Bumblebea
22-09-2011, 07:09 AM
Hi guys - I really would appreciate some advice from you as I'm not sure how to deal with this.
My apologies for the essay. Abridged version:
Alongside my rent payments under an AST my original landlord asked that we pay a top up for water rates which we have done ever since March 2003.
Last week, we received a letter from South West Water welcoming my husband as a customer.
Our new landlord, unbeknownst to us, had had a water meter fitted 2009. SWW told us last week that this didn't work sothere is no bill for the period 2009 to August 2011 when they fitted a new meter. This is when they were given my husband's name by the new landlord and we found out that our landlord wants us to pay the water company directly - he has at no point had a discussion with us about this.
We have, I believe a statutory periodic tenancy and are very grateful to be paying between £50 and £150 pcm (my estimate)below the market rent. We love our home and don't want to move.
So my questions are:
1. If we now, after we've discussed this with the landlord, have to pay for water directly to SWW (SWW have made us liable from 18.8.2011) does this constitute a rent increase if there is no corresponding reduction in our payments to the landlord or can he increase our rent as well?
2. If we do have to pay for water direct - do we need to be given a new agreement/would we be better off having a new agreement?
3. We have been paying our rent (plus water rates top up) to the new landlord for the last 3 years but he has not beenpaying anything over to the water company. Are we (technically)due a refund from him of those water rates payments (wouldn't want to push this unless the worst happens (i.e thathe asks for a rent increase that we cannot afford and we have to move out)?
Thank you in advance.
Full essay(!):
We moved into our flat(in a converted house) in 2003 with a 12 month AST. The tenancy agreement stated that bills are the responsibility of the tenant but the agreement between the landlord and ourselves was that we paid a top up for water rates (there were no meters in the property).
We have a receipt from the landlord for our deposit which also shows the first payment we made for water when we moved in and a subsequent letter showing the rent inclusive of water that we paid for the first 8 months. There were a couple of subsequent rent increases one of which I'm certain the landlord stated was due to water rates increasing but I will have to try and find this.
In 2008 my original landlord decided that he wanted to sellthe property "subject to the tenancies already in place". His letter stated that only a rent review was required and for us to sign a form contracting to rent the property for a further specific period or the tenancy could continue on a rolling month by month basis. We agreed a new rent and signed up for, I believe, a further two years. We do not have a copy of the form that we signed but there was no mention of any changes in any of the terms of our agreement.
A few weeks ago the gentleman who lives downstairs (and works for my landlord) advised that access to our flat would be needed as the landlord wanted to fit water meters. We assumed that the landlord would discuss this with us at some point but he didn't. The downstairs guy also made a comment in passing that our landlord had told him that we haven't been paying for water. I advised him that our rent includes water. he looked surprised (as were we!) but we didn't discuss it further.
Last weekend we received a letter from South West Water welcoming my husband as a new customer. I contacted them and was informed that separate water meters were fitted in the property in 2009. We had no idea that meters had been fitted as the landlord never discussed this with us. This presumably occurred when the landlord was doing renovations to the whole property (excluding our flat as we were the only tenants in the building at the time). I'm not too sure of the chronology so will need to ring SWW again to confirm the history but for a period they believed that no one was at the property (we never touched any of the letters that would occasionally turn up from them as they didn't have our name on and our water was included in the rent so they were none of our business). SWW said that they had believed that the property was vacant as there was no water use showing for the flat. They apparently sent someone round to cut off the supply but saw signs of habitation. The meter that was installed in August, that we believed was the first to be fitted turned out to be a replacement for the original faulty one (that we had no idea was even there)that didn't register water being used. On 9th September SWW received an email from my landlord informing them that my husband is the occupier and therefore responsible for the water bill, hence the letter we received.
All of this information has come to us through SWW.We have told them that our agreement is that water is included with our rent payments and they have advised us to approach our landlord. We have heard nothing from our landlord about this which leads my husband to believe that the landlord bought the property without knowing that, by virtue of our original agreement with our former landlord, he was liable to pay water rates (and subsequent bills)and not us. I think that he must have had an inkling (or should have done) as he would have known that the building was rated as a single property for the purposes of water when he arranged to have the meters fitted in 2009.
The other issue that we have is that the rent we pay has not been increased since 2008 just before the new landlord bought the property (and as his employee who lives downstairs keeps saying - don't ask him to do repairs as every time we mention something to him that he mentions to the landlord, our landlord says that he must remember to put our rent up) We are very lucky (and very grateful)to be paying what I believe to be less than the market rent for our home so I am certain that any discussions with the landlord will trigger a rent increase.
My apologies for the essay. Abridged version:
Alongside my rent payments under an AST my original landlord asked that we pay a top up for water rates which we have done ever since March 2003.
Last week, we received a letter from South West Water welcoming my husband as a customer.
Our new landlord, unbeknownst to us, had had a water meter fitted 2009. SWW told us last week that this didn't work sothere is no bill for the period 2009 to August 2011 when they fitted a new meter. This is when they were given my husband's name by the new landlord and we found out that our landlord wants us to pay the water company directly - he has at no point had a discussion with us about this.
We have, I believe a statutory periodic tenancy and are very grateful to be paying between £50 and £150 pcm (my estimate)below the market rent. We love our home and don't want to move.
So my questions are:
1. If we now, after we've discussed this with the landlord, have to pay for water directly to SWW (SWW have made us liable from 18.8.2011) does this constitute a rent increase if there is no corresponding reduction in our payments to the landlord or can he increase our rent as well?
2. If we do have to pay for water direct - do we need to be given a new agreement/would we be better off having a new agreement?
3. We have been paying our rent (plus water rates top up) to the new landlord for the last 3 years but he has not beenpaying anything over to the water company. Are we (technically)due a refund from him of those water rates payments (wouldn't want to push this unless the worst happens (i.e thathe asks for a rent increase that we cannot afford and we have to move out)?
Thank you in advance.
Full essay(!):
We moved into our flat(in a converted house) in 2003 with a 12 month AST. The tenancy agreement stated that bills are the responsibility of the tenant but the agreement between the landlord and ourselves was that we paid a top up for water rates (there were no meters in the property).
We have a receipt from the landlord for our deposit which also shows the first payment we made for water when we moved in and a subsequent letter showing the rent inclusive of water that we paid for the first 8 months. There were a couple of subsequent rent increases one of which I'm certain the landlord stated was due to water rates increasing but I will have to try and find this.
In 2008 my original landlord decided that he wanted to sellthe property "subject to the tenancies already in place". His letter stated that only a rent review was required and for us to sign a form contracting to rent the property for a further specific period or the tenancy could continue on a rolling month by month basis. We agreed a new rent and signed up for, I believe, a further two years. We do not have a copy of the form that we signed but there was no mention of any changes in any of the terms of our agreement.
A few weeks ago the gentleman who lives downstairs (and works for my landlord) advised that access to our flat would be needed as the landlord wanted to fit water meters. We assumed that the landlord would discuss this with us at some point but he didn't. The downstairs guy also made a comment in passing that our landlord had told him that we haven't been paying for water. I advised him that our rent includes water. he looked surprised (as were we!) but we didn't discuss it further.
Last weekend we received a letter from South West Water welcoming my husband as a new customer. I contacted them and was informed that separate water meters were fitted in the property in 2009. We had no idea that meters had been fitted as the landlord never discussed this with us. This presumably occurred when the landlord was doing renovations to the whole property (excluding our flat as we were the only tenants in the building at the time). I'm not too sure of the chronology so will need to ring SWW again to confirm the history but for a period they believed that no one was at the property (we never touched any of the letters that would occasionally turn up from them as they didn't have our name on and our water was included in the rent so they were none of our business). SWW said that they had believed that the property was vacant as there was no water use showing for the flat. They apparently sent someone round to cut off the supply but saw signs of habitation. The meter that was installed in August, that we believed was the first to be fitted turned out to be a replacement for the original faulty one (that we had no idea was even there)that didn't register water being used. On 9th September SWW received an email from my landlord informing them that my husband is the occupier and therefore responsible for the water bill, hence the letter we received.
All of this information has come to us through SWW.We have told them that our agreement is that water is included with our rent payments and they have advised us to approach our landlord. We have heard nothing from our landlord about this which leads my husband to believe that the landlord bought the property without knowing that, by virtue of our original agreement with our former landlord, he was liable to pay water rates (and subsequent bills)and not us. I think that he must have had an inkling (or should have done) as he would have known that the building was rated as a single property for the purposes of water when he arranged to have the meters fitted in 2009.
The other issue that we have is that the rent we pay has not been increased since 2008 just before the new landlord bought the property (and as his employee who lives downstairs keeps saying - don't ask him to do repairs as every time we mention something to him that he mentions to the landlord, our landlord says that he must remember to put our rent up) We are very lucky (and very grateful)to be paying what I believe to be less than the market rent for our home so I am certain that any discussions with the landlord will trigger a rent increase.