Residents claim a council oversight in the 1970s could leave them with a sewage bill for hundreds of pounds.
In March last year, residents of Mill Lane in East Hendred received a letter from the Vale of White Horse District Council, stating that they had not been paying for sewage disposal.
The letter also contained a demand for £1,500 -- £250 per year, back-dated for six years.
The residents claim that in the past six years they have been paying an extra £103.56 per year to Thames Water for full sewage disposal, on top of the normal council tax bills.
In September, the council reduced the charge to £62 a year -- a total of £372 over six years. But residents claim that this still leaves them paying twice for one service.
The problem dates back to the mid 1970s, when the council transferred all the sewage infrastructure, including pipes, pumping stations and treatment plants, to the new sewage authority, Thames Water.
But the Mill Lane pumping station, which takes waste from a sewer serving the residents' properties into the main sewer, was not transferred.
Since the transfer, residents have been paying Thames Water for a full sewage disposal service.
In 1995, the council attempted to transfer the pumping station to Thames Water, but the company refused to accept it.
Pat Rosum, representing the residents of Mill Lane, said: "These charges are effectively for the upkeep of the pumping station although the council has described them as sewage disposal charges.
"The council were inefficient in transferring the pumping station to Thames Water and because they have not maintained it to the proper standards, Thames Water are now reluctant to take it on.
"It is wrong that the residents of Mill Lane should be expected to pay to cover the Vale's incompetence."
A council statement said: "The residents are in an unusual position of receiving a service from two separate providers. This was recognised by the council on September 27, 2001, when it agreed a 40 per cent reduction in the standard charge.
"Thames Water withdrew from negotiations to transfer the facilities and the council concluded that for the foreseeable future it would need to maintain the service and thereafter resolved to levy the appropriate charges for services being provided."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article