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'.
