For my daughter at Uni. Slightly convoluted story
She's in a house share, runs 1/8/23 to 31/7/24. But the landlord keeps the place for August and uses the time to clean and repair, etc. - not convinced that much was done as it's a student level of repair when they moved in (and yes, we took photos, etc. and this isn't about that) - so they actually took over keys and met him there and did inventory etc. on 2/9/23
He also informed the power company (OVO FWIW) of them moving in and they have an account with OVO and letters confirming start from 2/9, meter readings - all done properly.
They got an OVO letter to 'The Occupiers' at the address a while back (last year) with a bill for the month of August - within their letting contract, but clearly outside their energy contract. They gave it to the landlord who said he'd sort it. It was only £40 which is basically standing charges, plus about £15 power. None of them had keys so someone was in there clearly (I assume won't have been boiler - was August)
Yesterday they got a letter from LCS Debt Recovery saying they'd been instructed to recover the debt by OVO, and their investigation had lead them to believe they were the occupiers at that time. Not sure where they'd get that from - maybe it's available if they have access to IDK what databases, maybe the letting agent gave it.... but it's no longer 'The Occupiers', it's addressed to all of them, by name. And of course they've added their admin charge, which admittedly is only £20 so far. So now 'they' owe £60.
She's tried OVO direct but the right team aren't there at weekends, and the LCS helpline just has automated options and no-one answering either. She'll try again tomorrow. In the meantime she has emailed LCS with a copy of the OVO letter confirming start date of 2/9 and asking for them to cancel the debt on them and also repair any credit impact that has been caused.
It's a confusing area because they were officially the tenants but didn't have access, and definitely didn't have an OVO account at the time. I suppose the Landlord could argue the standing charge should be theirs, but that's between him and them, nothing to do with OVO or LCS. And then there's £15 of power while they were in cleaning and whatever else.... and also a £20 admin fee because he didn't sort it out as they promised
In the end I'll stand the £60 to avoid the debt recovery people proceeding further as they are saying they will if this isn't resolved in a timely manner (hence why we've emailed, to get on record it's in dispute) and then argue that back with the landlord if necessary. The worry, and the question, is around the impact of having 'their' debt passed to LCS. Anyone got any knowledge or advice? Can they put right any impact it's had or is that now another thing for my daughter to sort.
Grrr....****er...etc.
Someone will be along with proper advice I’m sure but firstly do not correspond with LCS other than to request details of all their info via a SAR. Certainly don’t let your daughter phone them. They are likely to be very nasty on the phone. They can try and collect the debt but without a court order there is little they can do other than scare tactics. They cannot add any fees to it either. They also cannot affect any credit rating no matter what they say, however OVO can say that the account is in arrears which will appear on any credit report. I suggest you get a copy of it from Credit Expert or similar. Secondly I am assuming that OVO have sent letters of demand to the address and these have been ignored. Where are they?
No, one letter to 'the occupiers' in Nov or Dec last year, and now this.
She has thus far emailed back to LCS confirming they were not OVO customers for the period in question and asking them to remove / repair any damage caused thus far.
I'll tell her to call OVO first tomorrow and give them opportunity to fix it, before starting to go all 'legal' on them.
I have had similar with a gap between tenants. the departing tenants will have given a date of moving out. Your daughter has a moving in date. The gap between the two my bet is the landlord has not put the account in their name so no one is on the bill for that period. OVO will assume its your daughters responsibility from the date of the previous tenants leaving
Import point, does the letter from LCS say they are “acting on behalf “ of OVO? If it does then the debt is still with OVO and a call to them should be made initially. Definitely no correspondence with LCS other than a SAR. Certainly don’t ring them unless you are able to record the call. Templates for this type of SAR letter to debt collection agencies are available on the Money Saving Expert forums. Good luck! 👍
[color=red]DO NOT TALK TO DEBT RECOVERY COMPANIES OVER THE PHONE[/color]
A quick google would suggest that LCS is one of the more reputable ones (which is a bit like saying "most talented half of Milli Vanilli") but it's all too easy to incriminate yourself.
She does not own them money, it is unlawful to pursue a contested debt.
In the end I’ll stand the £60 to avoid the debt recovery people proceeding further
Which is exactly what they bank on.
The worry, and the question, is around the impact of having ‘their’ debt passed to LCS. Anyone got any knowledge or advice? Can they put right any impact it’s had or is that now another thing for my daughter to sort.
If - if - it has impacted her credit record then it is perfectly within their capability to correct it. Step 1 there is finding out, I suggest Credit Karma.
Personally I'd be making the entire situation the landlord's problem.
In the interest of expediency, can you just say to the landlord "is it cool if we just pay it, and deduct the amount from the next rent?"
She’s in a house share, runs 1/8/23 to 31/7/24. But the landlord keeps the place for August and uses the time to clean and repair, etc.
I'm kinda curious if they're still expected to pay rent for that time.
I'd be checking out the contract they signed as that should have information regarding the utilities.
I can't tell you how glad I am to be almost out of the student accommodation ripoff.
(I'm struggling to believe that OVO sent one bill before calling in the debt collectors..... They're world have been a number - not that it's particularly pertinent here)
I’m kinda curious if they’re still expected to pay rent for that time
Standard practice, you pay even if you can't access the property.
What Cougar said...it's a very short space of time (if i read correctly) for a cowboy 'debt collector' to get involved for a disputed utility bill.
I suspect high shenanigans here, But theres quite a lot to un-pick.
Step 1 - If they have already contacted LCS, (not good) then contact them again, stating that the alleged debt is in dispute, and refer LCS back to thier client (OVO?).
The debt is in dispute, so they have no authority to try to chase it.
Never speak to them on the phone, always by email so you have an audit trail.
Edit: I'm not sure I see how they can be the legal tenants without an official electricity contract for 4 weeks.
Personally I’d be making the entire situation the landlord’s problem.
He has been informed and has said he will sort - but he said that before.
my bet is the landlord has not put the account in their name so no one is on the bill for that period. OVO will assume its your daughters responsibility from the date of the previous tenants leaving
Yes, except OVO know when they took it over, which is the date the landlord informed OVO - which I guess isn't technically the same as knowing they weren't the 'in situ' tenants for the period in question.
does the letter from LCS say they are “acting on behalf “ of OVO?
Main points:
Case Ref XXX
Our Client - OVO Energy
We have undertaken an investigation into the supply of OVO energy services to [house] between 31/7 and 1/9. Investigation leads us to believe you had a connection during this period and therefore you may be responsible for part or all of the charges during this period, for example
- you were the legal owner
- you were the letting agent
- you were the tenant
If you were responsible please contact us on XXX to discuss how to pay. If you are not responsible for the supply during this period call us on YYY so we can update our records
I’m not sure I see how they can be the legal tenants without an official electricity contract for 4 weeks.
wouldn't that be the case in a fully serviced contract, where you pay rent only and the landlord pays the utilities?
it’s a very short space of time (if i read correctly) for a cowboy ‘debt collector’ to get involved for a disputed utility bill.
Apparently they (OVO or LCS, not sure) have sent bill to landlord on 11/1 again. So sounds like the fault is with him, just now making sure it doesn't negatively impacting ratings, and why the debt agency now has their names specifically.
The bill isn't in dispute, just who should pay it and then who should pay the debt agency their £20 for not paying it so far.
Like I said, for £60 I would and then claim back from landlord in rent or whatever, to avoid getting either further charges or worse, orders or whatever. But encouraged that fees can't be added to a disputed debt, and thanks for the advice to email only (if you can't contact them at all how do you dispute the debt)
therefore you may be responsible
"may"
I suspect the devil could be in the detail here. Does their tenancy agreement stop and restart for the period in question or were they - on paper at least - still technically tenants? Were they still paying rent during that period? It does seem to be an unnecessarily convoluted scenario.
Have they been paying the fuel bill from September's meter reading onwards? If so and they've provided meter readings from when they moved (back) in I'm not seeing how they can be held liable for usage prior to that.
Sounds like typical phshing...
There's no reason for a pseudo debt collection agency to be involved unless there are previous outstanding debts against the property.
LCS and the like will 'scatter bomb' anyone they can in the hopes of reclaiming a few quid.
I mean you could just pay them £60 or whatever to make the problem go away, but that's how they operate and make money.
Reading between the lines, there was 60 quids worth of utilites used between the last tennant moving out and your lot moving in, and the landlord has decided he doesn't want to cop for that.
just now making sure it doesn’t negatively impacting ratings
It seems unlikely. Again, "may." It sounds like they're just chasing liability at this point, not non-payment.
and why the debt agency now has their names specifically.
OVO have their details and have instructed LCS to recover, why wouldn't LCS have details?
The bill isn’t in dispute, just who should pay it
The bill isn't in dispute but whether or not it's their debt is.
Reading between the lines, there was 60 quids worth of utilites used between the last tennant moving out and your lot moving in, and the landlord has decided he doesn’t want to cop for that.
The previous tenant also being the self same "your lot".
I guess it shouldn't matter who the last tenant was, assuming they actually paid in full on moving out and picked up again when moving back in. But if it was some sort of gentleman's agreement where they'd go away for a few weeks, then the landlord decides to be a dick over £60 rather than just plain incompetent then it might get complicated. If meter readings were submitted then that shouldn't be the case but...
I think my response would be "we moved in on [1/9] and submitted meter readings at that time, the landlord has assured us that he will be accountable for his own usage prior to that date."
I totally get that most wont agree with me but id be tempted to pay the £60 and make it go away.
Other than that it's about how much time/ worry do you wish to invest in the problem to make it go away?
I'm not saying my course of action is the *right* one, I'm just being pragmatic.
Either way, hope you get it sorted op.👍
encouraged that fees can’t be added to a disputed debt
It is unlawful to actively pursue a contested debt. Continuing to do so once it's contested is considered Harassment. Whether that means they can or can't keep stacking charges in the hope that someone will eventually be proven liable for it, I couldn't say.
for £60 I would and then claim back from landlord in rent or whatever
and
I totally get that most wont agree with me but id be tempted to pay the £60 and make it go away.
I'm into the realms of speculation now but,
In paying, it could be argued that you're implicitly confirming liability of the debt. So any potential strikes on their credit history for non-payment of a six month old utility bill will stay on record. She's got buckley's of demonstrating that it was in error if she's paid it.
This is the bear trap here. Currently LCS do not know and cannot prove who is liable. A debt collection agency would really like it if someone were to go "yeah, it was me."
(Plus, I don't know about you, I understand you want to look out for your daughter and all but I'm not in the habit of giving away free money to anyone who asks for it, simply on a point of principle. "Let's just pay to make it go away" is exactly the phrase my partner of the time used when she was being chased for a debt she didn't owe.)
It's not phishing, and they're not pseudo - enough on various sites to confirm legitimacy and indeed seems they are HMRC's choice for chasing debts, and the debt (£40.81 fwiw) matches the bill that 'The Occupiers' were sent last year and which they gave to the landlord, as it falls in the period when technically they were in contract but not in residence. This situation - of the landlord having the access for the month to do repairs, etc - you might describe as unnecessarily convoluted but seems fairly common talking to other students who have the same, and confirmed by Sharkbait. I guess it's no different to as TJ said, where a long term tenant leaves and you might have a gap until next moves in, except the contracts themselves for these year to year student lets are back to back.
Like I said - their contract with the landlord says
During the Term you agree to pay the council tax and to pay for all services and utilities for the Property including but not limited to supplies of water, sewerage, gas and any other fuels, electricity.
but he only moved the contract with OVO to them on the 2/9, and yes they have paid that monthly ever since. So while the landlord might have said that yes they owe him, he didn't ask for it, didn't tell them to pay it, but said he'd sort it.
His problem, I'd say, right up until THEY start getting letters, with additional fees added, and I know what impact a bad credit rating can have. That's the major concern, not £60. Which i agree, I'm not in the habit of just giving away but £40 is some likelihood of being theirs anyway.
Intention is not to say 'it was me' - intention as clearly stated is to say it wasn't me and wave the 'welcome to OVO' letter as proof. As you say everything in the letter so far is MAY - and it MAY therefore also be that doing that makes them go elsewhere. They won't deny legally they were tenants, they will argue back to the landlord that as they didn't have access for that time then no matter what the contract says, in reality that month's bill is his as he had access all that time. If he'd done extensive remodelling with cement mixers and power tools in that period and run up a £200 bill - no way would they be expected to pay that, would they?
theotherjonv - based on your posts being both accurate and complete, do not pay.
Do not engage with LCS - and tell your daughter to do the same - after writing/emailing to tell them they are acting in error, possibly illegally and at fault.
Students, as young adults, can be easily bullied by 'officialdom' and feel threatened by the likes of LCS so you may wish to take the lead.
This appears to be for OVO and the landlord to sort between them.
You/your daughter should insist that OVO advise whether or not this resulted in a marker on her credit record and, if it has, insist they take action with the referencing agencies to remove it.
Is the landlord a uni approved agent or is he fully outside of any approved landlord scheme operated by the uni?
^ broadly that's the plan of action.
Yes, landlord is a regular Uni listed one. Doesn't seem the best - but comes across as disorganised / a bit shit rather than evil and machiavellian. Last time I was there I talked to their elderly neighbour, apparently the properties were all their Dad's, but when he retired or died he split them and gave them to his sons and they're not as diligent.
Students, as young adults, can be easily bullied by ‘officialdom’ and feel threatened by the likes of LCS so you may wish to take the lead.
I agree - but I'm also very much of the opinion that part of Uni is the standing on your own feet experience so i won't be calling OVO or LCS on her behalf unless I really have to, but that's different to asking for advice and passing that on - STW is a great resource for all matters as we know. And after plenty of experience working on the help desk at a supermarket, she knows how to handle a 'difficult customer' so if anyone from OVO or LCS does happen to read this I'd recommend not seeing how forceful she can be when she wants. Especially not for £20.
It won't stop them sending 'red' letters or spamming her on her mobile phone though if she's been in contact with them, though.
I'd reccomend blocking them (on the mobile) and simply sending them an email 'this alleged debt is in dispute, may I please refer you back to your client'.
Don't get caught up with dealing with them, as you might easily admit liability by accident, and then you will be on the hook, that's how the business model operates.
Op's daughter and the other students didn't get the keys until 2/9 so how can they be legally responsible for
any/all utilities costs before they moved in?
I would say that any attempt to make the students responsible for a utilities debt incurred before they had the keys and moved in is legally unenforceable as the contract wording is such that the landlord can dump costs onto tenants which they did not incur.
The extract from the contract which states 'During the term...' without, apparently, specifying the start date; is the reference to the uni term or the term of the let?
Clearly, the landlord intends it to be for the term of the let but he's pushing his luck to say that non-residents are responsible for costs they have not incurred.
Op’s daughter and the other students didn’t get the keys until 2/9 so how can they be legally responsible for
any/all utilities costs before they moved in?
They cannot be, in court, but that won't stop the shenannigans! the mere fact they have 'DCA' on the case so soon is highly suspect!
he only moved the contract with OVO to them on the 2/9
That's your answer then, isn't it.
"Our contract with OVO commenced on 2/9 and meter readings were provided at that time, since that date we have paid bills as presented in a timely manner. We have no knowledge of any monies owed prior to the start of our contract and therefore reject any liability for this."
Or words thereof.
term is term of contract which is clearly 1/8/23-31/7/24, and contract does say they have to pay all the bills etc., in that time. And yes, they did pay rent for that month, but that's the deal as well, it's effectively a year's rental paid by 4 quarterly payments, etc.
The month of landlord possession isn't in the contract but as i said seems fairly common practise for these student lets. TBH at the time it wasn't an issue, it is/was a month without bills, insurances, no need to not leave it unoccupied for 14 continuous days, etc., and for the purposes of repair etc. The fact that was a bit shit and it wasn't until she actually took possession and pointed out some issues that they got fixed is another matter.
So seems like there's a bit of 'interpretation' of the contract, but as i said - if he'd genuinely done a lot of renovation and run up a lot of power usage, no way would this be a question. Fact that it's basically standing charge and another £10-15 shouldn't change the principle but for some reason makes me a bit more sanguine.
the mere fact they have ‘DCA’ on the case so soon is highly suspect!
My £60 is on OVO chasing the landlord for the shortfall for the last six months and the landlord ignoring them. The tenants would have been oblivious to this right up until the point where OVO sells it as a bad debt to LCS.
LCS then scatterguns letters about the place using robust language in increasingly vivid shades of red ink to anyone who might remotely either be in a position to be liable or be in a position to be intimidated into paying.
Op’s daughter and the other students didn’t get the keys until 2/9 so how can they be legally responsible fora ny/all utilities costs before they moved in?
Quite simply because the signed the contract starting it was theirs from 1/8.
The "term" started on the 1/8, they probably could have got the keys then if they wanted (quite often students leaving their yr 2 house move their stuff straight into the yr3 house - even if painting if bring done - rather than take everything home for the dinner just to take it back again)
OP you could also try and find out if anyone was in the house during August.
Some students don't actually go home or sometimes there's a summer school thing that people need a room for just a few weeks.
This could account for the power usage.
In my experience landlords of student accomodation without never miss a month's rental.
the mere fact they have ‘DCA’ on the case so soon is highly suspect!
I don't agree.
Letter/bill from OVO to 'The Occupiers' in Nov for month of August with bill for £40.81, that was passed to the landlord who said he'd deal with it.
Further bill apparently (landlord has confirmed) on 11th Jan requesting payment. Not known if they have written to him before that still
And now after that is still unpaid 2 weeks later a letter to the named tenants by LCS on behalf of their client OVO asking them to confirm or deny they are liable.
What's suspect about that run of events?
I don’t agree.
What’s suspect about that run of events?
The landlord being a shyster?
None of us know the real details over this £60 bill, so the obvious thing to do, for the OP is call thier bluff, and openly ask them to take you to court. or piss off.
In my experience landlords of student accomodation without never miss a month’s rental.
They haven't.
And yes, they did pay rent for that month, but that’s the deal as well, it’s effectively a year’s rental paid by 4 quarterly payments, etc.
The month of landlord possession isn’t in the contract but as i said seems fairly common practise for these student lets. TBH at the time it wasn’t an issue, it is/was a month without bills, insurances, no need to not leave it unoccupied for 14 continuous days, etc., and for the purposes of repair etc.
Let's restate as they rented for a full year, but made an agreement that landlord would retain possession for the first month for the purposes of repairs, etc. In hindsight could they have negotiated to pay 11/12, maybe, particularly as he didn't seem to do much.
Maybe he did have a short term rent that used the power. TBH, who cares - my daughter and her lot took possession on the agreed date, and took over bills etc., on that date. All's good - until......
The landlord being a shyster?
Got you. As I said before, pretty sure it's a genuine agency chasing a genuine debt, not a scam or phishing trip trying to scare them into paying a false debt.
But yep, maybe me trusting the landlord as being a bit crap and disorganised is wrong, and maybe he's said he'd sort it and had no intent to, instead he's worked it to 'bank' the £40 he's saved and then pointed the agency at the legal tenants where the threats scare them into paying (again, to be clear for now all LCS asked is whether the debt is theirs or not), and so what if they get a £20 admin fee.
Just because a contract has been signed does not mean that the contract terms are always enforceable.
I would be very surprised if the students in question could be held legally liable for utilities costs incurred before they moved in or had keys for the property.
A question for the landlord could/should be...who was in the property and what were they doing between the contract start date of 1/8 and the date the students received the keys and moved in on 2/9?
With a follow-up question - why should the students pay for costs incurred by an unknown third party who was in the property without their knowledge or agreement?
Any costs incurred as a result of maintenance etc instructed by the landlord are his responsibility; they are, clearly, not the responsibility - either legally or morally - of the tenants who were yet to move in.
I would summarise as...incompetence, disorganisation and sharp practice.
I'd be sticking a formal complaint in to Offgen about OVO, and start making it their problem to resolve with the landlord.
I re ask my earlier question. Does the LCS letter say “on behalf of” because if it does then OVO have not sold the debt on. Rather they have engaged a DCA to assist in recovering it. If this is the case the DCA are less likely to do illegal searches on her credit report stating things like the reason for the search is debt recovery - the debt has to be proven before this takes place and that requires a court order or admission of liability hence all the “do not contact” advice. As soon as you tell the DCA that the debt is in dispute (and this does not mean OVO are out of pocket by £40, it means that the person disputes owing it) then they are no longer allowed to chase it. Do not give them any contact details as you will be plagued thereafter with chasing phone calls and I don’t doubt your details will be sold on to organisations who will be calling vulnerable people likely to be in debt in order to scam them with offers of clearing the debt etc. These people are totally unscrupulous. <br /><br />
Contact OVO is my advice and give them the landlord’s name, address and phone number.
No, it doesn't but as per the text I posted above from the DCA they refer to OVO as their client - so yes, I'm assuming they are being asked to help to recover it.
Other points noted
the bill that ‘The Occupiers’ were sent last year and which they gave to the landlord, as it falls in the period when technically they were in contract but not in residence.
If you are saying the contract covered the dates in question and contract states they are liable for utilities then they are liable. Whether they are in residency or not isn't relevant. Any arrangement about whether the landlord refunds the bill isn’t a matter for OVO.
Are they paying rent for August? Seems very dodgy that the landlord gets them to pay for his "cleaning time"...I'd just pay it - Life is too short for £60...
Welcome to the real world!
Are they paying rent for August? Seems very dodgy that the landlord gets them to pay for his “cleaning time”…
It's all in previous posts. Yes, they are renting for the year, this month of landlord possession between back to back student lets seems fairly normal even if it isn't part of the contract, as I said earlier her friends in other student houses have similar arrangements, and the same when she vacates this one and moves to her 3rd year house
I’d just pay it – Life is too short for £60…
Welcome to the real world!
That's not the point of the thread though - the £40 isn't really that contentious, as i said earlier "if he’d genuinely done a lot of renovation and run up a lot of power usage, no way would this be a question. Fact that it’s basically standing charge and another £10-15 shouldn’t change the principle but for some reason makes me a bit more sanguine" - it's how to make sure that OVO / LCS stop chasing them, don't damage their credit as a result of 'not paying' and repair any damage already done. A good credit record is way more valuable than £15 each, or even £60 out of the Bank of Dad. I think we're very in touch with the real world, thanks.
[Side note - I do appreciate people taking time to give advice, and this isn't one of those 'Give me some advice - NO NOT THAT ADVICE!' threads. But I do get a bit frustrated when people ask stuff that's already been covered or answered; even more so because I don't like to just not answer or answer with 'GO BACK AND READ THE THREAD!' - so I end up politely repeating myself endlessly instead. Just me??]
Quite simply because the signed the contract starting it was theirs from 1/8.
Sure, but if the landlord didn't had over the keys until Sept, the point's moot. This bill is not the OP's daughter's responsibility, and the only thing she need do, is pass on these letters to the Landlord in a reasonable time frame.
There are two contracts, one with OVO which started on 2/9 and one with the landlord. So yes they can be in contract with the landlord but not liable for OVO bills as they had no contract with OVO at that point.
There are 3 contracts as you’re missing the tenancy agreement between the landlord and tenants. If that states tenants are liable for utilities then they are on the hook.
It’s all in previous posts. Yes, they are renting for the year, this month of landlord possession between back to back student lets seems fairly normal even if it isn’t part of the contract, as I said earlier her friends in other student houses have similar arrangements, and the same when she vacates this one and moves to her 3rd year house
It might be "normal" but the way you have worded it certainly sounds dodgy as hell.
Normal would be "I have a flat to rent, it will be available on 1st Aug when the previous tenant moves out; you don't need a flat until 1st Sept, but the market is in my favour so you are paying for August if you want to secure the flat (as some other mug will be willing to do this if you are not). You can collect they keys whenever you want, but I'm fine if you don't collect them till early Sept." Dodgy is "you will start paying rent on 1st August, but the flat will not be available to occupy until 1st sept". Depending on exactly the wording in the tenancy agreement that distinction may also have a bearing on who was liable for the unpaid electricity bills.
"Dad this is normal, its what everyone has to do", does not actually mean its either normal or legitimate.
There are two relevant contracts, a supply agreement with OVO starting 2/9 and a tenancy agreement which contradict each other. Whatever other contract with OVO ran up to the 1/9, the point it transferred, isn't their responsibility, but it hasn't been paid and now they are being 'chased' for it (OK, reading the chase letter, it's fact finding but as others have said don't admit anything least of all if it's not in writing could be interpreted as an 'Aha! type of chase)
Technically yes, the tenancy does state they will take on the utils for the period of tenancy, but that was effectively waived out because of him keeping the property for the month of August for the purposes of repair and renovation. Nothing to do with OVO, it's clear their contract with OVO starts on the 2/9, and even more clear cut is THAT IS WHEN THE LANDLORD HIMSELF CHANGED THE OVO CONTRACT TO THEIR NAMES
As I said before, if he'd done extensive renovations costing hundreds, would they be liable for that? What if he'd run a cannabis factory or bitcoin mine and run up thousands in that time?
I suppose playing hardball if landlord now says they should pay that £40 plus his idiot tax of £20 for not sorting it like he said he would - the agreement around the first month becomes even more negotiable and they withhold a month of rent in return. Cake and eat it defence.
Refer to tenancy agreement. If tenancy agreement says tenant responsible for bills, look at date tenancy agreement started and pay bills from that date.
Any other 'I'll take care of it' stuff between landlord and tenant, unless it is written down, is pretty worthless.
It's a useful life lesson, I guess. Landlords are not to be taken at their word.
Whatever other contract with OVO ran up to the 1/9,
NOt necessarily if the other tenants moved out end of july and closed their account then. I have had exactly this happen. the landlord is liabile for the empty period but there may have been no contract covering it if the landlord did not put it in his name for the month.
My new tenants when givin a bill for the period without tenants simply wrote back saying " not us, try the landlord" as we only moved in on the date given. I then got a bill
Any other ‘I’ll take care of it’ stuff between landlord and tenant, unless it is written down, is pretty worthless.
It is, sort of. Being young people they never talk to anyone, it's all in texts or Whatsapps, including words to the effect of 'I know we said we'd get the keys and do the inventory on 1st Sept, but can we make it the 2nd which is a Saturday' and 'No problem, I've arranged the bills to come in your name on that date'
So unless his phone is one of the special Government Cabinet approved models with disappearing Whatsapps, then it is traceable.
And to reiterate, the issue isn't really with the landlord even if he is a bit unreliable - on other things he's been pretty good TBH. The issue is with OVO /LCS chasing someone who clearly isn't in contract WITH THEM and potentially messing up their credit rating by doing so.
NOt necessarily if the other tenants moved out end of july and closed their account then. I have had exactly this happen. the landlord is liabile for the empty period but there may have been no contract covering it if the landlord did not put it in his name for the month.
Could well be this - as said the LCS letter is fact finding / "leads us to believe"
For those saying...just pay it, are you so casual with your own money?
It's easy to spend someone else's.
At what cost does this move from being acceptable/reasonable to...no way?
From the facts as stated by jonv, the tenants are not liable.
The tenancy agreement term stating that tenants are liable for utilities from start date of tenancy (1 Aug) is inconsistent with them not being given keys or allowed to move in until 2 Sept.
Not every clause in every agreement/contract is always legally valid and, in my view, this is a case in point.
Would be interesting to know what, if anything, the uni accommodation office have to say - if anything - about this.
is inconsistent with them not being given keys or allowed to move in until 2 Sept.
I suspect that they could have taken the keys at any time from 1/8 but the landlord has said that there will be work/painting going on so they can't really live there - thus being able to still charge for August.
It's an unfortunate "feature" of the student rental market.
If you want a house in a preferred location you have to dance to a certain tune.
For those saying…just pay it, are you so casual with your own money?
I'd imagine because £60 is a very small price to pay to avoid a black credit mark at such a young age.
The black mark will take at least 6 years to recover from and could easily stop them renting in future.
"For those saying…just pay it, are you so casual with your own money?"
Well... The OP has already spent a morning on here. I don't know how much he values his time...
It’s an unfortunate “feature” of the student rental market.
If you want a house in a preferred location you have to dance to a certain tune.
Exactly. If you don't agree and don't get your rental sorted quickly (they paid deposit in November 22 to secure a place in Aug 2023). Don't like the T&C's? Fine, next please!
S-R. I wouldn't spend half the time if I didn't have to keep repeating myself where people haven't read the thread.
This is a fraction of the time it will take if you don't just pay it
Nothing's getting paid until she's spoken to OVO.
You shouldn't have to pay it. What's with all these ruffty tuffty mountain bikers shouting "roll over" ??
I’d imagine because £60 is a very small price to pay to avoid a black credit mark at such a young age.
The black mark will take at least 6 years to recover from and could easily stop them renting in future.
Conversely, any black marks applied will be impossible to have removed if they admit liability.
You shouldn’t have to pay it. What’s with all these ruffty tuffty mountain bikers shouting “roll over” ??
Yeah, shouldn't mountain bikers be shouting "send it"?
Yeah, shouldn’t mountain bikers be shouting “send it”?
Hell, yeah!
Black mark on a credit account can be removed if it's incorrectly applied.
Only by those who applied it in the first place (I think?)
Also my understanding so...it will be for OVO to sort as I don't believe a collection agency can do it as they are not the 'principal'.
