deemed contract - is a landlord liable for tenant's business utility bills?

tifo

jalexa wrote: »

They are not prosecuting this without a lawyer, so do they have a better argument they haven't disclosed?

Still being pedantic, can you elaborate on "the invoices would have originally been in the tenant's name". Is that fact or supposition?

There's been nothing yet shown apart from the 'replacement invoices' and the planning application as proof that the defendant owns the property and is in a deemed contract with the supplier.

We are assuming the original invoices were in the tenant's name and again without seeing them (under disclosure) we can't yet submit a full defence.

At the moment their solicitor wants consent to amend the claim and we need to follow that up.

victor2

Like has already been said, you need legal advice from a solicitor.
It does sound like you have a strong case though. I have no legal background, but I can't see how they can change their claim having first raised it. Hopefully, a solicitor would quickly show that as there was a contract in place with somebody else, there is no case for your friend to answer. That would then be good defence against a subsequent claim of a deemed contract as you'll have proven there was an actual contract in place.
Depends on getting the necessary proof of course, but it doesn't look like the supplier has a leg to stand on - and you should be awarded costs too. But get a solicitor's opinion!

Cardew

As indicated above, the crucial issue is if the bills were in the tenant's name. (I appreciate the OP is attempting to get hold of the original bills)

If the OP's 'assumption' is correct and they were in tenant's name, then I don't think the OP has a problem.

Personally I find it inconceivable that the Utility company would have produced altered bills. It seems more likely that the bills remained in the OP's name, but the tenant paid some of them.

If so it becomes a third person dispute - the OP is reponsible and should sue the tenant.

macman

The tenant is no longer available to be sued...:(

SYNERGY

The balance they're suing for is around £5,500 plus interest plus fixed sum, all at business rates.

Noting that this is is quite a sum, a few questions:

1) How long was the tenant in the shop ?

2) How long ago did he do a bunk ?

3) Any previous tenant to (1) ?

4) I note that he is " being sued for the balance ", what was the original sum ? Who paid the previous amounts ?

Ask the utility company for a copy of all the bills for the property from (1) or possibly (3) to (2).

If they are pursuing him for this amount they have to supply copies of all the relevant bills to him well before it gets any where a court !

Have they done so ?

Imagine the scenario, both parties facing the judge, utility company puts their case, your friend states that he is unable to put his case due to the utility company not providing, or willing to provide the evidence to him of his alleged debt.

I think most will know what the judge would do.

Anyone else pursuing the previous tenant, suppliers, customers, bank, council etc ?

In cases like this there is usually a wealth of information sat in the unopened mail behind the door.

tifo

SYNERGY wrote: »

Anyone else pursuing the previous tenant, suppliers, customers, bank, council etc ?

We obviously cannot know this. I don't think my friend opens his tenant's mail. Even if there was any info there, I don't think we'll be able to use it.

tifo

My friend says bills in the tenant's name do exist because the supplier sent copies to him many months ago before this case. He hasn't got them now as he thought it's nothing to do with him. That's when a DCA was chasing.

tifo

SYNERGY wrote: »

If they are pursuing him for this amount they have to supply copies of all the relevant bills to him well before it gets any where a court !

Even at court now, the invoices are in the defendant's name and address and titled 'replacement invoice' with TEMP0001 as the account number on all. So none of the reprinted invoices show an actual account number. I'm assuming because the original account number relates to the tenant and this TEMP0001 one they're using now is only because of the deemed contract.

tifo

There's also an issue with Data Protection here. They seem to be misusing the defendant's personal details by putting them where they were originally not.

undaunted

The Electricity Act 1986 Schedule 6 paragraph 3

(1) Where an electricity supplier supplies electricity to any premises otherwise than in pursuance of a contract, the supplier shall be deemed to have contracted with the occupier (or the owner if the premises are unoccupied) for the supply of electricity as from the time (“the relevant time”) when he began so to supply electricity.

When does the supplier claim to have commenced supply and on whose instigation? IE Had the supplier supplied your friend before the tennant moved in? If so were they advised of him renting it out and did the new tennant ever set up an account with them? When do thet claim the deemed contract with the landlord began? If the premises were occupied by the tennant when they began supplying him / her I'd take it to the courts personally. They cannot simply back date the deemed contract because the tenant has done a runner if they are claiming a deemed contract with the landlord began after the tennant left.