Landlord attempting to force us to pay utilities for months before we moved in

stator

Can you transfer to another supplier so that you can start paying the new bills for new usage whilst you dispute the rest?

Might try the shelter helpline for advice:
http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/how_we_can_help/housing_advice_helpline

Guest101

FBaby wrote: »

Does the DPA say that you can't be liable for an account that you didn't set up? If so, any link to support it?

That's not what I said though is it?


I'm unsure why your so defensive about this (though I suspect that you do the same with your tenants?)


The supplier would be in breach of the DPA by discussing the account with the LL:


Point out they are breaking DPA by talking to a third party as you didn't set up the account. Ask them how YOU are liable for an account you did not set up, know of or have use of until you moved in.


I mean we could say it's fraud if you prefer? It would no different to me setting up utilities at my home in your name.


The DPA does not cover consumer liability, just to clarify in case there's any confusion.

Guest101

bris wrote: »

The op clearly had a verbal contract for the first 2 months and a written contract from the move in date.


The verbal contract is binding and the terms were for securing the property from 1st July to 1 Sept. Written contracts are neat and all great as proof but verbal contracts are just as binding especially when they don't deny it so all this talk of not being liable until move in date is just plain wrong.


For me they are liable for the standing charges and the LL for the usage.

I think you might be slightly confused.


The OP did not have a verbal contract for the first two month, their tenancy agreement starts on July 1st. That's a written agreement.


You're absolutely correct that verbal contracts are legitimate. However the two pitfalls are: 1: there's no evidence of the contract so difficult to enforce 2: still covered by consumer guidelines, so clauses have to be fair. Would payment for the standing charges be fair - possibly. But for usage? Absolutely not.


The point in this case (not any other) is that a tenancy agreement is only binding once the tenancy starts, until that point the clauses cannot be enforced. The tenancy cannot start until the tenant has taken legal possession, which didnt happen until sept 1st.


One note to add to the general discussion. Was the deposit paid prior to July 1st, and if so when was it protected? As the deposit legislation is 30day from payment received, not from tenancy start date.

HouseBuyer77

The supplier would be in breach of the DPA by discussing the account with the LL:

I'm not sure you can wave the DPA at them

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Protection_Act_1998

Principle 1: 'Personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully and, in particular, shall not be processed unless:

1. at least one of the conditions in Schedule 2 is met'

One of the conditions is Schedule 2 is:



'Processing is necessary for the performance of, or commencing, a contract'


From the energy company's PoV tenant moved in July 1st, thus tenant was commencing a contract with energy company, thus it was reasonable for them to process their data.


Now in actual fact tenant did not move in til September 1st.


When discussing the matter with the enery company I'd avoid referencing the DPA. It just muddies the waters and may not help you at all (you'll spend all your time arguing about a potential DPA breach which isn't the issue you care about).

Guest101

HouseBuyer77 wrote: »

I'm not sure you can wave the DPA at them

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Protection_Act_1998

Principle 1: 'Personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully and, in particular, shall not be processed unless:

1. at least one of the conditions in Schedule 2 is met'

One of the conditions is Schedule 2 is:



'Processing is necessary for the performance of, or commencing, a contract'


From the energy company's PoV tenant moved in July 1st, thus tenant was commencing a contract with energy company, thus it was reasonable for them to process their data.


Now in actual fact tenant did not move in til September 1st.


When discussing the matter with the enery company I'd avoid referencing the DPA. It just muddies the waters and may not help you at all (you'll spend all your time arguing about a potential DPA breach which isn't the issue you care about).

I though I was clear, I said that they would be in breach if they carried on discussing the account with the LL.


I accept it's perfectly reasonable for the supplier of the person(s) legally occupying the property to make enquires. They do not breach the DPA by doing so. (The LL might've if he did not have permission - but that's not going to go anywhere)


On July 1st, the LL was occupying the property. Not the tenants.

Miss_Samantha

bris wrote: »

The verbal contract is binding and the terms were for securing the property from 1st July to 1 Sept. Written contracts are neat and all great as proof but verbal contracts are just as binding especially when they don't deny it so all this talk of not being liable until move in date is just plain wrong.

For me they are liable for the standing charges and the LL for the usage.

OP hasn't told us the actual terms.

david1951

From USwitch:

"When you move into a new property you'll automatically be placed on a 'deemed contract' with the energy company that has been supplying the property up until your move-in date."

I don't think you take over a utilities when some verbal contract starts, especially one that didn't say anything about utilities and is simply an exchange of money to guarantee a future move-in date. If anything the implication is that the landlord is still responsible until the move-in date.

I realise this doesn't look like a 'deemed contract', rather the landlord has somehow set a contract up on behalf of the tenants. If the tenants didn't agree to this then the contract is simply null and void.

So I would say they aren't liable for any of the utilities.

What if the landlord decided to set the tenants up with a contract in which the standing charges were unreasonably high? What if they decided to use the most expensive energy company? Obviously this isn't reasonable.

Guest101

david1951 wrote: »

From USwitch:

"When you move into a new property you'll automatically be placed on a 'deemed contract' with the energy company that has been supplying the property up until your move-in date."

I don't think you take over a utilities when some verbal contract starts, especially one that didn't say anything about utilities and is simply an exchange of money to guarantee a future move-in date. If anything the implication is that the landlord is still responsible until the move-in date.

I realise this doesn't look like a 'deemed contract', rather the landlord has somehow set a contract up on behalf of the tenants. If the tenants didn't agree to this then the contract is simply null and void.

So I would say they aren't liable for any of the utilities.

What if the landlord decided to set the tenants up with a contract in which the standing charges were unreasonably high? What if they decided to use the most expensive energy company? Obviously this isn't reasonable.

'Up until your move in date' in this context simply refers to the supplier.


IE The supplier on the day you move in is the one you have a deemed contract with.


Otherwise quite right

Miss_Samantha

david1951 wrote: »

So I would say they aren't liable for any of the utilities.

What you quoted from uSwitch does not really help. We need to see the terms of OP's tenancy agreement.

david1951

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

What you quoted from uSwitch does not really help. We need to see the terms of OP's tenancy agreement.

True. I suppose I was making the point that the default position is that you take on the utilities as part of a deemed contract when you move in, not when you sign or otherwise agree a contract that you will move in in the future.

If the tenancy agreement is silent or vague on the issue, I think it does help.