Demand Letter

[JohnW2]

I am just looking through the cost breakdown page .... for labour it has 23.50 single time hours ( half hour doing the job and 23 hrs sitting in van drinking brews lol ) ... 3 meter of 35mm2 cable (which is incorrect no cable was used) ... how can you justify the above for terminating a open end cable and burying it in the same location

As you say, it sounds as if it would probably be hard to justify, BUT ....

... if I were you, I would steer well away from even mentioning, let alone arguing about, the amount they are trying to charge, since they would then probably get the impression that you would probably agree to pay something. I would have thought that your argument should be that you should not have been billed for anything at all, whether the job 'cost them' £5 or £5,000 to do.

... just my opinion, of course!

Kind Regards, John

 

[John D v2.0]

To give another example, I was getting constant hassle from TV licensing about getting a licence, and ignoring it, the letters got more aggressive, then i just signed up online said I don't have atv and they said no problem we won't bother you for 2 years, let us know if anything changes. Sometimes you just have to say the right magic word.

 

[333rocky333]

I would have thought to get 23.5 single time hours, then the work would be spread over 2 possibly 3 days, companies like that are surely only single hours say 8am till 5pm

 

[HawkEye244]

I think u are correct in if i rang them they will ask for my details etc etc
Would it be advisable if i emailed them???
This way i can refer to them by the reference numbr on the letter and not disclose any of my details

No. It will only entice them to probe further. Zero contact is the best way to go.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Im a real worryer when it comes to somethin like this. Id like to get it resolved before it escalates.

Take zero notice of hawkeye - ignoring it won't go away.

Il like to have my say. Im confident i have a strong case regardin exposed cable definately not damaged and not connected to anythin also no mention of that i will be liable for payments for repairing the cable. Also justification of labour cost for putting a pot end on the cable and burying on my land

I will email them and see what happens

In your shoes I would do all communications in writing, no phone calls, no emails.

Were you there at any point? Just wondering if your initial letter could be one denying all knowledge of the whole affair.

 

[HawkEye244]

Of course not - but it would be easy enough for them to establish his identity. Apart from anything else, at least via his 'electricity supplier', he is presumably one of their 'customers'!
I really don't want to play at being a lawyer, since I have no expertise in that field, but I would think that there could well be an implied verbal contract, since someone (whose name was probably taken, and maybe even the call recorded) asked the DNO to do something about the cable, and a court might even be inclined to assume that, since the cable was on the OP's land, that 'someone' was acting on behalf of the owner of the property.

A series of follow-up 'reminders', 'threatening letters' and, ultimately, a 'Letter before Action' are quite probably already 'programmed in' to their system should the bill not been paid by specific points in time.

However, that's all just 'my opinion' and, as I've said, I'm no lawyer, so it's up to the OP to decide. It would seemingly do him no harm to talk to the CAB (or maybe OFGEM - although, as you say, I'm not sure I would necessarily 'trust them').

Kind Regards, John

Surprisingly not true also, keep in mind how many people's circumstances change. They could send someone with a clipboard and a form to fill out, again, if you don't give details they won't get anywhere. I would hazard a guess that the supplier didn't do this work, it was likely the distributor that does groundwork related stuff? Supplier's don't get their hands dirty, and whose paying the supplier is in no way proof of ownership, especially with the amount of rental propertys etc. They know this all to well, hence why it's written to the home owner and not his legal name to being with , they want to know who the home owner is.

Implied verbal contract, ha, no chance. If i turned up at your house and cleaned your roof and then sent you a letter for £3000 asking to be paid in full, I could say I had a verbal contract with you. The onus is on me to prove it, either a recorded conversation or some such thing. Doesn't appear they have any of that otherwise they'd be writing to him and not the homeowner.

''A series of follow-up 'reminders', 'threatening letters' and, ultimately, a 'Letter before Action' are quite probably already 'programmed in' to their system should the bill not been paid by specific points in time.''

Unlikely as they have no name to threaten, remember. You can't take action against no name.

Anyway, your quite sensible in approach, I have just learnt a few things in my time dealing with these sorts of things to know there are sometimes other avenues. I don't condone not meeting the terms of a contract, but in OPs case there isn't one, and he's better placed to know the full extent of his rights in a situation like this.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

To give another example, I was getting constant hassle from TV licensing about getting a licence, and ignoring it, the letters got more aggressive, then i just signed up online said I don't have atv and they said no problem we won't bother you for 2 years, let us know if anything changes. Sometimes you just have to say the right magic word.

Oh that is very different.

If you do not have a TV you do not have to respond to any of their demands. It's not like a motor vehicle and a SORN - you are not legally obliged to register non-possession of a TV.

If they start again in 2 years, just ignore the *******s.

 

[HawkEye244]

Im a real worryer when it comes to somethin like this. Id like to get it resolved before it escalates.

Il like to have my say. Im confident i have a strong case regardin exposed cable definately not damaged and not connected to anythin also no mention of that i will be liable for payments for repairing the cable. Also justification of labour cost for putting a pot end on the cable and burying on my land

I will email them and see what happens

Then pay. If you'd said that at the start I wouldn't have suggested the other stuff. Seeing as you did have the work done and to a satisfactory standard it's the reasonable thing to do really. I paid about £800 for a new connection for a gas meter once, and that was less than 1m from the roadside to the meter, so a grand is not unreasonable really for such work you describe. Disregard my comments then.

 

[HawkEye244]

To give another example, I was getting constant hassle from TV licensing about getting a licence, and ignoring it, the letters got more aggressive, then i just signed up online said I don't have atv and they said no problem we won't bother you for 2 years, let us know if anything changes. Sometimes you just have to say the right magic word.

Those are proforma letters though John, they come from a computer not a person. It's just the system churning out the same carefully worded threat letters on repeat. I've never paid for a tv licence and never will, zero communication, there's nothing they can do. Anyway, I'll bow out of the thread now.

 

[Sid1968]

Going againt your advice i have emailed the distributor. Iv asked all the questions and politly asked to withdraw the costs or i will seek legal advice and signed it with with regards the homeowner

Sorry guys but its back of my mind and niggling at me

 

[JohnW2]

Anyway, your quite sensible in approach, I have just learnt a few things in my time dealing with these sorts of things to know there are sometimes other avenues.

I'm not going to 'play lawyers' but I really don't think that attempts to conceal the identity of the homeowner has much mileage in it. So long as they believe that 'the owner of that house' owes them money, they will try to collect it, and that will, sooner or later, involve them taking steps to determine the idenity of that person.

... in OPs case there isn't one, and he's better placed to know the full extent of his rights in a situation like this.

Exactly - which is why I have suggested that if simply pointing out 'their mistake' to them does not resolve the issue, he would be advised to speak to a solicitor or the CAB.

I have never been in quite the same situation but, over the decades, have received a good few crazy 'demands for payment' and have always been able to eventually get things sorted by dialogue with the 'culprit', and have never been in the position of concealing my identity.

Kind Regards, John

 

[HawkEye244]

I'm not going to 'play lawyers' but I really don't think that attempts to conceal the identity of the homeowner has much mileage in it. So long as they believe that 'the owner of that house' owes them money, they will try to collect it, and that will, sooner or later, involve them taking steps to determine the idenity of that person.
Exactly - which is why I have suggested that if simply pointing out 'their mistake' to them does not resolve the issue, he would be advised to speak to a solicitor or the CAB.

I have never been in quite the same situation but, over the decades, have received a good few crazy 'demands for payment' and have always been able to eventually get things sorted by dialogue with the 'culprit', and have never been in the position of concealing my identity.

Kind Regards, John

Disagree completely and for the reasons stated but fair enough.

 

[JohnW2]

To give another example, I was getting constant hassle from TV licensing about getting a licence, and ignoring it, the letters got more aggressive, then i just signed up online said I don't have atv and they said no problem we won't bother you for 2 years, let us know if anything changes. Sometimes you just have to say the right magic word.

That was similar to the only case I can recall in which I was comparable with the OP's situation, in that I was being increasingly aggressively pursed as 'the house owner' for not having a TV licence. Since I knew that I had a licence, I ignored it for a good while, until I 'lost my nerve'.

In that case, the only thing I had to do to resolve the matter was to tell them my name. It transpired that their records had my postcode recorded incorrectly (although the rest of the address was correct) - so, as soon as I told them who I was, they were able to satisfy themselves that I did, indeed, have a licence!

Kind Regards, John

 

[motorbiking]

http://www.enwl.co.uk/docs/charging...ffered-by-electricity-north-west.pdf?sfvrsn=2

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I know someone who had a bit of fun with a TV licence enforcer, when he didn't have a TV.

After simply ignoring all the letters, when someone eventually turned up he let him in, and was very friendly to him - tea, biccies etc. He said he managed to keep the guy there for about 30 minutes before divulging that he didn't have a TV, and showing him round the bedsit. Apparently the guy went ballistic and threatened all sorts of repercussions for wasting his time. "Bring it on", he said.

I think he was disappointed that they didn't try to do anything.