One meter supplying two properties

LewisHamilton

Hi guys,

Just having a conversation with a relative who is currently in dispute with their energy supplier.

Background:

-Relative and ex partner lived in the same property but ended up separating

-Main property had a separate dwelling on site

-Property was the legally split into two dwellings (relative moved into one dwelling and ex partner lived in the main site). HOWEVER, one meter remained for both dwellings so essentially it is unclear how much energy each dwelling has used but the likelihood is his ex partner used more as they were living in the main dwelling with electric heating and cooker, he moved into the smaller dwelling

-The energy bills were in his ex partners name for years and years

-March 2013: ex partner rang the energy supplier and put the bills in our relatives name claiming that they had now moved out the property (this was false)

Our relative is currently in dispute with the energy supplier for the following reasons:

1) Firstly, he is stating that the energy company should not have put the bills in his name on his ex partners word?

2) He wants to pay the energy supplier his share and has offered a reasonable amount, over a third of the bill but the energy company are pursuing him for the whole bill covering usage in both dwellings?

Obviously a sub meter or a separate supply should have been installed when the separate dwelling became its own property in its own right but does our relative have any chance of paying the energy company the amount he has offered and to ask them to pursue his ex partner for the remaining amount (btw ex partner has left the main site now but only in January 2015, not March 2013 as they claimed to the energy supplier).

Or would the energy supplier consider this as a third party issue and that they are entitled to pursue either one because at the end of the day, the meter supplies both properties? We all think this is likely to be the case but if it went to court then a judge may view that the bill is shared responsibility.

Thanks in advance

Joyful

It's a third party issue unfortunately. The energy company have the right to contact either people as I imangine both will be on the voters role.

naedanger

LewisHamilton wrote: »

Or would the energy supplier consider this as a third party issue and that they are entitled to pursue either one because at the end of the day, the meter supplies both properties? We all think this is likely to be the case but if it went to court then a judge may view that the bill is shared responsibility.

Thanks in advance

Yes, normally the supplier can legally enforce the full debt against just one of those jointly responsible. (And to be jointly responsible the person does not even need to be on the bill but does need to have some financial responsibility for the dwelling e.g. on a tenancy agreement.)

This case does however have some unusual aspects, but I suspect the end position will still be that your relative can be held liable for the full amount.

How legally separate were the two dwellings? Did they have separate ownership details and separate council tax? Did your relative have no connection with one of the dwellings e.g. not an owner or on a tenancy agreement? If the two dwellings were completely separate, regardless of the legal position, the Ombudsman may rule your relative should not be held liable for the full amount. However if your relative was partly or fully responsible for there only being one joint supply then I think their chances of getting a sympathetic ruling will be much reduced. Nevertheless your relative can still complain as they have nothing to lose.

spiro

naedanger wrote: »

Yes, normally the supplier can legally enforce the full debt against just one of those jointly responsible. (And to be jointly responsible the person does not even need to be on the bill but does need to have some financial responsibility for the dwelling e.g. on a tenancy agreement.)

This case does however have some unusual aspects, but I suspect the end position will still be that your relative can be held liable for the full amount.

How legally separate were the two dwellings? Did they have separate ownership details and separate council tax? Did your relative have no connection with one of the dwellings e.g. not an owner or on a tenancy agreement? If the two dwellings were completely separate, regardless of the legal position, the Ombudsman may rule your relative should not be held liable for the full amount. However if your relative was partly or fully responsible for there only being one joint supply then I think their chances of getting a sympathetic ruling will be much reduced. Nevertheless your relative can still complain as they have nothing to lose.

I think the Ombudsman would probably say it is there own fault for not separating the supply when they seperated the properties. I don't know why they didn't do that but I suspect it may have been on the grounds of costs as a new supply can cost thousands.

LewisHamilton

Thanks for the responses.

Our relative understands that they should have had separate supplies, which is a shame.

As naedanger has stated, there are a couple of unusual aspects to this.

1) There is the dishonest behaviour of his ex partner putting the bills in his name claiming they no longer lived at the main site
2) The bills from March 2013 onwards were addressed in his name but the energy supplier continued to send the bills to the ex partners address as the main site remained the only address on the national database

To answer naedangers questions:
1) Both properties have separate ownership and council tax since 2013
2) His connection at the main site ceased when he became owner of the smaller dwelling

We all think its likely to be a third party dispute because the meter supplies both properties and I guess he is jointly responsible for failing to separate the supply. However, it still doesn't take away the fact that the bill does not relate to usage solely at his property and the dishonest behaviour from his ex partner, so we do feel the courts may take a more sympathetic view than the Ombudsman/Energy supplier.

The court route could be a better option for the circumstances of this.

naedanger

LewisHamilton wrote: »

Thanks for the responses.

Our relative understands that they should have had separate supplies, which is a shame.

As naedanger has stated, there are a couple of unusual aspects to this.

1) There is the dishonest behaviour of his ex partner putting the bills in his name claiming they no longer lived at the main site
2) The bills from March 2013 onwards were addressed in his name but the energy supplier continued to send the bills to the ex partners address as the main site remained the only address on the national database

To answer naedangers questions:
1) Both properties have separate ownership and council tax since 2013
2) His connection at the main site ceased when he became owner of the smaller dwelling

We all think its likely to be a third party dispute because the meter supplies both properties and I guess he is jointly responsible for failing to separate the supply. However, it still doesn't take away the fact that the bill does not relate to usage solely at his property and the dishonest behaviour from his ex partner, so we do feel the courts may take a more sympathetic view than the Ombudsman/Energy supplier.

The court route could be a better option for the circumstances of this.

On balance I agree with your assessment, with your emphasis on the "may".

On the other hand there is a (smallish) cost of taking a case to the courts, although that would normally be recoverable if your relative wins.

(An alternative course would be to go down the Ombudsman route first, then if that fails go to the courts. This gives your relative two chances to convince someone of his case.)

Thinking again about the case I think your relative's case is a bit stronger than I thought previously. I had discounted the fact the bill was put into his name by his ex. If there was a period when he had no legal responsibility for the legally separate dwelling that had the meter, then I would have thought he could not be held responsible by the supplier for the bill during that time unless he (and not his ex) had agreed. (Of course his ex could hold him responsible for that part of the bill in respect of your relative's sub usage, but he is not disputing that anyway.)

LewisHamilton

naedanger wrote: »

On balance I agree with your assessment, with your emphasis on the "may".

On the other hand there is a (smallish) cost of taking a case to the courts, although that would normally be recoverable if your relative wins.

(An alternative course would be to go down the Ombudsman route first, then if that fails go to the courts. This gives your relative two chances to convince someone of his case.)

Thinking again about the case I think your relative's case is a bit stronger than I thought previously. I had discounted the fact the bill was put into his name by his ex. If there was a period when he had no legal responsibility for the legally separate dwelling that had the meter, then I would have thought he could not be held responsible by the supplier for the bill during that time unless he (and not his ex) had agreed. (Of course his ex could hold him responsible for that part of the bill in respect of your relative's sub usage, but he is not disputing that anyway.)

I'll update the thread when we know what route he decided to go in the end.

As you state, I think his case is stronger than normal because of the facts.

It looks like the bill covers a very small period where he had no legal responsibility for the separate dwelling but again as you state, he doesn't dispute the usage or the amount of the bill. I believe he is willing to pay up to halve to get some justice and result for the matter - the bill is over £5000. However, the energy supplier is not interested and is pursuing him for the whole amount.

Out of curiosity, who does he need to go to to arrange a sub-meter? Is it through the energy supplier?

Cardew

As stated above, no energy company will get involved in a 'third person' dispute as either party could be telling lies.


If an energy company is not to accept that Mr X has moved in and is now responsible for bills, how else can this be achieved for the millions of people who change address?


For instance you buy my house. When I move out of my house I tell them that you are now responsible for the energy bills. If the energy company won't accept my statement, how are the bills to be put in your name?


The principle of one person being 'jointly and severally liable' is well established i.e. they can go after a single person for the whole amount.


If your relative has a good case, then take ex-partner to the small claims court.

footyguy

LewisHamilton wrote: »

Hi guys,

Just having a conversation with a relative who is currently in dispute with their energy supplier.

Background:

-Relative and ex partner lived in the same property but ended up separating

-Main property had a separate dwelling on site

-Property was the legally split into two dwellings (relative moved into one dwelling and ex partner lived in the main site). HOWEVER, one meter remained for both dwellings so essentially it is unclear how much energy each dwelling has used but the likelihood is his ex partner used more as they were living in the main dwelling with electric heating and cooker, he moved into the smaller dwelling

-The energy bills were in his ex partners name for years and years

-March 2013: ex partner rang the energy supplier and put the bills in our relatives name claiming that they had now moved out the property (this was false)

Our relative is currently in dispute with the energy supplier for the following reasons:

1) Firstly, he is stating that the energy company should not have put the bills in his name on his ex partners word?

2) He wants to pay the energy supplier his share and has offered a reasonable amount, over a third of the bill but the energy company are pursuing him for the whole bill covering usage in both dwellings?

Obviously a sub meter or a separate supply should have been installed when the separate dwelling became its own property in its own right but does our relative have any chance of paying the energy company the amount he has offered and to ask them to pursue his ex partner for the remaining amount (btw ex partner has left the main site now but only in January 2015, not March 2013 as they claimed to the energy supplier).

Or would the energy supplier consider this as a third party issue and that they are entitled to pursue either one because at the end of the day, the meter supplies both properties? We all think this is likely to be the case but if it went to court then a judge may view that the bill is shared responsibility.

Thanks in advance

Your relative is not giving you the true facts here.

No supplier will put a supply in someone else's name.
That would effectively be saying a third party has created a contract between two others.

If it were possible, what would stop us all putting our energy accounts in the name of David Cameron.

lstar337

footyguy wrote: »

No supplier will put a supply in someone else's name.

Is that a full stop, blanket, fact?

Or are there some exceptions?

I only ask because EDF, British Gas, and Bristol Water had no problem with our letting agent setting up accounts in my name. I had expected to do it myself, and was surprised when it happened without a hitch.

Cardew

footyguy wrote: »

Your relative is not giving you the true facts here.

No supplier will put a supply in someone else's name.
That would effectively be saying a third party has created a contract between two others.

If it were possible, what would stop us all putting our energy accounts in the name of David Cameron.

I don't think that is correct.


When I have sold properties I have contacted the energy companies with my final details(meter readings and forwarding address) and given them the name of the new owners. In fact I have been asked who are the new owners.


When my daughter moved into a property I owned, I told the energy company that she would be responsible for bills from xxx date and water/gas/electricity(and Council tax) bills were sent to her in her name.


The is nothing to stop you putting the various accounts in the name of David Cameron at either your address or 10 Downing Street. However it wouldn't make him a party to any contract. It is only a legally binding 'deemed contract' if he used energy at the property in question.