They want to install Smartmeters

[John D v2.0]

Tenancies are created by statutory laws and most tenancy agreements have at least one thing in that are not enforceable.
We have rented from plenty of landlords who think the tenancy agreement overrides the law and landlords who think they have rights over the house that they don't just because they own it.

Examples include the landlord has no rights of entry that any other member of the public doesn't have. Ie they can be trespassing in a house they own if someone else has possession. And one landlord even tried to tell us where to keep the bins and various other things, and we had to wash the windows at some regular interval. We were even told by one we had to provide receipts for shampooing the carpets after moving out.
One such thing is about the metering, if the tenant has the account they are allowed to change to any supplier, furthermore the contents of the meter board owned by the dno are not even a matter for the tenant, let alone the landlord. The supplier can change whatever they like on there, even if you are an owner occupier. Eg pre payment meters.
Any charges attempted by the landlord for arranging the dno to change their equipment would be difficult to charge to the tenant. Might be interesting to argue with the small claims court on that.
Same goes for changing the locks, the tenant can do this when they move in, and as long as they either change back or supply keys when they vacate there's nothing the landlord can do.

 

[JohnW2]

Tenancies are created by statutory laws and most tenancy agreements have at least one thing in that are not enforceable. ... We have rented from plenty of landlords who think the tenancy agreement overrides the law and landlords who think they have rights over the house that they don't just because they own it.

I don't think that is in any way peculiar to Tenancy Agreements - I don't think that any sort of contract can 'override the law'. As far as I am aware, the law does allow tenancy agreements to contain specific provisions/restrictions (not required by the law), at the discretion/wish of the landlord, so long as they are 'reasonable' (and, obviously, agreed to by the tenant if they sign the agreement). For example, some landlords may wish to prohibit pets, whilst others would not - so it would be unreasonable for the law to mandate one way or the other.

One such thing is about the metering, if the tenant has the account they are allowed to change to any supplier, furthermore the contents of the meter board owned by the dno are not even a matter for the tenant, let alone the landlord. The supplier can change whatever they like on there, even if you are an owner occupier. Eg pre payment meters.
Any charges attempted by the landlord for arranging the dno to change their equipment would be difficult to charge to the tenant. Might be interesting to argue with the small claims court on that.

Indeed - that is my understanding and belief, and that is what I've been saying.

One of my family members is a significant landlord (if you {and her} will excuse the 'sexist' term!) and I've never heard of any case in which she has, or has wanted to, get involved in any way with electricity supply arrangements made by tenants (and that includes meter changes) - and, as above, I doubt that she has any 'right' to. ... and I rather doubt that an electricity supplier would take any 'instructions' from someone who was not the account holder.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

landlord (if you {and her} will excuse the 'sexist' term!)

Stop it. Don't give in to the nonsense.

She should demand it; actresses do.

 

[JohnW2]

Stop it. Don't give in to the nonsense. She should demand it; actresses do.

Yes, some actresses do - but, there again, some like to be called actresses!

... but none of that alters the fact that I'm not flameport

Kind Regards, John

MOD: OP long since left the thread.