Do PAYG have online account options?

You are correct, however there’s still a flaw in your logic. A change of that nature constitutes a major/significant change to the Tenancy Agreement, one that would require re-negotiation and pre-approval from the Tenant before it could happen. Otherwise the Landlord risks breaking Contract Law for not providing something listed in the Tenancy Agreement as being handled by the Landlord.

When it comes to a HMO, the Landlord is still kinda “occupying” the parts of the building where there’s no bed e.g. the corridors between rooms, hence remains liable for electricity/gas usage in those parts of said building. As such, he cannot escape total liability. OVO et al could still argue he’s liable for the supply on the basis that the supply comes into his house and that only individual rooms are rented out rather than the whole property being rented out to one tenant exclusively. The “Tenant is responsible” thing only works when a single Tenant occupies the entire property - it doesn’t strictly apply when it’s a HMO or Lodger regardless of how many different tenants/lodgers are in the place.

Simply abandoning the All Inclusive thing without re-negotiating the contract would result an an Instant Breach Of Da Tenancy. Good luck with that one in Court - the Landlord would almost certainly lose.

Arguably, the Landlord would also have to make the arrangements to migrate the Tenant(s) off of Sub-Meters at the Landlords expense too, if they’re currently installed.

I think my landlord is down the pub with a few other landlords 'cause he's come back pretty quick. Sounds like there is an arm chair solicitor with them.

"Totally agree with your point about the legal trouble a landlord would be in if they tried to unilateraly back out if an all-inclusive contract with the tenants. But as long as the landlord received some consideration from the tenants then the new arrangement would be legally binding.

Regarding the common parts of the house, what you say about the landlords liability would be a fair point if there were sub-meters in the rooms that tenants have exclusive use of.

But in a HMO with a single electricity meter, then the simple defence from the landlord would be 'I'm not using and lecky me lord and the property is not 'unoccupied'. The law says the occupier using the supply is liable, not guilty me lord.

Even OFGEM are not sure. Although they agree in general that it is the occupier using the supply who is liable, they add the addendum that the interpretation of the law is up to the courts and to date there is no case law for guidance.

One reason for the lack of case law is likely to be that if the utility companies get a hint of this being tested in court they would rather settle than risk loosing and there being a president set.

Keep up the good work, you are worth you weight in gold.

Watch this space".

Like I say, when you convert a property to a HMO without doing the job fully and seperating the supplies then things start to get messy, both practicaly and legally.
That’s why it’s often discussed on LL/Tenant forums, you see cases where it has gotten into a complete mess.

PS. Not quite the same thing but legally the Landlord is always liable for Council Tax on a HMO, they can charge their tenants a higher rent to cover it, but in the end it's always the LL's responsibility to pay the CT on a HMO.
Most councils already charged the CT lke that anyway, but in December 2023 it became law that all councils have to do it that way:
https://chli.co.uk/2024/01/26/new-legislation-means-landlords-to-pay-council-tax-for-hmos/

There is no real reason why the same kind of thing couldn't be done for utilities, although it would be more complicated for the LL as utility bills vary rather than being a fixed amount like CT.
A major consideration against that happening at the moment is that again any such a move would cause many HMO landlords to evict their tenants and sell up, not helping the housing shortage at all.
(My previous LL has already sold all his HMOs and other residential properties and now just does commercial lets rather than residential).

If we’re being honest, there’s another big reason why I feel having the Tenants be directly hooked up to an energy supplier makes more sense - it’s the only way they can get things like the Warm Home Discount, proper freedom of choice over their tariffs and any future EBSS style schemes.

Sub-Metering setups are ineligible for any of that, as are cases where the Landlord controls the supply.

Good point. Plus for some of the more environmentally aware younger renterd there is something not quite right about living in a shared house where the bills are all inclusive. 

The problem being there is no direct relationship between the energy tenants use and the cost of that energy. Drive past a student halls of residence on a cold day and half the windows are wide open! I know, I used to do it.

IMHO any government concerned about preventing energy waste, should ban all inclusive tenancy agreements.

For my part I would prefer a pay monthly credit meter in a shared house, then the onus on not wasting energy lies with those who are paying for it. A smart meter read out monitor would help. 

The landlord says run this past the learned forum people and see what they say about whether the landlord should pay off the tenants debts

"OVO won't change the prepayment meter until the landlord pays off the debt accrued by the previous tenants. OVO fitted the prepayment meter while the tenants were still living there, (that makes it the tenants account, yes?). Then they loaded the debt on the meter and the tenants reduced the debt through the meter being programmed to extract a weekly amount.

When the tenants had left, OVO held the landlord responsible for the outstanding balance.....

....and when OVO sent the landlord his first bill, they addressed it to the rental property and the bill related to charges more than 12 months old.

For that one, I’ll ask ​@Bradley_OVO to verify, but I believe there’s a way to remove the debt blocker and allow you to migrate to Pay Monthly once your PAYG account has been successfully opened. It’s not your debt, so OVO won’t expect you to pay it at all. IIRC as long as a NEW account is opened in your name and OVO is satisfied the existing debt has nothing to do with you or any other current tenants, the migration should be possible.

Your landlord will need to discuss the remaining balance with OVO - only he can do that I’m afraid. But I suspect he may need to chase the former tenants over it, so I’d recommend seeking legal advice on that.

What I do know is that calling 0800 069 9831 allows you to make a one-off payment to either pay down part of a debt balance, or totally wipe it out in one go with full payment. Either one would result in the appropriate level of repaid debt being removed from the Meter and (if appropriate) debt collection functionality being disabled.

Whatever has already been repaid will be considered as paid off and will be removed from the calculations.

The Back Billing Rules aka the 12-month write off thing does NOT apply if an attempt to issue a bill was made, such as via PAYG. It only works if no bill was issued at all. I don’t think that’ll work this time. Either way, it’s not as simple as “it’s too late now cuz 12 months have passed lol” - it’s stupidly complicated!

In some ways, his best option might have to be just pay the debts off and chalk it up to a learning experience (with the option to recover that from the former tenants later). Failure to pay may have severe negative consequences for his credit record, so caution is advised.

The landlord cannot be made legally responsible for an ex-tenants bill - unless the account was in the LL's name all along. (and strange things like that do happen in HMOs).

If the account was in the ex-tenants name then they are responsible, and it's them who will/should be chased for that debt.

If the account was in the LLs name then it’s the LLs account and so the LL is responsible, no matter who was actually paying the bills or topping up the meter.

However if the utility account was not in the LL's name then it is not their responsibility.

In the case of a prepayment meter then the LL (or anyone else) opening a new account in their own name should result in the debt charge being removed from the prepayment meter.

Here's a couple of good articles about it:
https://help.openrent.co.uk/hc/en-gb/articles/4411974008977-Who-is-responsible-for-unpaid-utility-bills
https://www.splitthebills.co.uk/advice-centre/landlord-utility-bills-responsibilities/

PS. As Blastoise has already noted - the Back Billing rules in the Standard Conditions of Supply are not as simple as many people seem to think, in fact they are pretty complicated.
I know because I have had to look into them carefully, and I recently won such a case against a previous supplier who hadn’t billed me at all for 5 years. (they had sent some random ‘statements’ now and again, but not any actual bills/payment demands).
That’s a very long story and it’s taken the Ombudsman and over 3-years since I left them.

Nukecad…

The landlord says your good, and wishes you worked for the Energy Ombudsman.

He says ..."Pre OVO, whenever SSE had a problem collecting payments from my shared house their solution was to tell the tenants that the landlord was responsible for the bills and then remove the tenants name from the bill and put the landlord's name on it.

The tenants, of course didn't make any payments (why should they!), so when a prepayment was fitted and the debt was loaded on, SSE then said, (as you referred to) the prepayment meter was in your name so you are liable.

Trouble is SSE didn't contact the landlord despite having his phone number so I didnt know about any debt or even that a prepayment meter was installed"

So yes, I see what you mean when you say "strange things do happen that result in landlord's names ending up on bills".

It's also precisely why my stance is that the Landlord should NEVER take control of supply except for the purposes of looking after it during void periods between tenants. As soon as someone moves in or you sell up, you should absolutely kick yourself out of the system and require the new occupier to sign up to the suppliers themselves.

Hope you don't mind me saying that. 

SSE, or any supplier, would be legally correct to do that if whoevers name was on the account had left the tenancy.

Once there is no tenancy in place then the property owner, ie the landlord, becomes responsible for utilities.

Although strictly if the tenant had done a runner before the end of their tenancy then the tenancy hadn’t ended until a Posession Order is obtained from the court and the tenant ‘evicted’, even though they had left they still had a tenancy which should be ended legaly.

However the utility supplier will fall back on the position that the tenant has left and is not coming back, so in their eyes the LL should be resposible for ongoing supply/usage, and so they will switch the supply to a new account in the LLs name.
They should not however carry any debt owed by the ex-tenant onto that new account.*
The landlord could dispute that switch, because until a PO is obtained and the tenant ‘evicted’ the tenancy is still in place and so utilities are still the ex-tenants responsibility if their name was on the account.

What usually happens in practice is that the LL accepts the switch of ongoing utilities to their name, after all the tenant has gone.
The Utility supplier chases the ex-tenant for any debt built up before that switch.*

Of course it looks messier in a HMO with multiple tenants, but once you cut it down to being just one tenant, the one who’s name was on the utility account and has now gone, then it’s still the simpler 1-tenant, 1-landlord situation.
 

*One caveat to that ‘debt’ situation - If its been a while since the tenant did a flit then the new account in the LL’s name will be held responsible for supply/use since they left, ie the LL’s new account will be backdated to that leaving date.
That means that anything that had been used since that date (say by the other tenants in a HMO) is the LL’s responsibility on their new account.
Which is one way that a LL can end up responsible for a utility ‘debt’ after a tenant has left a HMO, it isn’t really the ex-tenants debt, (although legally that's debatable) it’s what has been used since they left.
As said, things can get messy with billing in a HMO.

I think that’s enough brain work for Christmas day, I’m off to the pub (again) for an hour or so before I cook dinner.
Hope you enjoy your day.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PS. Your posts keep changing from third person to first person, can we take it that you are in fact the Landlord here?

Whether you are the LL or the tenant doesn’t matter to us, but if we know which it is then we can usually give better advice depending on which.

for example you talk here both as if you are the tenant and the LL:

their solution was to tell the tenants that the landlord was responsible for the bills and then remove the tenants name from the bill and put the landlord's name on it.

The tenants, of course didn't make any payments (why should they!), so when a prepayment was fitted and the debt was loaded on, SSE then said, (as you referred to) the prepayment meter was in your name so you are liable.

Trouble is SSE didn't contact the landlord despite having his phone number so I didnt know about any debt or even that a prepayment meter was installed

I find it hard to imagine that a tenant would not know there was a prepayment meter in the place they were living.
However it’s quite possible that a landlord may not be aware that the meter had been changed.
(Yep, messy but not unusual, I have seen lots of threads like it before on LL/tenant forums).