Expiration of electricity bills
June 30, 2009 | 20,00 EUR | answered by Dr. Dr. Danjel-Philippe Newerla
Dear Sir or Madam,
In March 2003, we switched from Ares as our electricity provider to Yellow Strom due to Ares' bankruptcy.
We received a meter reading card by mail to determine our electricity consumption. This card had a line for entering the reading data.
Since we had both high tariff (HT) and low tariff (NT) since then, I manually wrote down the NT value on the card and on the tear-off strip for our records, attached a cover letter explaining the situation, and sent it off.
However, we continued to receive cards with only one line. I then tried to clarify the situation over the phone, but without success. The Yellow Strom employee said everything was fine as it was.
From then on, I assumed that everything was being billed based on the NT rate only. Perhaps because the new electricity provider does things differently. I am not an expert in this.
This went on from 2003 to 2009. We have now received our electricity bill in the past few days, with an unusually high electricity consumption. I called and requested an inspection to see if the meter was working correctly.
Through this call, the Yellow Strom employee realized that the NT rate should have been billed in addition from 2003 to 2009, but this had been overlooked.
The total from this bill is likely to be substantial, and we will certainly not be able to pay it all at once.
Are the amounts accrued from a certain period possibly already time-barred? We would greatly appreciate your advice on this matter.
Kind regards,
S. Genc
P.S.: The mention of usage is fictional, as I now need to verify how many kWh were consumed from 2003 to 2009.
Dear inquirer,
Thank you for your inquiry!
I would like to address your questions in consideration of the circumstances you have described.
Indeed, a large portion of the claims in question have already expired. I assume initially the validity of these claims, meaning that they were actually owed.
Because only a claim that exists and is due can be asserted against you, let alone be subject to expiration.
The electricity supplier's claim for payment of electricity costs is subject to the regular limitation period of 3 years according to § 195 BGB.
The question then arises as to precisely determine which claims are covered by the limitation period (or more precisely which months) and which are not, as well as when the limitation period actually began.
This question is explicitly regulated by § 199 BGB.
According to this, the regular limitation period (i.e., the three-year period according to § 195 BGB) begins at the end of the year in which:
1. the claim arose, and
2. the creditor became aware of the circumstances that establish the claim and the identity of the debtor or would have had to become aware of them without gross negligence.
The respective claims arose when you used the electricity. For example, regarding the month of January 2003, these claims fundamentally arose in January 2003.
Furthermore, the electricity supplier must have known or should have known that the claim existed or, due to gross negligence, had no knowledge of the claim.
Since the electricity supplier admitted that they failed to make the necessary billing, there is at least gross negligence.
To illustrate the effect of the regular limitation period and the start of the limitation period, let me provide you with the following example:
A claim for payment against you that arose in January 2003 begins to expire at the end of the same year, i.e., on December 31, 2003, at 12:00 a.m. This claim is valid for 3 years, as it expires after these 3 years.
This means that the claim from January 2003 expires 3 years after it began, i.e., on December 31, 2006, at 12:00 a.m.
This means that all claims before January 1, 2006, are already expired at the present time. Therefore, you owe the corresponding arrears from January 1, 2006 (provided that the electricity supplier actually has a contractual claim for payment, which I cannot conclusively assess without insight into the electricity supply contract from a distance).
I would like to point out the following to you:
The legal advice I have provided is based solely on the information you have provided. My response is only an initial legal assessment of the situation and cannot replace a comprehensive evaluation of the circumstances.
By adding or omitting relevant information, a completely different legal assessment could result.
I hope that my explanations have been helpful to you. Feel free to contact me through the follow-up option on this platform or via my email address.
I am also available for further legal representation. If you choose to engage my services, I would credit the initial consultation fee you paid here on the forum in full.
I wish you a pleasant Tuesday evening!
Sincerely,
Dipl.-jur. Danjel-Philippe Newerla, Attorney-at-Law
Heilsbergerstr. 16
27580 Bremerhaven
kanzlei.newerla@web.de
Tel. 0471/3088132
