ᐅ Is it legal to remove the meter or rent the meter during a period of vacancy? No!
Created on: 19 Apr 2015 17:28
G
Georg2
Hello,
For several years now, it has become common for energy suppliers to want to remove meters in multi-family buildings, citing either removal or meter fees as justification. On the internet, you can find a lot of amateurish nonsense about this, often claiming that since the meter belongs to them, they are also entitled to the money. They call it maintenance costs for the system but forget that except for the meter and the small main panel for the 3 phases, they own nothing else—and all of it is cheaper equipment already paid for with the first 6 months’ fees in the life of a house.
Since very few people understand the law and regulations, and even courts or lawyers often provide huge nonsense, it is important to clarify what the reality is. It was also said that removing and reinstalling a meter costs a lot of money, about 50€ (roughly 55 USD) each, and that you might lose existing legal protections in the process. Frequent meter rewiring is also bad for the meter wiring itself.
You should not assume that those who live off money are so generous that they spend their whole day giving away gifts, because far too many have only become rich through exploitation. Since Germany has some of the highest electricity prices—elsewhere it’s about 5-15 cents (USD) per kWh—this profiteering is well proven. Now, the problem lies with the landlord, who especially during vacancies would have to pay for the meters. With 7 meters, that can easily be 1000€ (around 1100 USD) per year, just for them sitting there unused. This cannot be a meter rental fee, firstly because the correct term is “basic fee” and not “meter fee” (which is just colloquial) and secondly because the energy companies pay about 15€ (about 16.5 USD) for a meter, so calling this a yearly rental fee is unreasonable since you could buy 8 new meters per year for that price.
It is also important to understand that electricity contracts are only concluded with the supplier or basic supplier, while the street grid including the meter belongs to the grid operator, with whom you cannot make a contract involving fees. According to §36 of the German Energy Industry Act (EnWG), the grid operator is obligated to supply electricity to every household/customer, even if they do not like the customer personally. They must provide a functioning grid to the customer free of charge, logically with a meter, because without a meter no electricity can be drawn. This is called the grid connection usage relationship, which most people don’t even know about.
From this, it follows that a meter cannot have any “meter fee” cost because it belongs free of charge to the mandatory connection of the grid operator, and the costs fall under the grid operator’s business risk. The basic supplier also has no right to declare the meters as their property since they don’t own them.
Now comes the basic supplier (or a free supplier), who buys electricity from the grid operator and then resells it to the customer. Only with this supplier can you make a fee contract. With the basic supplier, this is the basic supply contract, which must be concluded according to §2 and can be terminated within 2 weeks under §20 of the Electricity Basic Supply Ordinance. So, with a contract, there is a basic fee; without a contract, there is no fee because the basis for it is missing. Tenants can enter into the contract with the supplier, but so can the property owner, and either can cancel it. This creates a special situation. The grid operator must provide electricity to the building even if no one currently wants it; the basic supplier cannot collect money because the basic supply contract was properly canceled. If meters were then removed, it would be a violation of §36 EnWG. As a homeowner, you normally face this situation during vacancy periods that last months or years.
Now these two companies dare to target the customer’s money and threaten meter removal if the customer does not pay fees they are not obliged to pay when reading the law. But some people are naive enough to pay anyway or give up their meters—falling into the trap.
From our perspective, this is illegal and urgently needs to be clarified because many have allowed their meters to be removed with all unforeseen consequences or have even been sued, while ignorant or biased judges offer no remedy. The question is how to proceed. We suspect that a declaratory action is the right step to put an end to this arbitrariness. It can be taken up to the Federal Court of Justice to achieve a fundamental ruling.
The benefit of all this is that if you are sued, you immediately have an effective counterargument ready, since there is usually very little time to research during a lawsuit.
For several years now, it has become common for energy suppliers to want to remove meters in multi-family buildings, citing either removal or meter fees as justification. On the internet, you can find a lot of amateurish nonsense about this, often claiming that since the meter belongs to them, they are also entitled to the money. They call it maintenance costs for the system but forget that except for the meter and the small main panel for the 3 phases, they own nothing else—and all of it is cheaper equipment already paid for with the first 6 months’ fees in the life of a house.
Since very few people understand the law and regulations, and even courts or lawyers often provide huge nonsense, it is important to clarify what the reality is. It was also said that removing and reinstalling a meter costs a lot of money, about 50€ (roughly 55 USD) each, and that you might lose existing legal protections in the process. Frequent meter rewiring is also bad for the meter wiring itself.
You should not assume that those who live off money are so generous that they spend their whole day giving away gifts, because far too many have only become rich through exploitation. Since Germany has some of the highest electricity prices—elsewhere it’s about 5-15 cents (USD) per kWh—this profiteering is well proven. Now, the problem lies with the landlord, who especially during vacancies would have to pay for the meters. With 7 meters, that can easily be 1000€ (around 1100 USD) per year, just for them sitting there unused. This cannot be a meter rental fee, firstly because the correct term is “basic fee” and not “meter fee” (which is just colloquial) and secondly because the energy companies pay about 15€ (about 16.5 USD) for a meter, so calling this a yearly rental fee is unreasonable since you could buy 8 new meters per year for that price.
It is also important to understand that electricity contracts are only concluded with the supplier or basic supplier, while the street grid including the meter belongs to the grid operator, with whom you cannot make a contract involving fees. According to §36 of the German Energy Industry Act (EnWG), the grid operator is obligated to supply electricity to every household/customer, even if they do not like the customer personally. They must provide a functioning grid to the customer free of charge, logically with a meter, because without a meter no electricity can be drawn. This is called the grid connection usage relationship, which most people don’t even know about.
From this, it follows that a meter cannot have any “meter fee” cost because it belongs free of charge to the mandatory connection of the grid operator, and the costs fall under the grid operator’s business risk. The basic supplier also has no right to declare the meters as their property since they don’t own them.
Now comes the basic supplier (or a free supplier), who buys electricity from the grid operator and then resells it to the customer. Only with this supplier can you make a fee contract. With the basic supplier, this is the basic supply contract, which must be concluded according to §2 and can be terminated within 2 weeks under §20 of the Electricity Basic Supply Ordinance. So, with a contract, there is a basic fee; without a contract, there is no fee because the basis for it is missing. Tenants can enter into the contract with the supplier, but so can the property owner, and either can cancel it. This creates a special situation. The grid operator must provide electricity to the building even if no one currently wants it; the basic supplier cannot collect money because the basic supply contract was properly canceled. If meters were then removed, it would be a violation of §36 EnWG. As a homeowner, you normally face this situation during vacancy periods that last months or years.
Now these two companies dare to target the customer’s money and threaten meter removal if the customer does not pay fees they are not obliged to pay when reading the law. But some people are naive enough to pay anyway or give up their meters—falling into the trap.
From our perspective, this is illegal and urgently needs to be clarified because many have allowed their meters to be removed with all unforeseen consequences or have even been sued, while ignorant or biased judges offer no remedy. The question is how to proceed. We suspect that a declaratory action is the right step to put an end to this arbitrariness. It can be taken up to the Federal Court of Justice to achieve a fundamental ruling.
The benefit of all this is that if you are sued, you immediately have an effective counterargument ready, since there is usually very little time to research during a lawsuit.
T
toxicmolotof12 Feb 2018 20:34I did not read your very long post as a question, since you already solved your problem.
And no, basically we did not pay anything extra, as he was at the meter cabinet anyway and did other work that we paid for.
The craftsman simply removed the meter and deregistered it.
And no, basically we did not pay anything extra, as he was at the meter cabinet anyway and did other work that we paid for.
The craftsman simply removed the meter and deregistered it.
Nostradamus schrieb:
Nostradamus schrieb:
This insulting comment is pretty useless... Good for you if you didn’t have any problems. Did you pay for the interior finishing? Grave robbers are those who reply to very old forum posts that have been inactive for years, have already been answered long ago, and therefore no longer hold any value to be answered.
If necessary, one should not just blindly respond in a forum but read everything carefully and consider whether the post has already been addressed or no longer fits into the reply thread, for example due to the long time gap—check the date.
This is called attentiveness and respect.
N
Nostradamus13 Feb 2018 00:03Your previous response does not address my question. To put it briefly, I am not willing to pay for upgrading the outdated meter or to arrange for an electrician myself. In my opinion, there is at least no legal basis for this in the case of older contracts. This issue remains unresolved so far. Therefore, any helpful advice is welcome.
Otherwise, based on my experience, I do understand the frustration of the person who started this discussion. It may be true that this topic was brought up some time ago, but it is still clearly relevant today and if you search online, you end up here.
The way this was handled for me is quite confusing for the average consumer and certainly not ideal.
Otherwise, based on my experience, I do understand the frustration of the person who started this discussion. It may be true that this topic was brought up some time ago, but it is still clearly relevant today and if you search online, you end up here.
The way this was handled for me is quite confusing for the average consumer and certainly not ideal.
T
toxicmolotof13 Feb 2018 01:41It doesn’t matter how old the meter is. There is a law that has already been mentioned here. Have you read the mentioned Paragraph 9?
If you want to remove something, you will have to pay for it. That is the legal perspective, at least if the meter is located in Germany. The legal basis seems to be in place, although this is not legal advice.
If you want to remove something, you will have to pay for it. That is the legal perspective, at least if the meter is located in Germany. The legal basis seems to be in place, although this is not legal advice.
I understand your question as: "I want to have my meter removed but do not want to pay for it." This is regulated by NAV §9 and generally by your network connection contract. In my opinion, it fits perfectly.
NAV, §1 Scope of application:
The regulation applies to all network connection agreements concluded after July 12, 2005, and also to all connection usage agreements that existed before its entry into force.
NAV, §9 Cost reimbursement for installation and modification
The network operator is entitled to demand reimbursement from the connected party for the costs necessary for economically efficient operation for
1. the installation of the network connection,
2. modifications to the network connection that are required due to a change or extension of the customer installation or are otherwise initiated by the connected party.
Your default supplier doesn’t really care about that at first. The meter belongs to the network or metering point operator. Have you terminated your network connection contract with the network operator?
Nostradamus schrieb:
In my opinion, at least for old contracts, there is no legal basis here.
NAV, §1 Scope of application:
The regulation applies to all network connection agreements concluded after July 12, 2005, and also to all connection usage agreements that existed before its entry into force.
Nostradamus schrieb:
In my opinion, for a final termination it should be sufficient for the end consumer to make the meter available for removal, with all other costs then borne by the owner of the meter.
NAV, §9 Cost reimbursement for installation and modification
The network operator is entitled to demand reimbursement from the connected party for the costs necessary for economically efficient operation for
1. the installation of the network connection,
2. modifications to the network connection that are required due to a change or extension of the customer installation or are otherwise initiated by the connected party.
Nostradamus schrieb:
Since I no longer need heating electricity, I have made a final termination with my default supplier with this notice and offered that the meter can be removed and collected at any time from my premises.
Your default supplier doesn’t really care about that at first. The meter belongs to the network or metering point operator. Have you terminated your network connection contract with the network operator?
N
Nostradamus13 Feb 2018 14:47Those were some good tips.
The question then arises as to when necessary costs for economically efficient operation are justified. For an electricity meter that has generated revenue for almost four decades, the investment should be amortized many times over, meaning there should no longer be any need to pass the replacement costs on to the end consumer, since economic efficiency has already been achieved.
Furthermore, I wonder whether it is even necessary to replace the meter at all, or if there might be other effective alternatives that do not incur any costs. In other words, it might just be a matter of having the right approach, assuming you know it. The grid operator is likely no longer interested in an old electricity meter. Ultimately, I just want to avoid having a separate electricity connection for heating power or being forced into a contract with the default supplier.
In addition, the rights of end consumers have been significantly strengthened by European consumer directives. Therefore, I assume it should be sufficient to allow the network operator to collect their property, namely the electricity meter, and that this would fulfill one’s obligation. Everything else would then be the network operator’s responsibility. However, I’m not entirely sure about this. Perhaps someone here has already had experience with this and can share it or knows the specifics of this particular case.
Not everyone is lucky enough to have such a skilled tradesperson who removes the electricity meter during renovations and returns it or is at least aware of the procedure. Apart from that, not every electrician is authorized to do this. After all, this concerns someone else’s property.
I would therefore be very grateful for further tips or arguments to support this.
The question then arises as to when necessary costs for economically efficient operation are justified. For an electricity meter that has generated revenue for almost four decades, the investment should be amortized many times over, meaning there should no longer be any need to pass the replacement costs on to the end consumer, since economic efficiency has already been achieved.
Furthermore, I wonder whether it is even necessary to replace the meter at all, or if there might be other effective alternatives that do not incur any costs. In other words, it might just be a matter of having the right approach, assuming you know it. The grid operator is likely no longer interested in an old electricity meter. Ultimately, I just want to avoid having a separate electricity connection for heating power or being forced into a contract with the default supplier.
In addition, the rights of end consumers have been significantly strengthened by European consumer directives. Therefore, I assume it should be sufficient to allow the network operator to collect their property, namely the electricity meter, and that this would fulfill one’s obligation. Everything else would then be the network operator’s responsibility. However, I’m not entirely sure about this. Perhaps someone here has already had experience with this and can share it or knows the specifics of this particular case.
Not everyone is lucky enough to have such a skilled tradesperson who removes the electricity meter during renovations and returns it or is at least aware of the procedure. Apart from that, not every electrician is authorized to do this. After all, this concerns someone else’s property.
I would therefore be very grateful for further tips or arguments to support this.
Similar topics