Unreasonable tenancy clauses

[Pacific]

Just something I'm curious about here, can tenancy clauses be invalid if they are not reasonable? For example my friend's tenancy has clauses that state the landlord can deduct from the deposit for unpaid bills and services such as gas electric water TV licence broadband phone council tax and even netflix and other TV subscriptions.

First off netflix is a pay in advance service and doesn't renew without payment as do most TV subscriptions so not sure why that's in there, but my friend is liable for all bills and charges they are all in her name, nobody I know has ever come across this in a tenancy agreement. Even if she left with outstanding bills how can the landlord know this without opening her mail?

If when she does leave is there any legal basis for her to provide information to her landlord that all these bills have been paid or can he open her mail if she moves out or deduct her deposit for these charges? He doesn't directly provide any of these services and she pays him no charge for it but she did sign the tenancy agreement which says he can make such deductions.

She's not concerned about paying the bills as she is mostly up to date and the ones in arrears she makes repayments towards in agreement with the providers, her concern is having to give the landlord all her information it sounds intrusive and nothing to do with him so can she assume even if she signed the tenancy those clauses can be invalidated on grounds of being unreasonable?

[islandgirl]

The Landlord is attempting to protect themselves from unpaid bills being left by the tenant and the companies trying to get the money from him. If a deposit is protected the tenant has nothing to worry about - any disagreement re deposit decuctions goes to adjudication and the LL has to prove everything. The tenant can redirect their mail. As a LL however if red demands begin to arrive at my proptery there is every chance they will be "opened in error"! I do not think she is being asked to prove bills are up to date. It is merely the case that the LL is trying to protect himself from unpaid bills and there is nothing wrong with that in my opinion.

[Pacific]

ISLANDGIRL thanks, I've never heard of landlords having to pay tenant bills, in my personal experience and anyone I've asked the companies chase the person named on the bill or residing in the property the period the bill was generated for, often they pass it on to debt collectors whom find out the person's current address and chase them for it. It's happened to me in the past when I was renting that I left without paying my last bill because it hadn't arrived before I left then forgot about it but some months later received a letter by the energy company at my new address telling me I hadn't paid.

I think a landlord could only be liable for any bills the tenant leaves if the bills were inclusive or paid by the landlord whom then charged the tenant extra for the service. He could then apply to have any outstanding bill charges deducted but I don't see how he could do so in any legal capacity if the tenant has the contract directly with the supplier hence making the tenant liable. She says she's not going to pull out all her bills for him, but he can't hold her deposit either because he's waiting to see if arrears come in the post so it'll be interesting to see how this unfolds if he asks her for her personal bills if the eviction goes ahead.

If companies can chase a landlord for tenant bills in tenant's name then this is the first I'm hearing of it. I suppose its possible nothing surprises me anymore with laws, the more I research them the more unfair some seem to be. The guy also seems to be overly cautious what with listing netflix as a cost he thinks he can recover, total lunacy seeing as that's not something that could cause any arrears, he shouldn't be unloading his anxieties onto tenants. It's true some tenants are an absolute nightmare and can leave so many costs for landlord's I personally know some with horror stories of tenants, but I still think tenants have the worst end of it if they get a bad landlord. Should he get a bad tenant in future he will regret losing the one he evicted for no reason and hopefully learn to appreciate the good ones.

[islandgirl]

I agree with most bills. I have been chased for council tax from a previous tenant who lied about moving out earlier than they did and had a battle to prove it. Some tenants switch utilities back into the LLs name. But you are absolutely correct the LL cannot hold on to the deposit for months. Provided it is in a scheme then there will be no problem for the tenant. I assume the deposit IS protected otherwise this becomes a whole different ball game!

[dslippy]

I am n ot sure that the Landlord's remedy works, but it has to be understood that this can be a real problem for a landlord. One defaulting tenant can cause hours of frustrating work.

[Pacific]

ISLANDGIRL the deposit is protected, the property was given to her in a bad condition and just to avoid problems with the LL she cleaned/repaired it but she said she also took pictures and contacted the deposit company to tell them he gave her the property in this condition, contradictory to the inventory he sent her, so if he tried to say she left the property like that when she leaves he can't get her deposit because he let it like that. I like the new RRB proposals about the lifetime deposit, the advance payments on another place are another obstacle for her moving, she would need thousands in advance which she doesn't have, I hope the proposals are in effect soon for all tenants.

DSLIPPY your right there are some nightmare tenants out there, it's them that is the biggest problem for good tenants because landlords become overly cautious and zealous from these bad experiences and take it out on new tenants as a sort of preconceived judgement and bordering harassment.