See the reviews of client for this website
Name of client: Nicholas Dobson
Carl Ingram GDPR BRECH dangerous man.
Name of client: Thomas Eastwood
When this quango fails it takes…
When this quango fails it takes…
When this quango it takes…
When that quango fails it takes others to get possitive action taken against water companies.
Last week, a landmark new law came into effect that could see water company bosses face up to two years in prison for illegal sewage spills. [1] After years of tireless campaigning by 38 Degrees supporters – alongside many others – this is a major step forward in tackling the sewage scandal.
You should feel incredibly proud of the part you’ve played in making this happen.
But we know this new law alone won’t fix everything wrong with the water system.
That’s why, last week, more than 28,000 of us gave feedback to the Government’s big water consultation. In partnership with Surfers Against Sewage, we submitted evidence to the Independent Water Commission – laying bare the overwhelming public dissatisfaction with the state of our water industry. [2] Our message was clear: the system is broken, and we need sweeping reforms that put people and the planet before profit.
And we didn’t stop there.
Because decades of privatisation have failed both us and the environment, Clive Lewis MP – supported by 38 Degrees and Compass – handed in our petition, backed by over 113,000 of us, calling for public ownership of water to be put back on the table. [3]
All of this proves that together, we are building real momentum for change. There’s still a long way to go to clean up our rivers and seas and build a better water system that works for everyone – but thanks to your support, we’re heading in the right direction.
Name of client: mike
Property never been flooded but according to them it’s high risk!
Would have been zero, but for the software wouldn’t allow it. These clowns have my property as a hihh flood risk on their confusing website. Many houses are in a flood plain according to their data, which is not true. My property is not and has never been flooded and I’m nowhere near any water. After 6 months of arguing they agreed their website is wrong but wouldn’t be able to update their website due to cost. Instead they sent me a letter telling any interested parties my property was NOT in a flood plain. But 3 mortgage companies use the data from the EA so I was turned down by all three. Terrible experience and many other householders will suffer same fate, so check your household now. You will be shocked!
Name of client: Peter
Not fit for purpose..
.. and hasn’t been for many years. Another totally unaccountable, ineffective, inefficient public sector body. Now exposed for what they are by the water company scandal. Needs a total, top-down reorganisation.
Name of client: KATHRYN
Environment Agency employees Steve and…
Environment Agency employees Steve and Robert at Barmby barrage were extremely helpful knowledgeable and the facilities at and around the mooring at Barmby on the Marsh were immaculate and exceptional.
Name of client: Rex Anderson
Environment Agency polluting our country
The Environment Agency who has presided over 90% of our waterways becoming toxic and filled with sewage whilst wasting billions of pounds a year on god knows what, because they definitely aren’t spending it on saving our environment…
Name of client: John
Sewerage’AND Water/flooding in garden…
Sewerage’AND Water/flooding in garden rang,emailed no one at the Environmental agency gives a monkeys. This stuffs going into our water table and all they do is give you a refs number and you never hear another thing. Not fit for purpose.
Name of client: CP
Well Done
We live in Mulbarton, Norfolk. Today on our usual walk we met Alex and his crew clearing a ditch in the village which was well overgrown. They were doing a fantastic job in good humour. We had a pleasant chat with them.
There are several ditches in the area here that need cleaning out although we are not sure who they belong too. However very pleased to see this work being done. Thank you.
Name of client: marc o’regan
hey CEO …
I’m sure the CEO is on a great salary and pension. And gives not a ppoo for the stakeholders.
Name of client: Steve S
Very rude customer service
Telephoned over concerns about a new development were a neighbour is planning to dump sewage to a ‘drainage field’. Customer service representative would not answer any questions including how these decisions were made or details on the legality of such systems. He was so rude and just remained silent over the phone. I was obviously spoiling his quite day, or maybe he was working from home and still in bed! My property is already in a zone 3 flood zone (something else the enviroment agency can’t explain, even when I have never been flooded). What use is a government dept for the environment when they can’t answer these issues?
Name of client: Joseph Mehers
John Curtin
John Curtin. I have e mailed you many times regarding under reporting from water companies and you have never replied. A near 100% negative feedback sums up everything. Get a grip use the powers you have and feel the collar of these water companies. All the law is there for you to use, yet you choose not to use it. Shame on you and your department, I stand with the poor souls in this platform who have been let down by your week attitude to the environment.
Name of client: RichieK
Useless company allowing rivers to be…
Useless company allowing rivers to be polluted by sewage companies.
Name of client: Zsk Sports
UK Environment agency r beggars F U 😂
Name of client: KN
Pathetic oversight of Water Companies
Complete lack of proper oversight of Water companies and sewage discharge. (ie. numerous sewage discharge on dry days (along with other days). Relies on companies self-monitoring sewage discharge. Lack of proper regulation and lack of large regular fines and penalties for ALL offenders. (Fines and increased water bills should not be past on to customers – it’s a monopoly) Too little, too late ! Shameful. Agency needs complete shakeup. Theresa Coffee does not help defending it, with poor excuses. Ultimately, Government’s continuing failures to oversee Environment Agency.
Name of client: Misinformed
You queue for years – literally
A simple application for a variation to a permit was waiting in a queue for 17 months… because they have long queues! Now I’m in a different queue waiting for them to make a refund for the 17 months they kept charging whilst they pondered the queue. Total shambles. Also they put up so many barriers to applying for any change. If you have to deal with them, brace yourself, dig in, adopt terrier mode, and be prepared to wait for years… literally.
Name of client: Ryan Drew
Stopped supplying fishing licence at…
Stopped supplying fishing licence at post office. Now online so stopping people’s choices to make CASH payments or a place to pay it other than online 😡😡😡
Name of client: James William Godwin
Asked for advice about making a non…
Asked for advice about making a non compliant septic tank comply with the new 2020 general binding rules to be told that ‘We don’t arbitrate neighbour disputes’.
Zero advice offered and very poor quality response.
Name of client: Jon Purslow
Kendal mature Riverside trees
The Environment Agency have chopped down all the mature Riverside trees in Kendal. Thanks EA you have turned out beautiful river into an LA storm drain. EA destroyer of towns countryside and wildlife.Scumbags
Name of client: Tony Dellaway
Don’t like doing refunds just give you the brush off
Bought my rod license for the year but did not realise I already had one so called them up and a lady said no problem send it back with a letter and you will get it refunded.
I must say every person I have spoken to have been polite but I have called four times know and still no refund they say they requested it on the 13th June but it’s a finance department that dose the transaction.and not them I sent the license back well before that.
I have raised a complaint and was put in touch with a lady who said she would chase it up only to get a email saying she can’t get hold of the rod license department so I have just been given the brush off so I am out £45. They take money like lighting but don’t refund total waste of time
Name of client: Philip Jinman
Laurence Ralph and David Free from…
Laurence Ralph and David Free from Essex Environment Agency do not answer emails. Still awaiting reply from Simon Hawkins east anglian manager. Got a half reply today did not answer half the points made. No wonder the environment agency gets bad trustpilot reviews. Took 10 days to say the same again without telling me why Laurence Ralph and David Free did not answer emails. There customer commitment is not worth the paper it is printed on. As you can see 91% bad trustpilot reviews. Referred me to LGSCO who have 99% bad trustpilot reviews.
16.03.2022 Just chased up third go at a complaint. Customer commitment not worth the paper it is written on. Environment Agency not fit for purpose.
18.3.2022 Simon Hawkins has now refused to answer questions and took 20 days to refer you to LGSCO which has a 99% bad trustpilot reviews. Which is worse than the 91% bad trustpilot reviews for the environmental agency, quangos need sorting out.
(*) All reviews above are from Trustpilot
Our assessment after analyzing reviews
Below are the analyze and conclusion of us about above reviews
The reviews presented paint a largely negative picture of the Environment Agency. Let’s break down the sentiment and potential legitimacy of each review:
**Review 1: Nicholas Dobson – “Carl Ingram GDPR BRECH dangerous man.”**
This review is vague and lacks specific details about the agency’s services or performance. It appears to be a personal attack against an individual, “Carl Ingram,” and mentions GDPR, suggesting a data privacy concern. However, without more context, it’s difficult to determine its relevance to the overall legitimacy or scam status of the Environment Agency itself. The strong language (“dangerous man”) raises a red flag, making it potentially less reliable as a genuine review of the agency’s services.
**Review 2: Thomas Eastwood – “When this quango fails it takes…”**
This review is quite lengthy and delves into the issue of water companies, sewage spills, and the Environment Agency’s role in overseeing them. It highlights public dissatisfaction with the water industry and calls for reforms. While it doesn’t explicitly accuse the agency of being a “scam,” it strongly criticizes its effectiveness and accountability (“When this quango fails it takes…”). The review references specific campaigns and petitions, adding credibility to its claims. It suggests the agency is failing in its duties.
**Review 3: mike – “Property never been flooded but according to them it’s high risk!”**
This review presents a specific complaint about inaccurate flood risk data provided by the Environment Agency. The reviewer claims their property has never been flooded and is not near water, yet the agency’s website designates it as a high flood risk. The negative impact is that mortgage companies denied loans based on this inaccurate information. The reviewer is very dissatisfied and highlights potential widespread issues with the accuracy of the agency’s data. This review points towards potential issues with data accuracy and its real-world consequences.
**Review 4: Peter – “Not fit for purpose..”**
This review is a concise and scathing indictment of the Environment Agency, labeling it as “totally unaccountable, ineffective, inefficient.” It ties the agency’s failures to the water company scandal and calls for a complete overhaul. The language is strong and critical, suggesting deep dissatisfaction with the agency’s performance and oversight capabilities.
**Review 5: KATHRYN – “Environment Agency employees Steve and…”**
This is the only positive review in the provided set. It praises the helpfulness and knowledge of two specific Environment Agency employees and highlights the cleanliness and quality of facilities at Barmby on the Marsh. This positive review provides a counterpoint to the negative ones, indicating that there may be positive experiences with specific individuals or locations within the agency.
**Review 6: Rex Anderson – “Environment Agency polluting our country”**
This review accuses the Environment Agency of presiding over the pollution of waterways and wasting public funds. It’s a harsh accusation, implying that the agency is not only failing to protect the environment but is actively contributing to its degradation through inaction or mismanagement of resources. This suggests a failure of their primary mission.
**Review 7: John – “Sewerage’AND Water/flooding in garden…”**
This review describes a personal experience of sewerage and flooding issues, and the reviewer’s frustration with the Environment Agency’s lack of response. The reviewer alleges that despite contacting the agency, they received no assistance, leading to concerns about water table contamination. The phrase “Not fit for purpose” reinforces the sentiment of ineffectiveness.
**Review 8: CP – “Well Done”**
This is another positive review, describing a positive encounter with an Environment Agency crew clearing a ditch in Norfolk. The reviewer praises their work, good humor, and the overall effort to maintain local waterways. It provides a specific instance of the agency performing its duties effectively.
**Review 9: marc o’regan – “hey CEO …”**
This review expresses cynicism about the Environment Agency’s leadership, suggesting the CEO is more concerned with personal gain than with the interests of stakeholders. The language is disrespectful and implies a lack of accountability and care for the agency’s responsibilities.
**Review 10: Steve S – “Very rude customer service”**
This review focuses on negative customer service experience, citing a rude representative who refused to answer questions about a neighbor’s sewage disposal plans and flood zone issues. The reviewer expresses frustration with the agency’s inability to provide information and assistance, questioning its purpose.
**Review 11: Joseph Mehers – “John Curtin”**
This review directly addresses a specific individual (John Curtin) within the Environment Agency, accusing him of ignoring emails regarding underreporting by water companies. The reviewer expresses solidarity with others who feel let down by the agency’s perceived weak attitude towards environmental protection.
**Review 12: RichieK – “Useless company allowing rivers to be…”**
This is a concise and direct accusation of the agency being useless and permitting sewage companies to pollute rivers, mirroring similar sentiments expressed in other negative reviews.
**Review 13: Zsk Sports – “UK Environment agency r beggars F U 😂”**
This review is purely inflammatory and lacks any constructive criticism. It’s difficult to assess its legitimacy due to its lack of substance and offensive language.
**Review 14: KN – “Pathetic oversight of Water Companies”**
This review criticizes the agency’s oversight of water companies, alleging a lack of proper regulation, reliance on self-monitoring, and insufficient penalties for sewage discharge. It calls for a complete shakeup of the agency and criticizes government oversight.
**Review 15: Misinformed – “You queue for years – literally”**
This review highlights long delays and bureaucratic hurdles in dealing with the Environment Agency, specifically regarding permit variations and refunds. The reviewer uses strong language (“Total shambles”) and emphasizes the extensive waiting times.
**Review 16: Ryan Drew – “Stopped supplying fishing licence at…”**
This review focuses on a specific change in policy (stopping fishing license sales at post offices) and expresses dissatisfaction with the move to online-only sales. The reviewer is concerned about the impact on people who prefer cash payments or lack online access.
**Review 17: James William Godwin – “Asked for advice about making a non…”**
This review complains about a lack of helpful advice from the Environment Agency regarding septic tank compliance, stating that they were told “We don’t arbitrate neighbor disputes.” The reviewer criticizes the poor quality of the response and lack of assistance.
**Review 18: Jon Purslow – “Kendal mature Riverside trees”**
This review accuses the Environment Agency of destroying mature riverside trees in Kendal, transforming a natural river into a “storm drain.” The reviewer uses strong language (“EA destroyer of towns countryside and wildlife.Scumbags”) to express their anger and disappointment.
**Review 19: Tony Dellaway – “Don’t like doing refunds just give you the brush off”**
This review details a frustrating experience attempting to obtain a refund for a rod license. The reviewer describes polite but ultimately ineffective customer service and a lack of progress in resolving the issue, leading to a financial loss.
**Review 20: Philip Jinman – “Laurence Ralph and David Free from…”**
This review complains about a lack of response to emails from specific Environment Agency employees, as well as overall poor customer commitment and negative Trustpilot reviews. It also mentions a referral to another organization with similarly poor reviews.
Overall Assessment:
The overwhelming majority of the reviews are negative, focusing on issues such as:
* **Ineffective oversight of water companies and sewage pollution.**
* **Inaccurate data and its negative consequences.**
* **Poor customer service and lack of responsiveness.**
* **Bureaucratic delays and difficulties in obtaining permits or refunds.**
* **Destruction of natural environments.**
While there are a couple of positive reviews, they are overshadowed by the consistent criticisms. The negative reviews often include specific details and examples, adding to their credibility. While “scam” is perhaps too strong a word, the reviews suggest significant failures in the Environment Agency’s performance and accountability. It is important to remember that these reviews reflect specific interactions and perceptions, but they do point to systemic problems.
Environment Agency likely not a scam, but has significant performance and public perception issues.
Note: The above statement is just my personal opinion, you should check carefully at the sources and make the right decision for yourself.