Energy bill debt in my name only - forced out of home and ex changed supplier

StanHowe

Hey,

Apologies if this isn't the right section.

Long story short, my now ex partner got an occupational order / non molestation order on me so I can no longer attend our jointly owned property.

The gas and electricity account (with eOn) was in my name only as I was paying most of the bills before we bought our house together and I just totally forgot to add her when we moved, now I have just found out that she has changed the supplier and having provided actual meter readings there is around £1081 worth of debt to pay. 

If needs be I am happy to pay this via monthly payments, however is my partner liable for half of the debt? Or did her name need to be on the eOn account for this to be the case?

I have been reading up regarding jointly and severally liable but im not sure this applies here with her not being named on the eOn account?

Any help on this is appreciated. 

Thanks.
Stan. 

Reed_Richards

This is a legal issue with little to do with Energy.  My personal opinion (based on no legal expertise) is that you have to be named to be considered jointly and severally liable and so this would not apply.  If it did apply, it would make your ex partner equally liable for the debt, not liable for half the debt.

MWT

If you are named on the rental agreement or deeds then there is liability for the energy consumed in the property.

This comes up a lot when dealing with an HMO as the energy account is often in one name only but all in the property can be held liable for the energy consumed. 

... but as ever, the energy company can go after either of you for the whole amount.

StanHowe

Reed_Richards said:

This is a legal issue with little to do with Energy.  My personal opinion (based on no legal expertise) is that you have to be named to be considered jointly and severally liable and so this would not apply.  If it did apply, it would make your ex partner equally liable for the debt, not liable for half the debt.

Thanks for clarifying that & apologies that this is in the wrong section.

MWT said:

If you are named on the rental agreement or deeds then there is liability for the energy consumed in the property.

This comes up a lot when dealing with an HMO as the energy account is often in one name only but all in the property can be held liable for the energy consumed. 

... but as ever, the energy company can go after either of you for the whole amount.

We are both listed on the deeds yeah so thats promising, as long as I know that we are both liable then that will allow me to pursue whatever it is next via a solicitor. 

MWT

Just to add a little weight to this, with many energy suppliers it isn’t even an option to have more than one name on an account.
They mostly stopped doing this when they started sharing data with credit reference agencies. 

Reed_Richards

MWT said:

If you are named on the rental agreement or deeds then there is liability for the energy consumed in the property.

This comes up a lot when dealing with an HMO as the energy account is often in one name only but all in the property can be held liable for the energy consumed. 

... but as ever, the energy company can go after either of you for the whole amount.

As MWT confirms, joint liability does not mean that you share the bill equally, it means that either of you can be pursued for the whole of the debt.  Solicitors can be expensive, you need to make sure that your solicitor will charge you less than the £540.50 you are hoping to recover from your ex partner.  A single letter with a copy of the bill should not be too expensive but if you get into a dispute about how the bill should be split then it could easily be different.  

yelias

StanHowe said:

Hey,

Apologies if this isn't the right section.

Long story short, my now ex partner got an occupational order / non molestation order on me so I can no longer attend our jointly owned property.

The gas and electricity account (with eOn) was in my name only as I was paying most of the bills before we bought our house together and I just totally forgot to add her when we moved, now I have just found out that she has changed the supplier and having provided actual meter readings there is around £1081 worth of debt to pay. 

If needs be I am happy to pay this via monthly payments, however is my partner liable for half of the debt? Or did her name need to be on the eOn account for this to be the case?

I have been reading up regarding jointly and severally liable but im not sure this applies here with her not being named on the eOn account?

Any help on this is appreciated. 

Thanks.
Stan. 

Welcome back to MSE, @StanHowe.
I would appear this is your first post in almost 4 years; the good folk at MSE will be so pleased to learn that you have returned to this forum to experience the new improved, all singing, all dancing forum layout.

If I understand your post correctly, you own jointly a property with a (now ex-) partner.

You also have had, at least until recently, at least the gas and electricity account (with eOn) in your own name, and perhaps other bills relating to the property?

Do I also understand correctly that because of a court injunction that has been served on you (presumably requested by your ex-partner) that you are currently forbidden from attending the property because of an occupation order or a non-melsetation order. Is that correct, and if so which is it?

A non-molestation order is effectively an order issued by a court (usually after a hearing, but a court may grant one 'on paper' if the applicant and respondant live together) against a family member, a civil partner or someone the victim has or is living with, or just someone they have had a relationship with, where the applicant/victim has proved domestic abuse by the respondent.
It would normally prevent you from being violent or threatening violence towards the applicant (and/or any children/grand children where applicable). It also prevents intimidation, harassment and pestering including in-person or remotely by letter, email, phone or social media so as to ensure the safety of those it is drafted to protect.
It is usually time limited but may be renewed upon application to the court.
Breaching a non-molestation order is a criminal offence and a power of arrest is automatically attached to the injunction, meaning you  can be arrested simply for breaching the injunction without needing to have committed any other criminal activity. The Order is filed with the Police.

An occupation order is essentially one up from a non-molestation order. The order will state who can live in the family home or enter the surrounding area.
An occupation order is usually time limited to a maximum of 6 months
(this effectively allows time to allow a more formal settlement to be agreed)
Where you are currently a joint owner of the property and/or are solely responsible for payment of any bills relating to the property, then the court order usually allows for an agreed third party to attend the property to ensure your interest is being protected, ensure accurate utilty meter readings are taken, collect any of your post, etc.

If your order against you does not allow for this, I suggest you contact the legal advisors who originally defended you, as it sounds like the court were unaware at the time of both your interest in the property and your liability to pay some or all the bills regarding the property.

A breach of an occupation order is considered contempt of court. You could be brought before a court and fined or imprisoned for breaking the terms of the order.

As you were the named account holder on the gas & electricity account with Eon, you are liable for those bills.

It does sound like your ex-partner has now done you a favour, or at least is getting on with a more formal split from you, by putting the gas and electricty accounts in her own name now.
However, what is particularly unusual about your case is that the energy supplier (eon) allowed a change of supplier when there was a £1000+ debt on the existing account.

I guess you could file an erroneous transfer with eon to get the account returned to them and put back your name. In the circumstances, I'm not sure what that would achieve for you though.
On the one hand it would give you the time to repay the deficit on the account, but you will also remain responsible for paying the ongoing energy bills relating to the property. Otherwise Eon will want repayment within a couple of weeks (unless you agree a longer repayment plan with them). Failure to pay could adversely affect your future credit ability.

Have you, or are you in the process of, finalising your financial split from your (now ex-) partner? What is the plan for the property that you currently jointly own? What was agreed over the other financial matters between you?
If you have a non-molestation order against you, then it sounds like this needs to be done through your legal advisors. (or other agreed third party)

StanHowe

Thanks so much for the detailed response yelias. 

You also have had, at least until recently, at least the gas and electricity account (with eOn) in your own name, and perhaps other bills relating to the property?

Yes this is correct, I also have Virgin Media in my name only, which as far as I can tell is still active and she hasn't changed this (yet).

Do I also understand correctly that because of a court injunction that has been served on you (presumably requested by your ex-partner) that you are currently forbidden from attending the property because of an occupation order or a non-melsetation order. Is that correct, and if so which is it?

Thats correct, I am unable to attend our jointly owned property as she has obtained a non mol order and occupation order against me for 1 year (22 June 2021 - 22 June 2022). 

Have you, or are you in the process of, finalising your financial split from your (now ex-) partner? What is the plan for the property that you currently jointly own? What was agreed over the other financial matters between you?

We havent agreed to anything yet with regards to our property, but in terms of the household bills I am paying my half of the mortgage payment direct to our provider and the rest of the household bills need to be covered by my ex (as advised by a solicitor). 

Long story short, my ex ended the relationship, I wished to live in the property (even if temporary) and proposed she find alternative accommodation. She advised me that she is not willing to move out and wants me to sell our property immediately. I didnt want to rush anything so prior to the non mol / occupation orders I advised her that I am not agreeing to sell yet but she continuously pushing me to sell our property immediately.   I advised her that I need some time to consolidate my finances and assess if I can buy her out, or remortgage and take over the mortgage in my name only. 

As I made this clear on a number of occasions, she eventually got me arrested on a false charge (which have been dropped by the police) and subsequently applied for the non mol / occupation order to prevent me attending my home. My opinion is that she is doing this to put me in a really difficult mental/financial situation to force me to sell.

I appreciate that the property is jointly owned and she has equity that she wishes to acquire, but I also have the right to take my time and decide what I wish to do. 

Reed_Richards

If you and your ex-partner own the house as tenants in common (so you each own a 50% share) then either of you can force a sale by applying to the court for an "order for sale".  If you own the house as joint tenants then should either of you die the other will become the sole owner of the house.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2008/apr/30/property.mortgages

yelias

StanHowe said:

... she eventually got me arrested on a false charge (which have been dropped by the police) and subsequently applied for the non mol / occupation order to prevent me attending my home. My opinion is that she is doing this to put me in a really difficult mental/financial situation to force me to sell.

...

I am sorry, but I do not understand what you mean by that.

When you were arrested, you should have been told (amongst other things) the reason for your arrest.

UK law says that a police officer can arrest a person if they are wanted on a warrant or if they have “reasonable belief” that someone might have been involved in a criminal offence, or be about to commit an offence, and they therefore believe it is necessary to arrest them.

It is covered under S.24 of PACE:

The reasons given for the arrest invarianly include "to allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence or of the conduct of the person in question".
Depending on the circumstances, it may also include to prevent the commission of a further offence and/or to enable the name and/or address of the suspect to be acertained. The prevention of causing/suffering injury to themselves or others may also be cited (again dependant on the circumstances).

(these are not the only reasons, but probably cover any that should have been explained to you)

It is the role of the CPS (based on evidence supplied to them by the police) to decide whether or not to charge anyone with any offence. The police normally are granted up to 24 hours to hold a person to collate such evidence, submit it to the CPS and await their charging decision, and if granted, to charge the suspect.

Sometimes, the police may also NFA (No Further Action) a case when, often in conjunction with the CPS, they decide it is not in the public interest to pursue a prosecution.

Of course, if during the prompt and effective investigation of the offence or of the conduct of the person in question, the police establish to their own satisfaction that no offence has been committed, they alone can decide to de-arrest and release you.
This can also be quite common where they have arrested a person who they have reasonable grounds for suspecting to be about to commit an offence. e.g. if a person is arrested to prevent a possible breach of the peace, then that person can be de-arrested once the poilice have removed them from the scene (and are reasonably satisfied they will not immediately return to the scene to commit the offence),

Arresting anyone in any of the above circumstances is not wrongful arrest.

Did you ever prove wrongful arrest in court? If so, on what basis?
Or is is just your opinion that you were "arrested on a false charge" ?

Even if  the police arrest a suspect, the CPS agree to charge the suspect, the suspect is charged, the matter goes to court, and after a hearing, the court decides there is insufficient evidence to be sure that you have committed the offence with which you were charged, that is still not in itself a case of wrongful arrest. Many people are released by courts every day where a court has not been satisfied so as to be sure that the charged suspect is guilty.

I have already laid out previously in this thread the reasons for a person being issued with a non-molestation order and/or an occupation order. Such orders are only issued by a court upon being made sure they are reasonable in the circumstances.

MWT

We are going way off topic for this forum now, the OP has indicated that they have a solicitor involved so they will I am sure get any legal advice they need from that source...