A water bill’s six-year drip, drip, drip

There is no question of not paying, and, yes, my son has been naughty, but why has Severn Trent let this bill accumulate for six years?

JILL REPLIES It is hard to understand why your son did not receive any bills, as Severn Trent Water clearly had the correct address for him — he received the court claim, after all. Regardless of whether he received bills, he was aware that he should be paying for water services and failed to do so. I’m not sure that “naughty” is quite the word I would use.

After looking at a statement sent by the company to your son two weeks ago, I’m fairly sure that it did take action. The statement shows that he made fairly regular payments, starting in 2012. However, by then he already owed £1,303 and the payments did not cover his ongoing water bills, let alone make a dent in the outstanding debt. While Severn Trent Water would not discuss your son’s case with me, this did not prevent me from passing on suggestions as to what he could afford to pay.

Your son initially suggested paying £100 a month in return for not incurring a CCJ. This was met with stony silence. You then offered to pay £500 up front on his behalf, followed by your son making monthly payments of £100, if Severn Trent Water would waive the court charges, which amounted to £284.

Severn Trent agreed to this provided the water charges for 2016-17 were added to the bill. This took the total amount payable to £2,049, or £1,549 once you paid the £500 you had promised, meaning your son would have to repay about £129 a month for 12 months.

Severn Trent added: “Please be aware that our claim will be held at the court, the claim shall not be withdrawn and should payments not be cleared as set out, we would remain in a position to apply to the court to enter judgment against you.”

Your son reluctantly accepted this deal. You have paid the first instalment of £500, and hopefully you have managed to convince him that he must keep up with the monthly payments, otherwise he will end up in court.

Growing pains for new broadband supplier

WE WERE told by TalkTalk that it would be transferring our telephone and broadband account to Fleur Telecom. My wife set up an account with Fleur in January, paying 12 months’ line rental up front.

Fleur promised the accounts would be seamlessly transferred and that we could keep the same email address. It also said we would receive a new router “shortly”. This never arrived and then suddenly we lost our phone connection. We contacted the company and within four hours we were reconnected. However, on February 1 we lost our internet connection. It has been down since then, despite many calls to Fleur.

We have been forced to acquire a portable wi-fi unit, which is costly to use.

JILL REPLIES TalkTalk sold 5% of its customers to Fleur Telecom last year. They were customers who had to use BT’s broadband infrastructure rather than TalkTalk’s because of their rural location.

Within a week of bringing your complaint to me, you had received your new router and your broadband was reinstated. You were able to get a full £75 refund on your portable wi-fi unit because you had used it for less than 14 days. Fleur has agreed to credit the £39 usage costs you incurred for mobile wi-fi plus the £15 cost of a month’s broadband to your account.

Npower makes life such a trial for flat buyer

WHEN I moved into my flat in December 2014, I signed up with the energy company Ovo. I provided a meter reading and my bank details and thought no more of it. I have a special account for my mortgage and utilities and failed to notice that no money was going out to Ovo.

I took in a lodger in January last year. In October, my lodger received an email from Npower, the supplier used by the flat’s previous occupant, saying that it had tracked him down as being the new occupant of my flat.

I rang Npower to find out what it wanted and was told I owed it £400 for electricity. Apparently, Ovo had emailed me asking for my Mpan (meter point administration number), which it needed to transfer my account from Npower. I did not see the email and failed to provide the Mpan, so my account was not transferred to Ovo.

Npower refused to give me a discount despite the fact that the bills had been going to the downstairs flat. I own No 123a while my neighbour owns No 123. The first person I spoke to at Npower told me that No 123a was registered as being disconnected, but as it had been supplying electricity to this flat, it had sent the bills to downstairs instead.

My neighbour has told me that he rang Npower several times to say that I lived upstairs and it was sending bills to the wrong flat, but it refused to discuss anything with him on the grounds of data protection.

Npower grudgingly agreed to let me clear the money owed at £10 a month. I paid off £100 in one go and set up a standing order to repay the rest. But then I started getting demands from Westcot, a debt collection agency.

I decided I could take no more Kafkaesque dealings with Npower. I gave a final reading, paid off the balance and closed my account. But then I received a bill in December, which Npower said was a mistake, and another in January for £197 covering October-December. I ignored it, thinking it must be a mistake again, but now I have received a final demand.

JILL REPLIES You admit that you were partly to blame for this catalogue of errors because you did not check your current account to make sure payments were going out to cover energy bills. But this does not explain why Npower, which had successfully billed the previous occupant of your home, stopped using the correct address. Nor does it explain why your flat was registered as disconnected. And I cannot understand why your neighbour downstairs did not hand the bills to you.

I asked Npower to clear up this mess once and for all. It explained that you did owe £198 for electricity used while waiting to finally switch to Ovo. However, you had been charged at the full out-of-contract rate, so Npower agreed to waive £98, leaving you to pay £100.

You thanked me for my intervention, saying you would otherwise “surely be gibbering under the duvet with a bottle of gin by now”.

Is this more than my fair share of stamp duty?

I AM buying a shared-ownership property in London and am paying £760 stamp duty on my 40% share, which I had budgeted for. However, my completion statement indicates I must pay £1,404 stamp duty, including £644 on the 60% part of the flat I am renting. HM Revenue & Customs’ information on this subject is fairly confusing.

JILL REPLIES When a home is bought through an approved shared-ownership scheme, the stamp duty is calculated in one of two ways. It can be levied on the total market value of the property at the outset or paid in stages.

Your flat is worth £407,500, so if you chose to pay up front, you would face a bill of £10,375 on the full value minus the £125,000 stamp duty threshold.

Paying in stages could prove more costly, as the value of the property is likely to increase over time, so there will be more stamp duty to pay in total. However, it is better if you have limited capital or no intention of buying the whole property at some point.

Stamp duty is levied on the value of the share bought initially, minus the £125,000 taxed at 0%. In your case, this comes to £760 — 2% of £38,000, which is the value of your 40% stake (£163,000), minus the threshold (£125,000). More stamp duty falls due if and when the stake rises to more than 80%.

However, if a shared-ownership property is leasehold, the buyer also has to pay stamp duty at 1% on the part they will be renting, provided the adjusted rent over the entire length of the lease exceeds £125,000.

The calculation is horribly complicated but does leave the extra charge of £644, I am afraid to say.

For more information, visit gov.uk/guidance/sdlt-shared-ownership-property.

Can we help you?

Please email your questions to Jill Insley at questionofmoney@sunday-times.co.uk or write to Question of Money, The Sunday Times, 1 London Bridge Street, London SE1 9GF. Please send only copies of original documents . Advice is offered without legal responsibility. We regret Jill cannot reply to everyone who contacts her.