Court Overturns Ruling in Water Consumption Dispute

A recent legal battle concerning an alleged excessive water consumption has taken a significant turn. Josef Preßlmayer, an 82-year-old resident of Steinbach in the municipality of Brand-Nagelberg, was reported to have consumed over five million liters of water within a single year -- a figure that is astonishingly higher than the average usage for private households. After an initial setback at the Lower Austrian Administrative Court, where he contested a bill exceeding 10,000 euros, Preßlmayer found more success at the Austrian Supreme Administrative Court in Vienna.

The Supreme Court annulled the previous verdict due to procedural deficiencies, allowing Preßlmayer to contest the findings further. He has also filed a complaint regarding alleged abuse of office against the local mayor. The case has garnered considerable media attention across the country since it first emerged in February.

The key issue before the Supreme Court was not the astounding volume of water claimed to have been used, but rather the fairness of the process that led to the earlier decision. Preßlmayer asserts that the water meter was malfunctioning at the time of the readings. He reported that the meter continued to record usage even when all taps were turned off, only stopping when he switched the water supply valve.

Experts have since confirmed that all piping in Preßlmayer's home is in good condition. The court noted that sufficient opportunity for Preßlmayer to contest a report provided by the municipality regarding the water meter's accuracy was not granted, which is a violation of his rights. The municipality had submitted a report from the Federal Office for the Regulation of Weights and Measures, asserting that the water meter was functioning properly.

In a further complication, Preßlmayer claims that he did not receive the necessary reports from the municipality in a timely manner, leading him to file a complaint against Mayor Georg Einzinger for abuse of office. The mayor stated that he had not yet been informed about the complaint and could not comment on it at this time. However, he emphasized that the Supreme Court's review did not involve the actual water consumption figures, but rather the procedural aspects at the lower court level.

Einzinger expressed confidence in the integrity of the meter's report and asserted that there was no gross misconduct on his part. He mentioned that the report had been sent to the property owner and the court well before the case reached the Supreme Court. However, Preßlmayer had transferred ownership of the property to another party through a gift deed with a lifetime right of residence prior to the case.

The municipality is now facing financial repercussions due to the legal proceedings, having to reimburse Preßlmayer over 1,300 euros for incurred costs, with the overall legal expenses surpassing the initial disputed amount of 10,000 euros. Einzinger acknowledged the mounting legal costs for the municipality and reiterated that any reduction in the unusually high water bill was not feasible, as the criteria for such assistance were not met.