Widower Michael Kulynzak is so frugal about using water that his family had a meter fitted to minimise his bills.

But the 80-year-old, who only treats himself to a bath once a week, has his washing done by his daughter and would never dream of watering his garden, was left stunned when a quarterly bill landed on his doorstep for £1,039.

Unbeknown to him, a water leak in his ground-floor bathroom of his home in Claremont Grove, Wrose, caused the meter reading to soar - adding more than £1,000 to his usual payment.

But, despite a verbal assurance by a Yorkshire Water official that he would not have to pay for the lost water, Mr Kulynzak's family have been left incensed when he twice received bills for the huge demand..

Today Yorkshire Water admitted that "human error" had caused the bills to be sent and apologised to the family saying he could use a claim procedure to avoid the payment.

But Mr Kulynzak's daughter, Dana Dodsworth, was horrified by the mix-up which she had left her father beside himself with worry.

"I wouldn't advise anyone to get a water meter after this," said Mrs Dodsworth.

"And even though Yorkshire Water has said it will send us a claim form so my father won't have to pay this bill, I won't believe it until I see it.

"Dad rang me in tears - it is very worrying because he is on medication for high blood pressure and arthritis and could've had a heart attack.

"He even said this was going to finish him off. If we could get the meter taken off we would, but he had it installed in 1997 and you are only given 12 months to revert back."

Mrs Dodsworth said she is now worried that if her father suffers another leak in the winter, he will be liable for the lost water, because he will have used his one claim allowed under the company's procedures.

A Yorkshire Water spokesman said: "We apologise to Mr Kulynzak and also to his daughter Mrs Dodsworth.

"They received a bill they should not have, as a hold had been put on their bills. It was human error, which we apologise for.

"Because the burst was down as internal, people are generally responsible for these, but because Mr Kulynzak's bathroom was on the ground floor, he would not have known about the leak.

"What we will do now is go back and work out when the leak started to occur and based on his normal daily usage, we can work out how much his bill will be.

"We have reassured his daughter there is nothing to worry about and they will be getting a burst claim form to fill out. The previous bill is null and void."

A spokesman for water watchdog OFWAT said had Mr Kulynzak not had the meter installed, he would have paid a set bill, regardless of the amount of water lost.

"The company must now offer some assurance to the customer that this breakdown in communication, or a similar complaint, does not happen again," she said.

She said customers moved to a water meter usually because they were conscious of water conservation or to save money on their bills.

The one-off claim, known as a 'leakage allowance,' was available at the discretion of the water company and meant the customer was not billed for the water lost.