Royal Borough of Kingston-Upon-Thames v Moss [2019] EWHC 3261 (Ch) (29 November 2019)

Royal Borough of Kingston-Upon-Thames v Moss [2019] EWHC 3261 (Ch) (29 November 2019)

The 2003 agreement provided for Thames Water Utilities Ltd to supply water and sewerage services to Kingston, which then resold those services to its tenants. Kingston was a 'reseller' under the Water Resale Orders 2001 and 2006. The Orders required Kingston to pass on to tenants the benefit of voids allowance and commission it received from Thames Water. Kingston overcharged tenants by failing to make these deductions. The tenancy agreement also required the water charges to reflect the actual or exact amount payable, which included the deductions. The court followed the reasoning in Jones v Southwark LBC [2016] PTSR 1011.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 3261 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames; Defendant: Derek Moss
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Claim / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed; judgment for the Defendant
Legal Topics
Water Charges, Resale Orders, Tenancy Agreements, Statutory Interpretation, Agency, Local Authority Powers
Housing Law Water Law Contract Law Administrative Law Water Charges Resale Orders Tenancy Agreements Statutory Interpretation +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames

Claimant

Derek Moss

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Claim / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Kingston was a 'reseller' under the Water Resale Orders 2001 and 2006 as a result of the 2003 agreement and tenancy terms
  2. 2 Whether the 2003 agreement made Kingston an agent for Thames Water Utilities Ltd or a principal
  3. 3 Whether the Water Resale Orders applied to the arrangement between Kingston and its tenants

Ratio Decidendi

The 2003 agreement provided for Thames Water Utilities Ltd to supply water and sewerage services to Kingston, which then resold those services to its tenants. Kingston was a 'reseller' under the Water Resale Orders 2001 and 2006. The Orders required Kingston to pass on to tenants the benefit of voids allowance and commission it received from Thames Water. Kingston overcharged tenants by failing to make these deductions. The tenancy agreement also required the water charges to reflect the actual or exact amount payable, which included the deductions. The court followed the reasoning in Jones v Southwark LBC [2016] PTSR 1011.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; judgment for the Defendant

Orders

  • Kingston must recalculate water charges for Mr Moss in accordance with the Water Resale Orders, deducting voids allowance and commission.
  • Kingston must repay any overpayments made by Mr Moss as a result of overcharging.