parts, as well as €215 on getting her water tested.
“It’s really, really bad customer service for a company that is state funded. It’s not on.”
In a statement, Uisce Éireann cited the Commission for Regulation of Utilities’s (CRU) 2022 report which said the percentage of complaints resolved within five working days was 98%. It says it’s enhanced the complaints process since then. The 2023/24 figures have not yet been approved for publishing by the regulator.
Uisce Éireann also said it established a free text-based outage notification service which provides water supply information to customers who sign up.
In data provided to The Journal Investigates by Uisce Éireann, of the 166 complaints received in the first half of 2024, 51% of people were satisfied with the outcome, while 42% were not. The rest of the complaints made between January and June 2024 are either still in progress or were resolved through “good will”.
Some 39 complaints were from customers who reported becoming ill from consuming their water. In a statement, Uisce Éireann said this “does not represent actual proven illnesses caused by drinking water”.
Of the remainder, 66 complaints were related to outages and all others were to do with water quality, including discolouration.
Nearly one third of all complaints submitted to Uisce Éireann by individuals were from Cork, and around 10% of emails from Oireachtas members come from representatives of the county.
Trade union Unite recently sent water samples from Cork City and surrounding areas to a HSE laboratory for testing.
They say the tests showed excessive levels of manganese at over 300 μg/l and iron at over 600 μg/l. The laboratory said that “water with these levels of iron and manganese is not suitable for human consumption” and said that “treatment is recommended”.
John Ó Ríordáin, who lives in Ballyvolane in Cork City, has had dirty water at least once per week since his area became connected to the city’s water supply in 2022. He said he’s logged around 30 complaints, but each time he receives one of two responses “word for word”.
“I’d much prefer if someone just came straight out and said the pipes are fucked and will be for the next eight years until we can replace them,” Ó Ríordáin said.
“At least then I would know if I need to invest in higher quality filters.”
Ó Ríordáin also says he can’t run the dishwasher or washing machine at the same time as the shower, or the water will go brown.
He has not received a payout, and was not aware of the compensation scheme.
In Cork, there are extensive problems with the water pipes, and it’s understood that an overhaul of the system is what’s needed to permanently improve water quality. Uisce Éireann has recently flushed the pipes, but some say it’s made little difference
Ó Ríordáin is considering buying a €400 reverse osmosis filter. He says that while he doesn’t expect Uisce Éireann to pay for it, he thinks a government fund, similar to grants for energy efficient home upgrades, should be established for people living in areas with poor water quality.
Mattie McGrath TD, who sent the most emails of any Oireachtas member to Uisce Éireann last year, said some of his constituents in Tipperary South go “weeks” at a time without clean water, but dealing with Uisce Éireann is “very frustrating”. “You’ll get a response, but it’s just useless.”
He says he believed he had arranged a meeting with a representative from Uisce Éireann at one point, but right before it they “went off the radar” and “wouldn’t answer the phones”.
“You can’t deal with them.”
Despite the large volume of complaints they are making, representatives at a local and national level feel they are not being heard.
In Cork City, the council has requested a meeting with Uisce Éireann’s CEO Niall Gleeson multiple times, but he has repeatedly refused.
In a response to the council, seen by The Journal Investigates, Uisce Éireann said it was “not in a position” to send any representative to a meeting.
Councillor Shane O’Callaghan says it shows “a total lack of respect”.
O’Callaghan said he doesn’t understand why people like the CEO of the National Transport Authority and the Garda Commissioner will come before the council “no problem” but the head of Uisce Éireann won’t.
“They should be accountable to the people of Cork and the people of Ireland,” he told The Journal Investigates.
IRISH WATER UPDATE: Last September, Cork City Council passed my motion and lodged a formal complaint with the Commission for the Regulation of Utilities (CRU) regarding the consistent failure by the management of Uisce Éireann to tackle the persistent problems of water… pic.twitter.com/jM4pWjCW3j
— Shane O'Callaghan (@CllrShaneOC) February 28, 2025
Cork City Council made a complaint to the CRU about Uisce Éireann’s unwillingness to cooperate. In its response, the CRU said the attendance of Uisce Éireann representatives at council meetings is not a matter for the CRU, but it did note five briefings Uisce Éireann held for Oireachtas and council members in 2024.
Uisce Éireann said: “Recognising the significance of the issue of water quality in Cork City to elected representatives, Uisce Éireann commenced a series of dedicated briefings last year and have held a number of engagements to date that have been attended by senior management from Uisce Éireann.”
It was to meet with the council at the end of February, but this was postponed for a month, as Uisce Éireann now says it wants to meet first with the council executive only.
If your water supply has been disrupted and you weren’t given a plan within the timeframe, you can make a compensation claim by emailing customerservice@water.ie
And let us know how you got on by writing to investigates@thejournal.ie
*Name has been changed
Reporter: Mairead Maguire • Investigation Editor: Christine Bohan • The Journal Investigates Editor: Maria Delaney • Main Image Design: Lorcan O’Reilly • Video: Nicky Ryan
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The biggest trouble with this working paper is that it’s a classic case of nuanced academia meets tabloid headlines.
In this case, tabloid Irish Times coverage
Again… What short term…
My partner works… And makes just to much many to avail of family income supplement school allowances etc…. I need 33k to break even on childcare commute clothing cost when going to work.
We are taxed up to the hilt….
One of us at home… The other making a bit less would give us a higher expendable income and more time with our kids.
Thing is psychological we need work. So now for 100 a month extra we hardly see our kids
This report played right into the Krugman’s fallacy. People who work pay taxes, buy stuff (like child care) and generally support the employment of others. If more people go on the dole that has a strong negative feedback effect on the economy and their neighbors. Which is why, of course, austerity fails in a depression and stimulus works.
Clearly there is nothing wrong with the paper which can be read on the Irish Times, instead what we have is political interference, the powers that be in the ESRI blocking Tol’s research and that suggests the ESRI are not an independent institution. Actually what conclusions can be drawn from this research is how hard it is for low earners to survive in this country, with 7000 to 9000 costs just clocked up yearly form actually going to work. It also makes a laugh of the governments jobsbridge scheme, which is actually costing those with least income in our society to take up these shtty dead-end “internships” because the government has done nothing about job creation.
There is an important point here about the ubiquity of ecomonic commentators in Ireland at the current time. People seem to forget (and some economists don’t seem to realise) that life and society is much more complex than that which can be measured in pure economic terms. This is the same logic that looks at the value of culture only in terms of what it can pull in in hard tourist dollars.
I felt some sympathy (but not too much!) for Moore McDowell on a recent Frontline debate when he was asked to comment on the economics of Arts funding in Ireland. His opinion was undermined before he opened his mouth by PK’s reference to Oscar Wilde’s aphorism about knowing the price of everything but the value of nothing and Michael Colgan was able to seize on this in his criticism of the narrow focus of economics.
The ESRI, as its name suggests, has a remit beyond pure economics but it appears that this working paper leaned too heavily on that particular field of analysis.
Does anyone know the purpose of the ERSI?
And assuming it delivers on that purpose is it more important to our society than many of the services that have been slashed?
Just askin’
Thanks Brendan – I asked for that, so let me put the question a different way….
How would Irish society be worse off if the ERSI didn’t exist?
No problem Paul :)
Well for a start we wouldn’t have any of the following publications: http://www.esri.ie/publications/latest_publications/
ERSI reports are used to develop policy in relation to a wide range of areas. If there was no ERSI, there wouldn’t be the research, so there wouldn’t be any information to work off. So instead of the government of the day making crazed decisions based on the best possible evidence, they’d be making crazed decisions on no evidence at all.
At 12.8 million in 2010 that information comes relatively cheaply, particularly if you consider that in the same year we spent €1.354 Billion on Defence.
Nat,
Just to clear something up – the word ‘unprecedented’ was used by the ESRI themselves in their statement last night, which is why we in The Irish Times used it. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0612/breaking49.html
In the light of this, perhaps you might want to rephrase your introductory comments?
Regards,
Kilian
I’d pay a few pennies to see the opening comment changed to “we checked to see if it was in fact ‘unprecedented’, which the Irish Times didn’t do.”
Kilian,
Fair enough. I’ve changed the original post to reflect this.
http://www.progressive-economy.ie/2012/06/costs-of-working-in-ireland.html
Regards,
Nat
where is my comment
you are now censoring comments
None of your comments have been deleted from this piece Seamus. Was it on one of the other articles about Richard Tol, perhaps?
Well, back for a second small bite, after reading the paper, these and other posts and comments, it is clear that the paper is assigning costs for short term unemployment in a booming economy, while the inference, which the authors have not denied is for long term unemployment, e.g. people who stop working in order to take advantage of the short term differential.
According to Tol himself the “takeaway” food figure is overall spend on convenience food, NOT just lunch money. I suspect the clothing figure of 25 a week is also overall spend and not just for work. Correcting that would make a big difference to the results.
Well Christine another comment has not gone up.???.
There’s no record in the system of you leaving any other comments on this piece (besides the three that have already appeared here) so I’m going to pass this on to our tech team and see what the issue is. None of your comments have been removed by anyone here, just for the record. In the meantime, it could be worth clearing your cache and trying to post again.
Honestly, Christine this has never happened before, two comments in relation to the above article were not posted.
Have you tried turning it off an on again, Seamus?:)
have your say