For nearly a week, the National Water and Sewerage Corporation (NWSC) has found itself caught between a rock and a hard place, with several customers accusing the utility of issuing estimated water bills and charging them for water they either never received or never used.
It began as a complaint by activist Ivan Kutegyeka, popularly known on X as Omupakasi, but later evolved into a wider public outcry, with many others sharing similar experiences and demanding a public explanation from the state-owned water utility.
Kutegyeka’s complaint stemmed from, according to him, an unfair bill of over UGX 100,000 that accumulated while his home in Bweyogerere allegedly had no water connection for nearly four months after pipes supplying his house were removed during upgrade works on a neighbour’s connection.
Omupakasi says he was shocked to learn that NWSC had continued billing him throughout the period and was threatening to disconnect him over the outstanding balance.
“The funny part is that they had been billing me every month even when the pipes had been removed,” he posted on X, further claiming that when he contacted NWSC, he was informed that meter readings had continued to be taken during the period in question.
The allegations quickly gained traction online, attracting responses from NWSC and triggering complaints from other customers who claimed to have suffered similar experiences.
Throughout the exchanges, NWSC repeatedly asked Kutegyeka and other complainants to provide their account details and encouraged further engagement through private channels so that the matter could be investigated and resolved, a response many seemed not satisfied with.
Instead, they began questioning the broader issue of estimated billing and how bills are generated whenever meter readers fail to physically access customer premises.
One customer challenged the utility to publicly explain the basis upon which such bills are calculated and why complaints about estimated charges continue to emerge from different parts of the country.
Soon, more testimonies started pouring in.
Muyanja Umal from Kyengera claimed his household spent an entire month without water but later received a bill that was significantly higher than usual.
“We spent a month without water but the bill came double what we always pay,” he wrote. Tina Ssenabulya, also from Kyengera, said she had previously believed she was alone until she saw dozens of people narrating similar experiences online.
“I was thinking it was me alone. Many months with no water and I am billed over Shs100,000,” she said.
The debate took a new turn when Kutegyeka later revealed that NWSC had invited him for a meeting to discuss and resolve his complaint.
While some viewed the development as a victory for citizen activism, many other customers reacted differently.
Several accused the utility of focusing on silencing a high-profile critic while failing to address what they believe is a widespread problem affecting thousands of consumers.
Others questioned whether only customers with large social media followings would receive prompt attention while ordinary Ugandans continue struggling with disputed bills.
They are now demanding answers on how estimated bills are generated, how many customers are affected, and what measures exist to protect consumers from being charged for water they never consumed.
Many customers are insisting that resolving only Kutegyeka’s complaint will not be enough. They want a public explanation and a solution that addresses the concerns of all affected consumers, not just the loudest voices on social media.
