Claim against landlord/me for unpaid tenant bills by DCA of Insolvent Orbit Energy

[PallasAthena]

A question for the experts on this, isn't there some rule in Ofgem procedures and relevant law that says that if the owner of an empty property has not transferred the account to another supplier then the current supplier is entitled to charge them for the standing charge even though the owner has signed no contract? Their right comes from energy supply law not contract/agreement. Ofgem "Voids" procedures?

That seems to be the situation here, Orbit are saying masterchij is liable as owner for the S/C for periods when the property was empty as Orbit were the registered supplier during those periods.

Thought I'd better raise this before masterchij fires off the suggested letter.

[masterchij]

To date how much have you spent on Court fees?

If you paid fees, then you need to rethink the last paragraph (you shouldn't be out of pocket).

'Please note that I have never taken out a contract with Orbit Energy, so cannot be liable for any alleged 'Standing charges'.

Please also note that XXXXXXX has pursued me for an alleged debt which does not exist, I'm minded to remind XXXXXXX that, that under the Prevention from Harassment Act 1997 that would constitute 'harassment'. This has caused me considerable stress both in terms of my wellbeing but also my ability to obtain credit from providers.

If the claim is not withdrawn and it proceeds to a Hearing, then I will petition the Judge that the Creditor reimburses me the Ł303 set aside fee along with my costs for attending the hearing.'

Thanks,

I will use this wording.

I have paid only Ł303 for the "set aside judgement fee". I am not so much out of pocket, as opposed to not being able to get a pocket, right now, I can't get any credit cards or loans as we speak due to the CCJ, which means I am very tight on cash. But anyway that is more my fault for misunderstanding the court timeslines.

[Pezza54]

This topic was covered in the MSE forum a few years ago
Every poster believed the landlord was liable for utility bills between tenancies.
When a tenant moves in they can stay with the current or transfer to another service provider as account holder
When the tenancy ends and the tenant vacates the property, the tenant takes meter readings and informs the landlord of the meter reading and name of supplier. The landlord becomes responsible for future bills even though he or she has never formed a contract with the supplier

[echat11]

Thanks,

I will use this wording.

I have paid only Ł303 for the "set aside judgement fee". I am not so much out of pocket, as opposed to not being able to get a pocket, right now, I can't get any credit cards or loans as we speak due to the CCJ, which means I am very tight on cash. But anyway that is more my fault for misunderstanding the court timeslines.

O.K. as long as you are happy, update when you get a response.

**Also write a paragraph about removing the CCJ from your Credit File**.

[PallasAthena]

masterchij read posts #31 and #33 before sending that letter (cross posting).

[masterchij]

masterchij read posts #31 and #33 before sending that letter (cross posting).

Thanks for this input, does this potentially mean TM Legal has a case even though I did not agree to any Tarriffs which include standing charges?

[masterchij]

Thanks,

I will use this wording.

I have paid only Ł303 for the "set aside judgement fee". I am not so much out of pocket, as opposed to not being able to get a pocket, right now, I can't get any credit cards or loans as we speak due to the CCJ, which means I am very tight on cash. But anyway that is more my fault for misunderstanding the court timeslines.

In both cases I was neither informed of the tenant moving out, they just left, I just took the readings. Also I was only contacted by the energy supplier 2 years after the facts

[masterchij]

Hi Experts,

I am attaching a redacted version of my witness statement to this post. I am looking to submit it later tonight as it will be 7 days from the hearing from tomorrow.

Any advise I can get would me much appreciated.

[Pezza54]

If both tenants just left during the tenancy period without giving you notice, they are responsible for paying utility bills

[Pezza54]

I am certainly not an expert, but your witness statement is an impressive read
You have also displayed that you have a strong defence to the claim- tenancy agreements show that the property was tenanted for the periods that the utility bills relate to

[echat11]

I would make the following 'minor' changes -

a) particulars of claim should read Particulars of Claim.

b) Point 40, is a bit 'muddled', doesn't read well, needs clearing up 'grammar'.

c) Point 55, it should read 'the Protection from Harassment Act 1997

d) claimants should read Claimants.

e) Point 58, is a bit 'muddled', doesn't read well, needs clearing up 'grammar'.

Good job. Have you numbered the pages in the 'evidence bundle'?

[masterchij]

I am certainly not an expert, but your witness statement is an impressive read
You have also displayed that you have a strong defence to the claim- tenancy agreements show that the property was tenanted for the periods that the utility bills relate to

Thanks for this. Makes me a little more confident going in.

[masterchij]

I would make the following 'minor' changes -

a) particulars of claim should read Particulars of Claim.

b) Point 40, is a bit 'muddled', doesn't read well, needs clearing up 'grammar'.

c) Point 55, it should read 'the Protection from Harassment Act 1997

d) claimants should read Claimants.

e) Point 58, is a bit 'muddled', doesn't read well, needs clearing up 'grammar'.

Good job. Have you numbered the pages in the 'evidence bundle'?

Thanks. Much appreciated for the quick review and comments. Will make the needed amendments

[masterchij]

I would make the following 'minor' changes -

a) particulars of claim should read Particulars of Claim.

b) Point 40, is a bit 'muddled', doesn't read well, needs clearing up 'grammar'.

c) Point 55, it should read 'the Protection from Harassment Act 1997

d) claimants should read Claimants.

e) Point 58, is a bit 'muddled', doesn't read well, needs clearing up 'grammar'.

Good job. Have you numbered the pages in the 'evidence bundle'?

How does this sound

40. Orbit Energy were provided with the details of the Tenant(s) residing in the property for the disputed period (Exhibit J), but instead of pursuing the persons responsible for the debts accrued, they passed my details to their administrators and their debt collectors.

55. I replied to EXXXX on the same day making it clear that there has never been a contract between I and Orbit Energy, hence I cannot be held liable for any ‘standing charges’. I also made it clear to Exxxx that her company were in breach of ‘the Protection from Harassment Act 1997’ as they had pursued me for debts that I was not liable for. I then requested that they should withdraw this claim.

[echat11]

How does this sound

40. Orbit Energy were provided with the details of the Tenant(s) residing in the property for the disputed period (Exhibit J), but instead of pursuing the persons responsible for the debts accrued, they passed my details to their administrators and their debt collectors.

55. I replied to EXXXX on the same day making it clear that there has never been a contract between I and Orbit Energy, hence I cannot be held liable for any ‘standing charges’. I also made it clear to Exxxx that her company were in breach of ‘the Protection from Harassment Act 1997’ as they had pursued me for debts that I was not liable for. I then requested that they should withdraw this claim.

That's fine, don't forget to check point 58.