If he received the service and was undercharged, why shouldn't he pay for it? [providing he was actually under-charged] Everybody else in the city is expected to.
It's not quite that simple.
First of all, he was undercharged for reasons totally beyond his control.
More importantly, he runs a business. The pricing of his product includes current incidental costs. This is not a residence, where no such factors exist.
Finally, I would want an independent lab to test the old unmodified meter to verify the inaccuracy. I deal with bureaucrats. Many can be uniformly dumb as bricks and uncompromisingly dense and arbitrary.
Because it's unreasonable that a client is responsible for some unknown future cost resulting from a CITY mistake today. He'd have had no way of knowing if or when the meter wasn't functioning right, and no reason or ability to budget for such a surprise bill now. They can correct the problem when found and begin charging the correct amount, but I would resent and reject that they can hit me with an $11,000 lump sum bill when they have no proof of actual usage, just a wild a$$ guess, and, I might add, a w.a.g where the benefit of any error gives the highest benefit to the city.
Nope.
You cannot tell with any certainty how much he was undercharged. The City is saying that the meter was malfunctioning three years ago. My questions are these:
How much was it malfuctioning?
If it was malfuctioning, how do you know it wasn't OVERCHARGING for a period of time in the past?
After all, how can you trust a meter that is malfunctioning to give you an accurate reading of how much it was malfunctioning?
The City has no chance. They will settle for much less if anything.