The owner of a Saint John apartment house claims the city broke his water pipe, then forced him to pay for it.

Cameron McPherson said the incident has cost him $4,000 in repairs and thousands more in lost rental income.

McPherson said his problems began shortly after the city did work to the sidewalk in front of his eight-unit Elliott Row building late last summer.

Workers re-paving the walk hammered down a metal sleeve used to reach the water shutoff, damaging the pipe underground in the process.

"We didn't really have a significant problem until that activity," McPherson said.

"Tenants were severely lacking in water pressure."

Matt Doherty, McPherson's property manager, said tenants on the upper floor began to complain they could no longer use their showers.

The property line at 95 Elliot Row is at the sidewalk. (CBC)

Some moved out while he and McPherson tried without success to get the city to repair the line.

But with the city refusing to budge and other tenants threatening to leave, the men were forced to do the work themselves.

That included hiring an excavator and plumber and buying a permit from the city.

It's absolutely on city property. - Matt Doherty, property manager

Nancy Moar, spokesperson for the City of Saint John, said the issue is "complicated" and she would not be able to respond Wednesday.

Doherty said the municipality takes a hard line when it comes to damage to water pipes connecting to buildings.

Like others on the central peninsula street, the Elliott Row building and the property line are set right at the sidewalk.

The water main is about eight feet [about 2.4 metres] away from the house on city property at the road's edge.

"There's no dispute legally whatsoever," said Doherty. "It's absolutely on city property. But the city has the position that if it's on the property side of this valve, it's the property owner's responsibility. Period. End of story."

McPherson said he appealed to the city's claims office without success and to the provincial ombudsman.

His insurance company also refused to accept the claim.