Landlord charging incorrectly for bills + deposit issue

martinlewisjunior

HampshireH wrote: »

The agreement seems quite clear that they are liable for anything over the £5 a week?

HampshireH wrote: »

Sorry missed a bit before posting.

Why don't they just pay the difference rather than rely on the deposit?

Obviously needs to be based on real bills. Unless there is something else int the tenant which states a charge payable to the landlord for going over.

Yep, as I thought. I spoke with the house, they're happy to pay what they owe. Just not what the landlord is saying.

The second question is can the landlord ask for an additional deposit. two months after the new contract has started?

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

It looks like they are liable then, but only for the actual costs of gas and electric (not water or anything else) divided by the number of tenants, not a figure dreamed up by the landlord.

Are you sure about the water? As it states in the contract they have to pay for the water? They're also happy to pay for the water

Marvel1

00ec25 wrote: »

so you have completely misunderstood your girlfriend's tenancy agreemnt

it is there in plain text - if actual costs are more than £5 per week then the extra is payable by the tenant

Seems this landlord is trying to charge more that the extra bill! Cheeky !!!!.

martinlewisjunior

cjdavies wrote: »

Seems this landlord is trying to charge more that the extra bill! Cheeky !!!!.

Yes that is the case, the landlord also did the same for the previous tenants. They didn't fight it or have the evidence like I do with the bills.

00ec25

cjdavies wrote: »

Seems this landlord is trying to charge more that the extra bill! Cheeky !!!!.

yes, i skim read the OP and now see my own mistake

the LL cannot charge extra above the actual costs as that is "illegal" as it means he would be charging above the maximum resale price. Note however that the solution to any such dispute is to take the LL to the small claims court to recover any money paid to him.

So, on the basis this extra money has not been paid, but potentially will be taken out of the deposit, the solution is much easier, dispute any such deduction with the relevant deposit protection scheme given you have firm evidence of actual usage. The LL won't stand a chance in hell of getting more than that

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/energy/energy-supply/problems-with-your-energy-supply/what-your-landlord-can-charge-for-energy/

martinlewisjunior

00ec25 wrote: »

yes, i skim read the OP and now see my own mistake

the LL cannot charge extra above the actual costs as that is "illegal" as it means he would be charging above the maximum resale price

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/energy/energy-supply/problems-with-your-energy-supply/what-your-landlord-can-charge-for-energy/

Thank you! I didn't even know this existed.

Red-Squirrel_2

martinlewisjunior wrote: »

Are you sure about the water? As it states in the contract they have to pay for the water? They're also happy to pay for the water

Ok, if the £5 per week doesn't include water then yes, they pay for that. I was only going off the bit of the contract I can see, which mentions gas and electric only.

saajan_12

martinlewisjunior wrote: »

And on the last page it states

It states quite clearly that the LL pays for Gas, electric and water direct to the companies, and the tenants reimburse for the excess over £5 used of Gas + Electric.

The deposit can be used to cover this if the tenants don't pay the excess as it mentions bills.

martinlewisjunior wrote: »

The second question is can the landlord ask for an additional deposit. two months after the new contract has started?

The LL can ask for the full deposit anytime if it is mandated by the new agreement - read it!

martinlewisjunior

saajan_12 wrote: »

It states quite clearly that the LL pays for Gas, electric and water direct to the companies, and the tenants reimburse for the excess over £5 used of Gas + Electric.

The deposit can be used to cover this if the tenants don't pay the excess as it mentions bills.




The LL can ask for the full deposit anytime if it is mandated by the new agreement - read it!

:beer:
Thanks for your response.

As they haven't gone over their water usage? Would they have to pay this?

I am aware that if the bills exceed the amount, the deposit can be used to cover the excess. However the issue at hand is the landlord is over charging for the bills. Read it!

The tenants had already made a deposit as per their tenancy at the start of the previous year. This was simply a renewal document. With a few adjustments, like the bills will be handled by themselves.

The landlord is saying that as the tenants have gone over their bills in the first year, they don't have a full deposit and he is requesting more money. However on renewal, he said everything was okay. The problem here is , the tenancy has already started and for the people living in the house, he can't ask for more until the end of the tenancy.

elsien

If I've understood correctly, the bills are in the landlord's name?
So is it not a breach of the DPA for the utility suppliers to give the statements/information to you when the bills are nothing to do with you? (I appreciate you're trying to help your girlfriend but I'm struggling with the idea that the companies would share full information with someone not named on the bill and not a tenant at the address.)

Do you have paper/email statements or have they just given you figures over the phone?

martinlewisjunior

elsien wrote: »

If I've understood correctly, the bills are in the landlord's name?
So is it not a breach of the DPA for the utility suppliers to give the statements/information to you when the bills are nothing to do with you? (I appreciate you're trying to help your girlfriend but I'm struggling with the idea that the companies would share full information with someone not named on the bill and not a tenant at the address.)

Do you have paper/email statements or have they just given you figures over the phone?

They sent paper statements to the address. Not to me, as per what you said. They can't provide me that information.