Pat Ranalli and his wife, Marie, use about 9,000 gallons of water every three months at their three bedroom home in Stowe.

So they assumed it was a mistake when the West View Water Authority sent them a bill for using 52,000 gallons of water from Dec. 5, 2008 through March 13.

"We figured it had something to do with the water main break on Dec. 7 at the house five doors down the street from us," said Mr. Ranalli, 78, a retired Pittsburgh and Lake Erie railroad employee. "Our usual water bill is about $45. This one was for $186."

He called the authority. It said the water main break had nothing to do with his extraordinary bill. It said the bill was based on water usage recorded by his water meter.

"I told them there was no way my wife and I used that much water," Mr. Ranalli said. "I told them something must be wrong with the meter. They told me a surge was the only way a meter could be faulty. That's why I thought the water main break down the street did something to our meter."

Jim Miller, one of the authority's experienced service technicians, went to the Ranalli home March 27 to look for a leak. He told them not to run any water while he was there. After checking all the faucets and the two bathrooms in the house, he said he heard a leak behind an eight-inch concrete wall in the basement shower.

"He didn't use any equipment to detect the sound of any running water," Mr. Ranalli said. "I couldn't hear anything and neither could my wife. One of the needles on the water meter was spinning at a fast rate when he arrived and was still spinning when he left."

Mr. Miller advised the couple to call a plumber. They did. Tim Tomaino, of Tomaino Plumbing, came out the next day and checked all the plumbing in the house for a leak. "He used a stethoscope to check the shower wall, but he didn't hear anything."

"That's correct," Mr. Tomaino said. "Usually there's something leaking when you get a big bill, but I couldn't find any leaks in the [Ranalli] house. Water meters can go bad. One of my neighbors had a meter that went backwards."

A defective water meter can benefit a homeowner if it slows down and doesn't accurately record usage.

Mr. Ranalli believes that something was wrong with his water meter because it showed he and his wife used 11,000 gallons between March 13 and March 27.

"There had to be something wrong with it because it showed, in effect, that we used three months of water in two weeks," he said. "There's no way we used that much water in two weeks. I called the authority and told them to install a new meter. They put it in on April 7."

But the Ranalli's old water meter wasn't defective, said Sharon Bruno, director of administration for the West View Water Authority. She said the meter was tested to see if it accurately recorded three different amounts of water: 15 gallons, two gallons and one-quarter gallon.

"The meter was 100 percent accurate," she said. "It's very, very rare to have a meter jump ahead and record more water than was actually used. I've been here for 30 years, and it's only happened once."

Mrs. Bruno believes the high usage at the Ranalli household was caused by a leak that Mr. Miller said he heard behind the shower wall.

She said the authority has reduced the Ranalli's bill from $186 to $143, a savings of 25 percent. She said it was a one-time allowance the authority has granted in similar cases in the past.

"I think we have treated the Ranallis very fairly," she said. "Imagine what it would do to our rates if we granted allowances [for water usage above a household's normal use]. We have to be answerable for any allowance we grant. If Mr. Ranalli wants to send a letter to our board, he is welcome to do that."

Mr. Ranalli said he would.

He said he was preparing himself for "a big bill" from Alcosan because its rates are based on water usage. Alcosan spokeswoman Nancy Barylak said the bill was $196.50 but that the Ranallis would be given credit for the 25 percent allowance granted by the Water Authority when it notifies Alcosan.

"But these things take time," Ms. Barylak said. "They may not receive the credit until fall."

Since Stowe imposes a surcharge of $2 for every 1,000 gallons of water used in the township, the Ranallis will be getting a bill for $104 for the 52,000 gallons they allegedly used between Dec. 5 and March 13 and a bill for $22 for the 11,000 gallons allegedly used between March 13 and March 27.

"We'll give them a 25 percent credit on the 52,000 gallons as soon as the Water Authority notifies us," township secretary Marie Incorvati said.

Meanwhile, the Water Authority has notified Mr. Ranalli that it will shut of his water May 23 if he doesn't pay the disputed bill before that date.

"I'll have to pay it," he said. "I have no other choice."

He's correct. If he doesn't pay it, the delinquent and service restoration fees -- $160 -- are more than his bill.

I'll keep you posted.