Tribunal Decides on Providing Personal Details for Utility Services Under GDPR

OUTCOME: Allowed

1 FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference MAN/00EQ/ PHC/2022/0014 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant [NAME] - Respondent [APPELLANT] Ms [COUNSEL], [NAME] of Application Determination of any question arising under the Mobile Homes Act 1983 or any agreement to which it applies. Tribunal Members Judge Rachel Watkin Surveyor Member – [NAME] and Venue of Hearing 22 June 2023 – Civil and Family Justice Centre, Chester Date of Decision 19 October 2023

DECISION CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023

2

DECISION The Tribunal has determined the questions arising under the Mobile Homes Act 1983 or the agreement to which it applies below. THE PARTIES 1. The Applicant, [NAME] [APPELLANT] (the “Applicant”), is the owner of a mobile home situated at 63 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE].

2. The Respondent, [RESPONDENT] (the “Respondent”), is the proprietor or [NAME] of [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (the “Park”). THE LAW The Mobile Homes Act 1983 (as amended)

3. The Mobile Homes Act 1983 (as amended) (“the 1983 Act”) “applies to any agreement under which a person (“[NAME]”) is entitled - a. to station a mobile home on land forming part of a protected [NAME]; and b. to occupy the mobile home as his only or main residence.” 4. Section 2(1) of the 1983 Act provides for the implied terms set out in Schedule 1 of the 1983 Act to be incorporated into any agreement to which the 1983 Act applies, notwithstanding any express terms of the agreement. The implied terms set out in Chapter 2 (the “Implied Terms”) apply to “all agreements which relate to a pitch except an agreement which relates to a pitch… on a local authority gypsy and traveller sites or a County Council gypsy and traveller [NAME].” 5. Section 2(2) provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of either party, within 6 months of the date of the agreement (or the date upon which the written agreement was given, if later), order that certain further terms shall be implied into the agreement (subject to exceptions).

3 6. Section 4(1) provides that: “In relation to a protected [NAME] … a Tribunal has jurisdiction – (a) to determine any question arising under this Act or any agreement to which it applies; and (b) to entertain any proceedings brought under this Act or any such agreement, subject to subsections (2) to (6).” 7. Subsections (2) and (6) are not relevant to the present proceedings. Relevant Implied Terms 8. The following are the Implied Terms that are relevant to the present matter and are set out in Chapter 2 of Schedule 1.

9. Paragraph 12 of Chapter 2 states: “The owner may enter the pitch without prior notice between the hours of 9 a.m. And 6 p.m. a) to deliver written communications, including post any notices, to [NAME]; and b) to read any [NAME] for gas, electricity, water, sewage or other services supplied by the owner.” 10. Paragraph 13 states: “The owner may enter the pitch to carry out essential repair or emergency works on giving as much notice to [NAME] (whether in writing or otherwise) as is reasonably practicable in the circumstances and period.” 11. Paragraph 14 states: “[NAME] has agreed otherwise, the owner may enter the pitch for a reason other than one specified in paragraph 12 or 13 only if he is given [NAME] at least 14 clear days written notice of the date, time and reason for his visit.” 12. Paragraph 21 states: “[NAME] shall— (a) pay the pitch fee to the owner;

4 (b) pay to the owner all sums due under the agreement in respect of gas, electricity, water, sewerage or other services supplied by the owner; … 13. Paragraph 22 states: “The owner shall— (a) … (b) if requested by [NAME], provide (free of charge) documentary evidence in support and explanation of— (i) any new pitch fee; (ii) any charges for gas, electricity, water, sewerage or other services payable by [NAME] to the owner under the agreement; and (iii) any other charges, costs or expenses payable by [NAME] to the owner under the agreement; (c) be responsible for repairing the base on which the mobile home is stationed and for maintaining any gas, electricity, water, sewerage or other services supplied by the owner to the pitch or to the mobile home; (d) maintain in a clean and tidy condition those parts of the protected [NAME], including access ways, [NAME] boundary fences and trees, which are not the responsibility of any [NAME] of a mobile home stationed on the protected [NAME]; (e) consult [NAME] about improvements to the protected [NAME] in general, and in particular about those which the owner wishes to be taken into account when determining the amount of any new pitch fee; and (f) consult a qualifying residents' association, if there is one, about all matters which relate to the operation and management of, or improvements to, the protected [NAME] and may affect the [NAME] either directly or indirectly.” 14. Paragraph 24 states: “For the purposes of paragraph 22(e) above, to “consult” [NAME] means—

5 (a) to give [NAME] at least 28 clear days' notice in writing of the proposed improvements which— (i) describes the proposed improvements and how they will benefit [NAME] in the long and short term; (ii) details how the pitch fee may be affected when it is next reviewed; and (iii) states when and where [NAME] can make representations about the proposed improvements; …” Housing Act 2004 15. Section 231Aof the Housing Act 2004 provides: (1) The First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal exercising any jurisdiction conferred by or under [the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960,] the Mobile Homes Act 1983, the Housing Act 1985 or this Act has, in addition to any specific powers exercisable by them in exercising that jurisdiction, the general power mentioned in subsection (2). (2) The Tribunal’s general power is a power to give such directions as the Tribunal considers necessary or desirable for securing the just, expeditious and economical disposal of the proceedings or any issue in or in connection with them. (3) When exercising jurisdiction under this Act, the directions which may be given by the Tribunal under its general power include (where appropriate)— (a) directions requiring a licence to be granted under Part 2 or 3 of this Act; (b) directions requiring any licence so granted to contain such terms as are specified in the directions; (c) directions requiring any order made under Part 4 of this Act to contain such terms as are so specified; (d) directions that any building or part of a building so specified is to be treated as if an HMO declaration had been served in respect of it on such date as is so specified (and such a direction is to be an excluded decision for the

6 purposes of section 11(1) and 13(1) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007); (e) directions requiring the payment of money by one party to the proceedings to another by way of compensation, damages or otherwise. (3A) When exercising jurisdiction under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960, the directions which may be given by a Tribunal under its general power include (where appropriate) directions requiring the payment of money by one party to the proceedings to another by way of compensation, damages or otherwise. (4) When exercising jurisdiction under the Mobile Homes Act 1983, the directions which may be given by the Tribunal under its general power include (where appropriate)— (a) directions requiring the payment of money by one party to the proceedings to another by way of compensation, damages or otherwise; (b) directions requiring the arrears of pitch fees or the recovery of overpayments of pitch fees to be paid in such manner and by such date as may be specified in the directions; (c) directions requiring cleaning, repairs, restoration, re- positioning or other works to be carried out in connection with a mobile home, pitch or protected [NAME] in such manner as may be specified in the directions; (d) directions requiring the establishment, provision or maintenance of any service or amenity in connection with a mobile home, pitch or protected [NAME] in such manner as may be specified in the directions. Relevant Case Law 16. In Elleray v Bourne [2018] UKUT 0003(LC), the Upper Tribunal stated: “Despite the apparent breadth of section 4, a power to determine questions or entertain proceedings is not the same as a power to grant specific remedies. The FTT has no inherent jurisdiction and may only

7 make such orders or grant such remedies as Parliament has given it specific powers to make or grant. Although it is rather strangely described as part of a “general power” to “give directions”, in section 231A(4)(a) of the Housing Act 2004 Parliament has given the FTT a specific power to require the payment of money by one party to the proceedings to another. Such “directions” may be given where the FTT considers it necessary or desirable for securing “the just, expeditious and economical disposal of the proceedings.” The use of the word “directions” in this context might give the impression that section 231A (2) is concerned only with procedural matters. It is clear from section 231A (4), however, that the power to give directions is a power to make substantive orders, including for the payment of money, the carrying out of works, and the provision of services.” 17. In [COMPANY] v Santer (2018) UKUT 0030 (LC), the Upper Tribunal stated: “The language of section 4 of the 1983 Act is very broad, and the powers conferred by section 231A of the 2004 Act are extensive and expressed in general terms. It should therefore be taken that (with the exception of disputes over termination) the proper forum for the resolution of contractual disputes between park home owners and the owners of protected sites in England is the FTT.” 18. The intention is for most mobile homes disputes to be dealt within the Tribunal rather than the Courts because of the Tribunal’s greater expertise, accessibility and lower cost. The enhanced powers conferred by section 231A Housing Act 2004 also reduce the risk that proceedings to resolve disputes may be required to be commenced in more than one forum.

19. In relation to the question of payment of any compensation or damages under Section 231(A) of the Housing Act 2004, consideration must be given to any judicial guidance provided. In the case of Milner v [COMPANY] ([NAME]) [2010] EWCA Civ 389, Lord Justice Ward stated: “It is trite law that the measure of damages is such compensation as will place the claimants, so far as money can do so, in the same position as they would have been in had the contract been properly performed. The task is to compare and contrast what was promised and what was received, acknowledging that money cannot truly

8 compensate for this deficit. As Lord [NAME] of [NAME] observed in Parry v Cleaver [1970] A.C. 1, 22, "But a money award is all that is possible. It is the best that can be done." Doing the best one can is hardly the most enlightening guidance for those who have to perform the task, but I am not sure I can improve upon it.”

BACKGROUND 20. The Applicant entered into an agreement with the Respondent entitling him and [RESPONDENT] to station a mobile home on [NAME] on 22 November 2011. In accordance with Sections 1(2), his occupation was subject to a written statement dated 28 July 1989 between [COMPANY] and [NAME] and Mrs. [NAME] (the predecessors in title to the parties), a copy of which has been provided within the Applicant’s bundle (the “Written Statement”) 21. [NAME] is a residential mobile home [NAME] for residents aged over 55 years. It is understood that there is only one director, Mrs [NAME]. There is also an employee [NAME] manager called [NAME] [NAME] who takes his instructions from a man called [NAME] [NAME] [NAME]. Each of the homes on [NAME] has outside sub-meters for gas and LPG gas.

22. On 1 July 2022, the [NAME] all received letters from [NAME] stating that the Respondent had contracted with them for the installation of pre-payment smart sub-meters for both the LPG gas and electricity on each of [NAME]’s pitches. As a result of events that have taken place in relation to the installation of the new system, a number of the [NAME] [NAME] have been left dissatisfied with the management. Eight of the [NAME] have submitted applications to the Tribunal. Whilst all were heard together, as each application is different, separate judgments have had to be prepared for each. THE APPLICATION 23. By application filed at the Tribunal on 19 December 2022 the Applicant has requested that the Tribunal determines a number of questions raising under the Mobile Homes Act 1983 or the agreement to which it applies.

9 INSPECTION AND HEARING 24. The Tribunal carried out an inspection during the morning of 22 June 2023 when it visited the Applicant’s pitch, as well as the pitches belonging to other applicants with similar claims. The Tribunal viewed the location of the electricity and gas meters.

25. Immediately following the inspection, a hearing took place before the Tribunal at the County Court in Chester. At this hearing, [NAME] [NAME] represented himself with a nominated spokesperson, as did the other 7 applicants. Ms [COUNSEL], solicitor, represented the Respondent and [NAME] [COUNSEL], director, of [NAME] (“[NAME]”) was present as a witness on behalf of the Respondent. THE QUESTIONS Question 1. Did the Respondent breach implied term 22(e)? 26. Implied term 22(e) stipulates: “22. The owner shall – … e) consult [NAME] about improvements to the protected [NAME] in general, and in particular about those which the owner wishes to be taken into account when determining the amount of any new pitch fee.” 27. The Applicant contends that the Respondent breached implied term 22(e) by not consulting him about the works to be carried out to the sub-meters. Whilst he accepts that he was contacted by [NAME] about the works, he was not contacted by the Respondent until November 2022, after the sub-meters had been installed. This was despite him having sent a letter to the Respondent himself on 8 July 2022 indicating that he did not wish to have a submeter installed and to query the costs. 28. [NAME] appears to have written to the Applicant as agent to the Respondent, it is noted that no response was sent to the subsequent correspondence. At the hearing, Ms [RESPONDENT], on behalf of the Respondent,

10 accepted that there had been a breach of the implied term at paragraph 22.

29. The Tribunal determines that the Respondent’s failure to properly consult amounts to a breach. Question 2. Did the Respondent breach implied term 14? 30. The Applicant states that the letter that he received from [NAME] on 1 July 2022 did not provide a date or time for when the installation would take place nor was it clear that engineers would need to enter onto his pitch. He states that he did not receive any further communication in relation to this matter from the Respondent or [NAME] prior to the installation of the sub-meters that was carried out by engineers entering onto his pitch.

31. Paragraph 14 of Schedule 1 of the Act provides: “14. [NAME] has agreed otherwise, the owner may enter the pitch for a reason other than one specified in paragraph 12 or 13 only if he has given [NAME] at least 14 clear days written notice of the date, time and reason for his visit.” 32. Paragraph 12 relates to entry for the purposes of delivering communications or reading meters and paragraph 13 relates to essential repair or emergency work. Neither party contends that the entry of the pitch for the purposes of installing sub-meters falls within an exception within paragraphs 12 or 13 and the Respondent, through Ms [RESPONDENT], accepts the breach.

33. The Tribunal determines that a breach occurred. Question 3. Did the Respondent breach implied Term 11 (also clause 4(e)) of the Written Statement during planning, installation and ongoing management of the new sub-meters? 34. Paragraph 11 of Schedule 1 of the Act provides:

11 “[NAME] shall be entitled to quiet enjoyment of the mobile home together with the pitch during the continuance of the agreement, subject to paragraphs 10, 12, 13 and 14” 35. Paragraph 10 relates to the re-siting of a mobile home, paragraph 12 relates to entry for the purposes of delivering communications or reading meters, paragraph 13 relates to essential repair or emergency work and paragraph 14 relates to the Respondent’s obligation to give notice prior to entering onto a pitch (see above). Neither party contends that paragraphs 10, 12, 13 or 14 apply.

36. Clause 4(e) of the Written Statement stipulates: “[NAME] undertakes with the owner as follows: ….that [NAME] duly paying the pitch fee and observing and performing the undertakings herein contained and on the part of [NAME] to be observed and performed shall quietly occupy the pitch and enjoy the pitch during the continuance of the agreement.” 37. The Applicant contends that his “right to quiet enjoyment of his home and pitch has been severely disrupted since July 2022 and continues to be disrupted”. He complains that his pitch was entered on at least two separate occasions since July 2022 without notification and sometimes in his absence. He states that his gas and electricity supplies were disconnected intermittently with minimal notice and for “most of the day”. He complains that it was disruptive as he had to go out to eat.

38. The Applicant also states that he believes that the disruption to his power supplies also amounts to breaches of paragraph 5 of the Second Schedule to his Written Statement Electricity Supply Agreement and Written Statement Calor Gas Supply Agreement which provide that the owner will provide notice in writing (except in an emergency) of any scheduled power cuts.

39. In light of the previous acceptance by the Respondent of the breaches of paragraphs 11, 14 and 22(e) above, the Tribunal determines that the Respondent’s conduct amounts to a breach of the Applicant’s quiet enjoyment of his pitch. It is acknowledged that Ms [RESPONDENT] did not dispute this on behalf of the Respondent.

12 Question 4. Can the Applicant continue to pay the Respondent for gas and electric bills? 40. The Applicant sets out in his statement that, from 22 September 2022, he has tried to pay the Respondent, via the [NAME] manager, for his gas and electricity, but the [NAME] manager has refused to accept the payments due to the payments being by cheque payable to the Respondent.

41. On 22 September 2022, the Applicant received a hand delivered note from the [NAME] manager informing him that all payments must be made to [NAME]. On 18 October 2022, a notice was posted on the [NAME] office window requesting that all residents pay [NAME] for their gas and electricity charges.

42. The Applicant states that paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Second Schedule of his Written Statement Electricity Supply Agreement and his Written Statement Calor Gas Supply Agreement as well as a breach of implied term 21(b) of the First Schedule of the Act all indicate that the Respondent is the supplier of gas and electricity.

43. Paragraph 21(b) of the First Schedule to the Act states: “[NAME] shall: a) … b) pay to the owner all sums due under the agreement in respect of gas, electricity, water, sewerage or other services supplied by the owner” 44. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Schedule 2 of the Written Statement relate to the payment of the charges for energy supplies but do not specify the person or entity to whom the payments need to be made.

45. The Applicant states that in all the time that he has resided on [NAME], he has always paid the Respondent for his electricity charges and he feels that it is reasonable for him to continue. He adds that he does not have any business relationship with [NAME] and he refers to the letter that he received from [NAME] on 1 July 2022 in support of this. The letter indicates that the contractual relationship in relation to the provision of gas and electric is between the Applicant and the Respondent.

46. However, the Applicant accepts that the Respondent has a right to engage an agent to assist in carrying out their responsibilities but that he does not

13 believe that it should impact the Respondent’s responsibilities to provide an invoice nor his responsibility to pay the Respondent. He also suggests that [NAME] could maintain the “metering technology” without him being required to have an account with them and that they could administer invoices in the name of the Respondent and for him to continue to pay the Respondent directly.

47. In response, Ms [RESPONDENT] on behalf of the Respondent confirmed that [NAME] had been appointed to both maintain and monitor the meters and to act as the Respondent’s agent for the purposes of collecting the sums charged in respect of gas and electricity usage.

48. The Tribunal has given detailed consideration to this matter and concludes: a. the implied term at paragraph 21(b) of Schedule 1 of the Act relates to the [NAME]’ obligations to pay charges and does not place any duty upon the Respondent. Paragraph 21(b) does not stipulate how the payments are to be made to the Respondent and does not preclude the use by the Respondent of an agent for the collection of the charges. b. the Applicant accepts that the Respondent may appoint an agent to manage billing but disputes the Respondent’s right to appoint an agent to collect the sums due. No reason is given for this and there is no implied term that would prevent a Respondent from using an agent to collect any charges on its behalf. c. whilst the letter from [NAME] dated 1 July 2022 states only that it has been appointed to “install new meters and manage the metering and billing”, it is accepted that, on the facts of this matter, [NAME] has also been appointed to collect the sums payable. d. the payment of the charges to the agent of the Respondent, if so requested by the Respondent, amounts to payment to the Respondent. However, it is noted that the Respondent did not request that all payments were to be made to [NAME] until the letter of 10 November 2022.

49. On balance, the Tribunal find that the Applicant must pay the Respondent the charges in the manner requested by the Respondent. As this is to [NAME], the Applicant should pay the charges to [NAME]. However, the Tribunal also finds that the request for payment to be made to [NAME] should have been clearly communicated to the Applicant by the Respondent and prior to the date the payments fell due.

50. Furthermore, if the Applicant is unable to make payments online due to an inability to do so which arises from his age, as age is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010, the Tribunal considers it reasonable for the Applicant to be permitted to make payment by leaving a cheque payable to [NAME] at the [NAME] office. Question 5. Is the 41 pence per utility per day “administration charge”/ “daily service charge” lawful? 51. The Applicant states that the letter from [NAME] referred to an administration charge of 41p per day per utility that would be added to the gas and electricity invoices. A number of these invoices were provided to the Tribunal at the hearing.

52. The Applicant states that this charge is a new charge linked to the use by the Respondent of [NAME]’ services. The Applicant suggests that this charge is unlawful and refers to [COMPANY] (UTLC Case Number: lrx/14/2013) (“[NAME]”) in which he states that the Upper Tribunal ruled that a monthly administration fee charged in addition to the cost of electricity was unlawful. In that case, the administration charge was intended to cover time and costs incurred by [NAME] owner in administering the residents’ accounts. The Upper Tribunal read the express terms of the written statements and found that, unless there was an express term allowing such a separate administration charge, these costs were deemed to be included within the pitch fee and could not be included as an additional charge.

53. The Applicant contends that the Written Statement does not allow for an additional charge to be levied for administration.

54. Ms [RESPONDENT] on behalf of the Respondent avers that the charges are lawful as they are not charges for the administration work of the Respondent but are the charges of an agent appointed by the Respondent. She refers to the case of [NAME] and partners v [NAME] (2015) UKUT 0587 (“[NAME]”) which was a decision of the Upper Tribunal,

15 subsequently upheld by the Court of Appeal. Within this decision the wording of the written statement was construed.

55. Paragraph 3 of that written statement reads as follows: “(a) to pay to the owner an annual pitch fee of [blank] subject to review… (b) to pay and discharge all general and/ or water rates which may from time to time be assessed charged or payable in respect of the mobile home or the pitch (and/ or a proportionate part thereof where the same are assessed in respect of the residential part of [NAME]) and charges and respect of electricity gas water telephone and other services” 56. The Upper Tribunal held that the starting point for considering the submissions was the express terms of the written statement as supplemented by the statutory implied terms. It was noted that neither of the sources of obligation include anything which looked like a service charge as might appear within a long lease, acknowledging that if there had been an intention to impose an obligation on [NAME] to pay a separate service charge for services provided by [NAME] owner then it could have been included. Furthermore, if a form of service charge had been intended, one would expect it to have been made clear. The Upper Tribunal held that there was nothing of that sort in the common form of written statement or in the statutory implied terms.

57. The Deputy President went on to confirm adherence to the express term in [NAME] which was that paragraph 3(b) of (Part IV) of the written statement did not impose a general service charge on the [NAME] but is concerned solely with the reimbursement of specific outgoings incurred by the [NAME] in meeting liabilities to [NAME]. However, he notes that paragraph 3(b) begins with the charges for general and water rates and continues to state, “and charges in respect of electricity gas water telephone and other services”. He found that the reference to “other services” must amount to services which are analogous to the other types of service already listed and added that the common characteristic of the list of services is that each service is generally supplied by a third party and quantified by a third party.

58. The Upper Tribunal further stipulated that the language of paragraphs 21 and 22 of the Implied Terms did not further the matter but, in fact,

16 supports the view taken as it “reflects the understanding of the draftsman that the parties are free to provide expressly for separate charges to be payable in addition to the pitch fee” 59. Therefore, in determining this matter, the Tribunal must turn to the Written Statement which includes the following provisions: “3. [NAME] undertakes with the freehold owner as follows: - (a) to pay to the owner an annual pitch fee of... (b) to pay and discharge all general and/ or water rates which may from time to time be assessed charged or payable in respect of the mobile home or the pitch (and/ or a proportionate part thereof where the same are assessed in respect of the residential part of [NAME]) and charges in respect of electricity gas water telephone and other charges” 60. Thus, it is apparent that the wording of the Written Statement is in similar terms to the written statement in [RESPONDENT]. For that reason, the Tribunal finds that the Respondent is entitled to recover fees incurred by [NAME] on its behalf in relation to (or in respect of) “electricity gas water telephone and other services”. As the charges by [NAME] for acting in relation to the provision of electricity and gas are charges by a third party in respect of services, the Tribunal finds that the Respondent is entitled to recover the sums charged by [NAME] from the Applicant. Question 6. Is the Respondent obliged to provide a transparent itemised invoice/ bill for gas and electric? 61. The Applicant states that he has not received an invoice/bill from the [NAME] manager for gas and electricity charges since September 2022 but that he has been told that he can access his usage and charges via the online [NAME] web portal.

62. The Applicant was 81 years of age at date of the Application, does not have internet access and is not confident online. He states that he informed the Respondent of this by letter dated 8 July 2022 and received a response on 17 November 2022 which stated:

17 “If you are unable to access the internet then [NAME] can organise another way for you to view this information, you just need to contact them.” 63. However, the Applicant states that the letter of 1 July 2022 indicates that he would be charged an administration charge for accessing his statement any other way than online. However, the letter of 1 July 2022 may have been written prior to the Respondent or [NAME] being made aware that the Applicant was unable to access the internet and there is no indication that he has requested that the information be provided in another form for reasons relating to his age.

64. In accordance with paragraph 22 of the Act, “The owner shall – a) .. b) if requested by [NAME], provide (free of charge) documentary evidence in support and explanation of- i. any new pitch fee; ii. any charges for gas, electricity, water, sewerage or other services payable by [NAME] to the owner under the agreement; and iii. any other charges, costs or expenses payable by [NAME] to the owner under the agreement;” 65. It is, therefore, correct that the Respondent is obliged to provide a transparent itemised invoice/bill for gas and electricity charges when requested to do so by the Applicant. However, there is nothing in the Act that stipulates how the documentary evidence in relation to electricity and gas charges is to be provided. Therefore, there is no prohibition against the Respondent providing these details online through its agents.

66. In circumstances where an [NAME] informs the Respondent of difficulties accessing the information via any particular medium, by reason of a characteristic that would be a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010, such as his age, it is appropriate for the information it to be provided to [NAME] in a form that is accessible to him. Therefore, whilst the Respondent is not in breach of the implied term at paragraph 22 of the Act by providing the information online, considering the Applicant’s situation, the Tribunal concludes that the information should

18 be provided in a more user friendly manner and without additional cost. At the hearing, [NAME] [NAME] confirm that they would now be able to send out statements of account in the post to assist the Applicants. Question 7. Can the Respondent levy the proposed charge for “manual readings” of my meters? 67. The Applicant states that he was informed that if his online account is not activated then it will be paused, and he will then be charged for manual [NAME] readings to be taken by a third party.

68. The question asked is whether this further charge would be unlawful due to it being an administration charge. The Applicant again refers to [NAME] and indicates that such a charge would be unlawful. However, as stated above, the case to which is referred relates to charges levied for work carried out by [NAME] owner, whereas the present reference is to a charge for a third party to conduct [NAME] readings.

69. Whilst the Tribunal notes that the Written Statement does not provide for the levying of a charge for administrative work by the Respondent, as the case of [NAME] would also apply to this matter, the Tribunal concludes that the Respondent may pass on charges incurred by a third party on their behalf. However, this may not apply in circumstances where the practice of only providing information via an online portal is potentially discriminatory (s.19 Equality Act 2010) towards the Applicant because of his age.

70. The Tribunal, therefore, concludes that if the practice of charging for manual readings is only necessary due to the Applicants age-related inability to access the online system, it is not appropriate for a charge to be levied. In any event, at the hearing, [NAME] [NAME] of [NAME] confirmed that [NAME] will provide written statements of account on paper where they are requested to do so and, it is therefore hoped, that this will mean that the Applicant’s account will not need to be paused and the manual readings will not be necessary.

19 Question 8 Is the Respondent obliged to provide the Applicant, free of charge, with documentary evidence in support and explanation of all charges for gas and electricity on [NAME]? 71. The Applicant states that he has requested documentary evidence in support and explanation of charges for gas and electricity from the Respondent. He states that these requests have been ignored and no such evidence or explanation have been provided.

72. The Applicant indicates that the Respondents previous provider of electricity went into administration in Autumn 2021. Thereafter Yu Energy was appointed from 15 November 2021 but, again, he states, he was not provided with a copy of bills from this supplier despite asking. He states that he has not received any evidence in relation to electricity charges since receiving a bill from [NAME] on 12 January 2021. He requests that the Respondent is ordered to provide documentary evidence in support and explanation of charges for electricity from 12 January 2021 together with documentary evidence in support and explanation of charges for gas from the same date.

73. The Applicant refers to paragraph 22 of the Act, “The owner shall – c) .. d) if requested by [NAME], provide (free of charge)} documentary evidence in support and explanation of- i. any new pitch fee; ii. any charges for gas, electricity, water, sewerage or other services payable by [NAME] to the owner under the agreement; and iii. any other charges, costs or expenses payable by [NAME] to the owner under the agreement;” 74. At the hearing, Ms [RESPONDENT] on behalf of the Respondent indicated that the information was provided by [NAME] via the online system. However, no such indication was given in relation to documentation relating to the whole of the [NAME].

20 75. The Tribunal confirms that in accordance with the implied term at paragraph 22 of schedule 1 of the Act, the Respondent does have an obligation to provide documentary evidence in support and an explanation of charges for gas and electricity which are payable by the Applicant but the implied term does not cover charges that are not payable by the Applicant.

76. There is, however, no obligation upon the Respondent to provide evidence of any charges costs or expenses that are payable by the Applicant in respect of the whole Park. It is for the Applicant to consider the accuracy of the sums charged to him by reference to usage and rates applied in relation to his pitch. Question 9. Is the Respondent: [redacted] obliged to provide the Applicant with evidence that the sub- meters are of an approved type under national/EU legislation; b) obliged to provide the Applicant with evidence that the new sub- meters are working within legal accuracy boundaries; and c) obliged any to agree any dispensation of the requirements for legal certification with the Applicant in writing? 77. The Applicant states that the Government [NAME] stipulates: “any gas or electricity [NAME] used for the purpose of billing, whether by a licensed energy supplier or a landlord, must be of an approved design” (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/gas-and-electricity-[NAME]- regulations); and “The [NAME] is obliged to use an approved [NAME] and keep the metrology of the [NAME] accurate” (HTTPS://www.gov.uk/guidance/electricity-[NAME]-certification)

78. The Applicant further contends that the letter from [NAME] dated 1 July 2022 suggests that the sub-meters and technology will comply with the EU Measuring Instruments Directive. The Applicant states that he has

21 not received any evidence of this and requests that the Respondent is ordered to provide him with such evidence.

79. The Applicant states that the sub-meters on his pitch do not show different readings for peak and off-peak usage despite the letter from [NAME]' indicating to the contrary. He contends that [NAME] are not fitting sub-meters that are able to differentiate between peak and off-peak rates but only single rate display sub-meters. Without indicating the type of sub-[NAME] on his pitch, he states that where a sub-[NAME] is old a “black box” monitoring device is added. Furthermore, he indicates that he hasn't been provided with an in-home display unit either and, therefore, cannot check the readings on his sub-meters against any invoice to ensure they match up for accuracy. This was contrary to the previous position where he could check the [NAME] reading against the invoice. Due to this, he states that it is even more important that the sub-meters are of an approved type and proven to be within legal accuracy limits as he has a right to know that the sums he is being charged are accurately calculated.

80. Whilst the Applicant also indicates that the [NAME] makes clear that the sub-meters do not need to be certified, he states that the guidance indicates that “a written agreement must be in place between the two parties to dispense with the requirement for certification”. HTTPS://www.gov.uk/guidance/electricity-[NAME]- certification). He adds that no such written agreement exists between him and the Respondent and that the Respondent should be ordered to commence discussions with him with a view to reaching such agreement if the certification cannot be provided.

81. The question for the Tribunal is simply whether the Respondent has an obligation to provide the Applicant with evidence that the sub-meters are of an approved type, are working within legal accuracy boundaries or, alternatively, whether the Respondent must reach an agreement with the Applicant for dispensation of the requirement.

82. The Tribunal considers that, unless the meters bear the appropriate stamp confirming that they are of an approved design, the Respondent must provide the Applicant with documentary evidence confirming that the [NAME] is approved.

22 Question 10. Is the Respondent obliged to compensate the Applicant for the breach of rights and the time, disruption, fear, and distress caused by the manner in which the planning and installation of the new sub metering arrangements and complaints about this were handled, the Respondents repeated failures to respond to requests, and to reimburse the Applicant for the fees for bringing this action? 83. The Applicant complains that the installation of the new meters and management of the ongoing payments for gas and electricity have caused him significant upset, distress and disruption. He states that he has spent considerable time attempting to resolve these issues with the Respondent.

84. Furthermore, the Applicant indicates that he respects the Respondents rights to appoint an agent for the installation and management of the sub- meters together with the billing but that the process should have been handled differently and the rights of the [NAME] respected.

85. However, the Applicant contends that he should still receive invoices from the Respondent and that he should be able to make payments to the Respondent in accordance with his Written Statement and the implied terms.

86. The Applicant requests evidence of what he is being charged for gas and electricity and for his concerns to be dealt with quickly and reasonably. He complains that his letters to the Respondent in July 2022 were ignored until 17 November 2022 - after work on his pitch had been carried out without his consent.

87. The Applicant states that as a result of the manner in which this matter was conducted, he has lost faith in the Respondent as well as time and money. He requests compensation to make up for this and to rebuild trust. Whilst he does not specify a sum which he believes he should be awarded by way of compensation; he requests that the Respondent refunds him the fees associated with bringing this action as he has tried on multiple occasions previously to resolve these issues. He considers it unfortunate that his efforts have been ignored leaving him with no option but to apply to the Tribunal for resolution. However, he does not provide details of any sum claimed.

23 88. Pursuant to Section 231A of the Housing Act 2004, the Tribunal is able to make an order for the payment of compensation by one party to another by way of compensation, damages or otherwise.

89. The Tribunal agrees that the conduct of the Respondent has been less than satisfactory. However, the Tribunal is not aware of any actual financial loss having been suffered for which damages are claimable and the Applicant does not otherwise set out any sum claimed for damages/compensation. The costs of the proceedings correctly need to be dealt with as a claim for costs under Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013 and is considered below. ORDERS 90. The Applicant requests that specific orders be made.

For the reasons set out above, the Tribunal responds as follows: Order Request 1 That the Respondent must accept payment for gas and electricity bills made out to the Respondent. Where the Respondent has contracted with an agent for that agent to collect payments for gas and electricity bills, it is appropriate for the Applicant to make those payments as requested by the Respondent. However, if the Applicant is unable to make payment online due to age, it is appropriate for the Respondent’s agent to make the necessary reasonable adjustments to enable them to accept payment by cheque. Order Request 2 That the Respondent must provide the Applicant with monthly invoices in arrears for gas and electricity that provide: i. the tariff rates being applied for gas and electric at peak and off-peak times ii. units of gas and electric used per month at peak and off-peak times and the total cost of each of these for the invoice.; and

24 iii. itemised costs for all additional gas and electric charges being levied (including but not limited to an explanation for the 82 pence per day “utility charge” or “daily service charge” currently being charged In light of the Applicants difficulties (which appear to be age related) in accessing [NAME]' online system, it is appropriate that the Respondent or its agent provides the Applicant with invoices in arrears for his gas and electricity charges which include the information sought. Order Request 3 The Respondent must withdraw the 41p per utility per day “administration charge”, the proposed charge for ‘manual reading’ and threats of Court action. The Respondent is permitted to recharge the fees charged by its agent in relation to the provision of services. Order Request 4 and 5 The Respondent must provide documentary evidence in support of and explanation for all charges for gas and electric from January 2021 to date. The Respondent it should provide documentary evidence in support of and an explanation for all charges for gas and electricity from January 2021 onwards in relation to the Applicant’s pitch. It may either produce this evidence itself or instruct its agent to do so on its behalf. Order Request Requests 5 and 6 Provide evidence that the sub-meters installed are of an approved [NAME] type under national and or EU legislation and are working within legal accuracy boundaries. Alternatively, to commence negotiations regarding an agreed dispensation of the requirement for legal certification of the new sub-meters

25 Unless the submeters bear a stamp confirming that they are of an approved type, the Respondent should provide the Applicant with evidence that the sub-meters installed are approved pursuant to national and/or EU legislation and are working within legal accuracy boundaries or, alternatively ,make contact with the Applicant with a view to reaching an agreement, in writing, for the dispensation of the legal certification of the sub-meters. Order Request 7 Pay the Applicant any fees and/ or compensation The Applicant does not presently quantify his claim for compensation for the distress he states that he has suffered. He quantifies this only as a refund of the fees that he has incurred as a result of these proceedings, but he does not state how much those fees and such a claim should properly be considered as a claim for costs. On balance, whilst the Tribunal does accept that some inconvenience has been suffered by the Applicant, the Tribunal is not able to further quantify the appropriate sum due to the lack of detail in respect of the sum claimed. For the avoidance of doubt, the Tribunal does not consider that any significant compensation is likely to be allowed in the circumstances in any event. The question of costs is dealt with below. Order Request 8 The Respondents are to inform [NAME] not to contact the Applicant The Respondent is permitted to appoint an agent for the purposes of dealing with the recovery of electricity and gas charges from the [NAME] of [NAME]. For the agent to act on behalf of the Respondent it is reasonable and appropriate for the agent to contact the Applicant.

26 Data Protection Concern 91. Finally, the Applicant raises a concern that the Respondent has inappropriately provided his personal details to its agent. The Applicant does not accept that this is reasonable or necessary as, he states that the agent is able to read meters and issue gas and electricity invoices without them being aware of his personal details.

92. The Tribunal accepts that the Respondent is a data controller under GDPR and that individuals must actively consent to a business processing and passing on their personal detail data unless that business has a lawful reason for processing their data.

93. Article 6(1)(f) of the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) states: “Processing shall be lawful only if and to the extent that at least one of the following applies: … (e) processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party, except where such interests are overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject which require protection of personal data, in particular where the data subject is child.” 94. As [NAME] has been appointed as the Respondent’s agent, not just in relation to preparing invoices but for issuing invoices to the Applicant and the collection of payments from him, the Tribunal considers that it is necessary for the Applicant’s name and address to be provided to the agent for that purpose.

95. The Tribunal does not accept that there has been any breach of UK GDPR as a result of the Respondent having been provided with the Applicant’s name and address.

96. Whilst some issues were raised at the hearing in relation to data breaches by [NAME], these are not part of the Applicant and, therefore, have not been considered further.

27 COSTS 97. Whilst the Applicant does suggest that he should be repaid his costs due to the inconvenience that he has suffered, he does not claim costs in the ordinary way and does not provide any evidence to show that any costs have been incurred by him.

98. No claim for costs has been made by the Respondent.

99. In the circumstances, it is not considered that either party has made any valid claim for costs. 100. In any event, it is not considered that either party has acted “unreasonably in bringing, defending or conducting proceedings” which is the appropriate test set for any claim for costs under rule 13(1)(b)(ii) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013. --------------------------------- APPEAL If either party is dissatisfied with this decision an application may be made to this Tribunal for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, [NAME] (Residential Property) on a point of law only. Any such application must be received within 28 days after these reasons have been sent to the parties under Rule 52 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013. Judge R Watkin Tribunal Member [NAME]