Advice please: Letting agency switched electricity supplier when adding person to tenancy mid-term

reheat

SpiderLegs said:

davilown said:

Similar question here - how can the landlord
1. Dictate what utilities you use, and
2. Change them when they’re in your name?

if the landlord has changed them, then phone the company you had the utilities with and tell them you haven’t authorised it.

The account is in the landlords name.

if that’s the case the Tenant had no right to change supplier so no wonder they have been asked to pay this bill.

Crossed wires here.

The account was originally set up with Spark in the tenant's name, with a prepayment-only meter, when they originally took on the tenancy, as per the tenancy agreement. Because the combined PITA of Spark and prepayment meter (Spark could offer nothing else), the tenant then switched to EDF, still in the tenant's name, and with the landlord's approval.

The tenant then wanted to add his wife to the tenancy agreement, which was agreed to by the LA, and they assured him it would involve nothing more than just adding her to the agreement, with no other changes. But it turned out they did not abide by this, and instead reverted his supplier back to Spark, albeit in the LL's name - even the LL was unaware of this it seems. Due to Covid 19 lockdown delays, by the time the tenant found out, the account had already been switched, so he got back to EDF and they then reinstated his account with them, thereby switching away from the spuriously set up account. The LL is actually peeved that the second Spark account was ever set up in his name. All the more confused because Spark was going bust and SSE taking over.

So no, the account was all set up in the tenant's name, as per the rental agreement, and it was the LA's screw up that at some point an account was set up in the LL's name.

reheat

@canaldumidi and @davilown

See my reply to @SpiderLegs above. 

But we know for sure that the spurious account was set up in the LLs name by the LA. It is now clear the real dispute is between the LA and the LL.

It is indeed a good question as to how the LA can just switch the tenant's supplier willy nilly.

But I think progress is being made

reheat

Thanks everyone for help so far.

canaldumidi

Tenant should ignore the request for payment as the agent had no right to switch the account. How the LL and their agent choose to apportion the cost is their problem, not the tenant's.

That just leaves the question of how the tenancy was changed. Was it

a) surrendered, and a brand new tenancy entered into and signed by the two new joint tenants, or

b) an Assignment was agreed ad signed by LL and both tenants?

reheat

canaldumidi said:

Tenant should ignore the request for payment as the agent had no right to switch the account. How the LL and their agent choose to apportion the cost is their problem, not the tenant's.

That just leaves the question of how the tenancy was changed. Was it

a) surrendered, and a brand new tenancy entered into and signed by the two new joint tenants, or

b) an Assignment was agreed ad signed by LL and both tenants?

Not sure TBH.

canaldumidi

reheat said:

canaldumidi said:

Tenant should ignore the request for payment as the agent had no right to switch the account. How the LL and their agent choose to apportion the cost is their problem, not the tenant's.

That just leaves the question of how the tenancy was changed. Was it

a) surrendered, and a brand new tenancy entered into and signed by the two new joint tenants, or

b) an Assignment was agreed ad signed by LL and both tenants?

Not sure TBH.

Probobly not important/relevant at the moment, but it could become so in future eg when ending the tenancy/ reclaiming deposit or (god forbid) if the relationship breaks down and one of the two wants to move out.