Park home owner - energy overcharged now court?

SAC2334

BooJewels said:

Just out of curiosity, how many homes are there in the park?

I can sort of get why there might be need to make an 'admin' charge, if there are a lot and it would take some time to walk around to do them all - if the owner had to pay someone to do this extra task.  But if there are a lot, 20 quid each would seem excessive.

Good question, I used to regularly meter read Park Home estates and one of the largest had over 90 and I  could  whip round the lot in a couple of hours. all the gas meters were outside and easily accessible . Electric meters were usually in blocks and contained many meters together so it was a quick job once I d got hold of the keys to the meter cuboard rooms 

There are 62 park homes and so 62 x £20 = £1240 which is ludicrously expensive.
Every occupant will be annoyed and feel swindled at this huge ammount just for a reading . 

 Personally I d be happy to see the Small claims court adjudicate to see if they think that £620 an hour is totally excessive.
Even  £2 a reading is too much when every occupant can read their own and submit it to the owner themselves .
All the Park Home estates I did were connected to usually British Gas as a supplier and they don t levy a meter reading charge even though they would pay the meter reading company 

[Deleted User]

FWiW, I think that there should be a ban on unqualified people giving legal advice on this forum. Reading through these 5 pages there is a whole lot of 'I think' etc.

My non-legal advice would be this. If everybody on the site is impacted by the charge and the majority feel that it is outwith the law, then seek proper legal opinion and representation and pay for it on a collective basis. Here is some advice on Small Claims Courts here:

https://www.cwj.co.uk/site/individualservices/civildisputes/howtomakeasmallclaim/

If there is any mediation service available, the Court usually expects this route to have been followed first. For example, the Energy Ombudsman if there is a dispute with an energy supplier.

ariarnia

people should always seek proper legal advice if they need it and understand that no one on here can be relied on. even any real qualified lawyers posting on here shouldn't be relied on. 

but that doesn mean 'being taken to court' is not confusing or scary for someone who hasn't ever had to deal with them before. which is why the park owner is probably threatening to do it. so as long as replies are said as 'i think' or 'this was our experience' then i dont see a problem? you dont have to say 'this is not legal advice' for it to not be legal advice. its just giving some different views to the op. 

your post for example. the small claims is specifically designed for people to not have legal advice and saying someone should get paid for advice could be bad advice for the op. its what you would do but theres lots of places they can get free advice that have been pointed out in the thread so better advice could be to follow up on those options and see where they go.  

BooJewels

[Deleted User] said:

FWiW, I think that there should be a ban on unqualified people giving legal advice on this forum. Reading through these 5 pages there is a whole lot of 'I think' etc.

So, your opinion on the matter is more valid than everyone else's?   I don't think I read anyone giving legal advice.

My own thinking was to offer a bit of solidarity to the OP as they posted out of business hours on a Friday and I didn't see anything that seemed like questionable advice - largely links to places to find further information or ideas to consider.  Often with threads like this, they end up finding their own way when they do get to proper advice, but there are often good ideas posted en route that might help the OP, but might also help other readers - if it only helps them gather their thoughts and calms their fears.  I've picked up many a tip myself from reading threads I didn't start or contribute to.

The OP sounds pretty smart, so I'm sure that they can disseminate what information might help them or otherwise.  Sometimes, just bouncing ideas around with other people in itself has value.

[Deleted User]

BooJewels said:

[Deleted User] said:

FWiW, I think that there should be a ban on unqualified people giving legal advice on this forum. Reading through these 5 pages there is a whole lot of 'I think' etc.

So, your opinion on the matter is more valid than everyone else's?   I don't think I read anyone giving legal advice.

My own thinking was to offer a bit of solidarity to the OP as they posted out of business hours on a Friday and I didn't see anything that seemed like questionable advice - largely links to places to find further information or ideas to consider.  Often with threads like this, they end up finding their own way when they do get to proper advice, but there are often good ideas posted en route that might help the OP, but might also help other readers - if it only helps them gather their thoughts and calms their fears.  I've picked up many a tip myself from reading threads I didn't start or contribute to.

The OP sounds pretty smart, so I'm sure that they can disseminate what information might help them or otherwise.  Sometimes, just bouncing ideas around with other people in itself has value.

Try to shoot me down in flames if you wish. It is not a question of whether what I say is more valid than anybody else’s opinion.  I haven’t offered a quasilegal opinion - as others have chosen to do - save for suggesting that the OP gets proper legal advice, and suggested a way that it could be paid for. I have no horse in this race.

This is a contractual matter as the OP himself has admitted. Clearly, the site owner thinks he/she has the legal right to make a charge and the park home owner disagrees. If the site owner decides to go to the Small Claims Court then I am confident that he/she will not do so unless he/she can produce evidence in support of his/her claim. 

dealyboy

Just to note the couple of links I posted for pages from the LEASE website, for those who didn't follow them, are pages relevant to the OP's situation.

The About Us page item 1.:

WHO ARE LEASE?

We provide free advice on fully residential park homes and leasehold law. We are an independent body, and we only advise leaseholders and park home owners. All of our advisers are legally qualified.

They are government funded.

The freephone number I stated is for the LEASE advice line (I don't think it is shown on the website anymore) giving adhoc advice during office hours. I have spoken to them a few times over the last five years and have found them highly professional, sympathetic and knowledgable. They ask that people prepare what they want to discuss so that it can be completed within 15 minutes. Further conversations can be had and e-mails used for more detailed enquiries. As you might expect from a professional organisation they are impartial and keep records for continuity purposes.

ariarnia

[Deleted User] said:

BooJewels said:

[Deleted User] said:

FWiW, I think that there should be a ban on unqualified people giving legal advice on this forum. Reading through these 5 pages there is a whole lot of 'I think' etc.

So, your opinion on the matter is more valid than everyone else's?   I don't think I read anyone giving legal advice.

My own thinking was to offer a bit of solidarity to the OP as they posted out of business hours on a Friday and I didn't see anything that seemed like questionable advice - largely links to places to find further information or ideas to consider.  Often with threads like this, they end up finding their own way when they do get to proper advice, but there are often good ideas posted en route that might help the OP, but might also help other readers - if it only helps them gather their thoughts and calms their fears.  I've picked up many a tip myself from reading threads I didn't start or contribute to.

The OP sounds pretty smart, so I'm sure that they can disseminate what information might help them or otherwise.  Sometimes, just bouncing ideas around with other people in itself has value.

Try to shoot me down in flames if you wish. It is not a question of whether what I say is more valid than anybody else’s opinion.  I haven’t offered a quasilegal opinion - as others have chosen to do - save for suggesting that the OP gets proper legal advice, and suggested a way that it could be paid for. I have no horse in this race.

i dont think anyone is trying to shoot you down. i know i wasn't. maybe the problem is that you see 'quasi legal opinion' and we see opinion and suggestions for things to look into? i agree people shouldn't give or take legal advice on a public forum. i just dont think giving an opinion or a link to some info or talking about our own maybe related experience is legal advice. 

smellymel74

doodling said:

Hi,

Can I just point out that a court claim might be in your interest at this point.  You will have the opportunity to counter claim in your defense so you can say "no, I don't owe £20 a month and the owner owes me £xx because he has been overcharging me for some units".  The court would rule on the whole disagreement which, by the sound of it, would leave you ahead.  Treat a small claims case as an opportunity to claim against the owner without you having to pay court costs up front.

Thanks doodling, that’s a good way of looking at it. I’ve no experience of the court system so the threat did scare me initially but having read martin’s article about it and the helpful comments from people on here, my mindset is changing and I see it could well be a good thing for me to go to court. Thanks for helping me reframe it smile:

smellymel74

Dolor said:

FWiW, I think that there should be a ban on unqualified people giving legal advice on this forum. Reading through these 5 pages there is a whole lot of 'I think' etc.

My non-legal advice would be this. If everybody on the site is impacted by the charge and the majority feel that it is outwith the law, then seek proper legal opinion and representation and pay for it on a collective basis. Here is some advice on Small Claims Courts here:

https://www.cwj.co.uk/site/individualservices/civildisputes/howtomakeasmallclaim/

If there is any mediation service available, the Court usually expects this route to have been followed first. For example, the Energy Ombudsman if there is a dispute with an energy supplier.

I agree it’s important to seek legal advice for sure and I have done so but I don’t think there’s been anyone giving legal advice on this thread - more support and explanation for the court process, where I can go to help free help and clarification on what the ofgem regulations are. I’m grateful for this help from people. I do recognise engaging a solicitor may be needed at some point but it certainly isn’t necessary for the small claims court (martin’s article and the small claims court website make this very clear; you can’t claim these costs back) so I’m not convinced this is good advice in this instance. 

unfortunately your comment about going to the regulator in this case isn’t accurate -  the park home owner is a re-seller of energy not an energy supplier (this is noted in the early posts and replies about Ofgem re-selling regulations) and, as such, isn’t regulated by ofgem so there’s no ombudsman to go to. 

smellymel74

Dolor said:

BooJewels said:

Dolor said:

FWiW, I think that there should be a ban on unqualified people giving legal advice on this forum. Reading through these 5 pages there is a whole lot of 'I think' etc.

So, your opinion on the matter is more valid than everyone else's?   I don't think I read anyone giving legal advice.

My own thinking was to offer a bit of solidarity to the OP as they posted out of business hours on a Friday and I didn't see anything that seemed like questionable advice - largely links to places to find further information or ideas to consider.  Often with threads like this, they end up finding their own way when they do get to proper advice, but there are often good ideas posted en route that might help the OP, but might also help other readers - if it only helps them gather their thoughts and calms their fears.  I've picked up many a tip myself from reading threads I didn't start or contribute to.

The OP sounds pretty smart, so I'm sure that they can disseminate what information might help them or otherwise.  Sometimes, just bouncing ideas around with other people in itself has value.

Try to shoot me down in flames if you wish. It is not a question of whether what I say is more valid than anybody else’s opinion.  I haven’t offered a quasilegal opinion - as others have chosen to do - save for suggesting that the OP gets proper legal advice, and suggested a way that it could be paid for. I have no horse in this race.

This is a contractual matter as the OP himself has admitted. Clearly, the site owner thinks he/she has the legal right to make a charge and the park home owner disagrees. If the site owner decides to go to the Small Claims Court then I am confident that he/she will not do so unless he/she can produce evidence in support of his/her claim. 

“If the site owner decides to go to the Small Claims Court then I am confident that he/she will not do so unless he/she can produce evidence in support of his/her claim”

I’ll respectfully disagree. It’s not beyond some people to make such threats when they’re not valid or warranted unfortunately. The solicitor I consulted and a second that has been engaged by one of the residents both say the charge is 95% unlawful in this instance, and the site owner has a track record of unlawful behaviour as he doesn’t use a solicitor. I’ll update the thread with the result when we get there.