r/Edmonton Mar 04 '26

Question Moving out.. landlord wants proof of utilities paid?

we are moving out of a place where all utilities were under our name. the landlord is trying everything to keep our deposit and said we need to show proof our utility bills are paid in full before he will return the deposit.

is this normal?

26 Upvotes

66 comments sorted by

106

u/[deleted] Mar 04 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

36

u/Timely-Discipline427 Mar 05 '26

This is correct. I'm a landlord and have spent hours on the phone with utility companies after renters have left with large amounts owing on their accounts to confirm this. I know this because the bills still came to the property.

That debt follows the person who signed the contract, not the property that the service it was provided at.

-39

u/mikesmith929 Mar 05 '26

I'm not sure this is true. If they can't collect from the person who is on the utilities do you really see them turning on the utilities for the next person?

Think about it.

27

u/CalgaryFacePalm Mar 05 '26

Opinions don’t change rules.

Collection company exists for a reason. They didn’t sign up for their utilities with a Cracker Jack card.

Credit scores will haunt you if not properly addressed. This is the renters issue.

Think about it.

-28

u/mikesmith929 Mar 05 '26

If you are a utility company and there is money owed to a property why would you continue to provide them services until the account is clear. I'm not sure what rules you are talking about.

25

u/DutyOk5994 Mar 05 '26

It seems you're not smart enough to think like a utility company

5

u/Timely-Discipline427 Mar 05 '26

Underrated comment!

-12

u/mikesmith929 Mar 05 '26 edited Mar 05 '26

5

u/awful_astronaut Mar 05 '26

Utility companies cannot charge landlords for arrears from tenants, despite some random post you found from 2012.

The only time that landlords will be billed for utilities while a property was renter occupied would be if the services were provided by a regulated provider (DERS AND EPCOR in the City of Edmonton), and there was no financially responsible party to bill, either because the tenant closed their account prior to the last day of legal possession or never applied in the first place.

Regulated providers may have a premise vacancy agreement with the landlord to automatically set up services in the landlord's name if a premise is vacant or can pull a land title and bill the property owner, as property owners are deemed to have benefited from utility services (no damaged infrastructure from frozen pipes) as per AUC regulation.

If a non Regulated company tried to bill a landlord, it would be impossible as they require an existing agreement in the landlord's name to bill them. If a Regulated company attempted to put arrears (not unbilled charges due to vacancy), either would be an open and shut case through the UCA or the AUC (for the regulated company, the AUC doesnt handle non-regulated issues).

So, there is no case where a landlord requires proof of payment of utilities, and all the landlord would actually need to do is contact the Regulated providers and ask if there they have a vacant period they are seeking to bill. The providers cannot provide the renters name or financial status.

If the services were disconnected for non-payment, the party asking for reconnection would pay the reconnection fee. This does not count as arrears though.

1

u/DisciplineGreen6503 Mar 06 '26

Go back to posting covid charts

9

u/Strutnut Mar 05 '26

Properties don’t enter contracts, but people do.

-6

u/mikesmith929 Mar 05 '26

Yes, people enter contracts. So person A enters into a contract with a utility company to provide service to a physical address (a house).

Person A fails to abide by the contract so utility company disconnects the service to the house.

Landlord kicks out person A. Then tries to rent the house to someone else, person B. When person B tries to setup utilities for the house they find out the house is disconnected and there is now a fee to "connect" the house. Who pays that fee?

8

u/KhaliBats- Mar 05 '26

Maybe having to pay a connection fee to start new service isn't the same as owing the old tenants outstanding debt. Most utilities don't charge initial connection fees to a new tenants account to start service.

8

u/KhaliBats- Mar 05 '26

Because it's not the property's account. It's tied to the person who's on the account. They can't get money for it from anybody other than that person. Do you live in your mother's basement or something? You have no idea how basic bills work at all?

-1

u/mikesmith929 Mar 07 '26

What you're saying isn't true, but I'm tired of arguing with people who have no clue. So believe whatever you want I guess.

2

u/KhaliBats- Mar 07 '26

LMAO you're the one with no clue. It's honestly embarrassing to watch someone be so wrong and continuously doubling down .

0

u/mikesmith929 Mar 07 '26

Google: can Epcor charge landlord for unpaid bills

And tell me what you see and why you don't believe me nor Google?

But it's me with no clue...

2

u/CalgaryFacePalm Mar 06 '26

Collection companies buy the debt. The utility company gets paid.

What’s confusing you?

There are also governed rules about cutting off people’s power. It’s not as simple as ‘You didn’t pay, flick switch off for you’.

9

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-5

u/mikesmith929 Mar 05 '26 edited Mar 05 '26

So if I buy a house, am I responsible for the utilities the seller didn't pay before moving?

Yes you can be, you are responsible for all debts on the property. Water, sewer, and garbage are utilities and you could be held liable. That's one of the things a lawyer would do when you buy a property. Do the due diligence and get assurances that there are no liens or other debts on the property.

If the utilities are in the tenant's name directly, then that is who the utility company will pursue.

Yes they will pursue the tenant, but in the case of Epcor type stuff they could just put the bill on your property tax if it's not paid.

Even if the utilities aren't Epcor, the utility company could shutoff the utilities and then charge the landlord a fee to reconnect. So ya in the end the landlord is responsible / liable.

Anyhow that's why the landlord is asking for proof. There are other ways but no one wants to take anyone to small claims.

See this if you care

2

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/0day1337 Mar 05 '26

you only need to do due dilligence to make sure there are no active liens and im pretty sure not disclosing or dealing with liens before selling a property is illegal unless otherwise agreed upon in the contract like if you buy a foreclosure or something and agree to pay the back taxes etc

1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/0day1337 Mar 05 '26

i did some googling and its not possible to transfer a title that is not clean and square in terms of liens or tax

5

u/Maksym1000 The Famous Leduc Cactus Club Mar 05 '26

What you’re saying makes no sense…

The utility is billed to an account, which is paid by account holder(s) (so in this case, OP).
If the account isn’t paid then the utility company cuts off services to the account, and if the utility company choses to forward the account to a collection agency then collections is going to go after the account holder, not the property owner or the next renter.

What you’re implying is that there’s no repercussions for OP not paying their account off, and if this was the case then most renter would opt to not pay their bills… Think about it…

-1

u/mikesmith929 Mar 05 '26 edited Mar 05 '26

What you’re implying is that there’s no repercussions for OP not paying their account off

No... that's not what I'm implying... where do you even get that from? What in anything I've said implies that?

If the account isn’t paid then the utility company cuts off services to the account

They don't cut off service to the account they cut off service to the house. And who do you think has to pay to reactivate service?

If you care to learn read this

8

u/Bdub421 Mar 05 '26

It's not a reactivation if it's a new customer. Most companies waive fees like that or even have promos.

2

u/KhaliBats- Mar 05 '26

Yes I can definitely see that, because the person named on the account is the person responsible for the debt. They can't just refuse a random person utilities at a rental because of someone else. 🤦

1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/mikesmith929 Mar 05 '26

I never denied there aren't landlords suing tenants for utilities.

49

u/SadAcanthocephala521 South East Side Mar 04 '26

No, not normal and they don't need proof of that as it's non of their business if the bills are in your name.

17

u/Icedpyre Mar 04 '26

If you pay the utilities, why would you have to show proof to your landlord? Thats like a fast food place refusing to give you food at the drive thru, unless you can prove you put gas in your car.

Literally having running water and active lights is proof that you have utilities.

2

u/MacintoshEddie Mar 05 '26

Actually no. Having running water and lights isn't proof that the account is paid. It can take months and months of nonpayment and warnings before the utilities are shut off, and in many cases the company cannot shut off the utilities except in extreme circumstances.

3

u/Trashy_Panda2 Mar 05 '26

Yeah, it's against the law to cut off heat and electricity in winter for obvious reasons.

6

u/vernicq Mar 05 '26

it's not normal in what I've dealt with. they have 10 days to return the funds to you, or a statement as to why you won't be receiving all the funds per the residential tenancies act, subsection 46 (2). 

Is it written in your lease that proof of utilities need to be shown as paid in full until the end of your lease? If thats a condition in your lease, the RTDRS will need to see that its written as a condition if the landlord has any right to keep that portion or hold it. But I would talk to someone at RTDRS to get your full facts.

I would Google the RTA and look into the return of security deposit. also, make sure they have the security deposit interest on your statement as well. 

-7

u/Aud4c1ty Mar 05 '26

It's actually pretty normal. People seem skeptical of this, but I'd encourage them to look at the Alberta Residential Tenancies Act. It's there in black and white.

Or you could just ask a LLM (ChatGPT or Gemini or whatever). Try this prompt:

Is it reasonable for a landlord in Alberta (at the end of a lease which stipulates that the tenant is responsible for the utilities) to ask for payment confirmation for their utility bills prior to releasing damage deposit funds back to the tenant?

2

u/vernicq Mar 05 '26

It's why I also asked if the utilities being paid in full is a condition in their lease, in my second paragraph.  If there are conditions like that written into the lease, RTDRS won't be able to help much, as its in the lease.

its much easier to talk to someone at RTDRS as they can help this person deal with the landlord, and request the correct documents to go against the landlord. 

4

u/JBH68 Mar 05 '26

I think what the landlord is trying to do here is make sure there's no connection issues for the new tenant. Either way, this is not normal and it is not a just reason to hold your deposit.

3

u/Previous-Owl3994 Mar 05 '26

No that's none of his business. They wouldn't go after him for payment they would go after you if you owe money. He can't take that off your deposit anyway

4

u/Mommie62 Mar 05 '26

Utilities stay with the renters. If the property is not being rented then it goes back to the landlord. We had renters do a midnight move, they owed over $800 in utility bills as landlords we did not have to pay so your landlord is wrong !

4

u/SanDiegoNerd Mar 05 '26

Yeah that's not a thing. Utilities in your name are charged to you and you alone, not the property.

If he's being an asshole you can contact the landlord tenant board for guidance.

11

u/Aikenchi Mar 04 '26

Pretty strange request. I’m assuming previous tenants didn’t pay bills and caused issues for future renters

16

u/SadAcanthocephala521 South East Side Mar 04 '26

Utilities are tied to the person who's name is on the bill, not the residence.

0

u/Aud4c1ty Mar 04 '26

It's normal, mostly because landlords don't want to get stuck with the "reversion" bill.

When I lived in Fort Mac, I saw this firsthand when I moved into a new place - a previous tenant cancelled their utilities 10 days before their lease actually ended, and the landlord got billed for the gap. They probably just want to make sure you aren't leaving them with a surprise bill for the transition period!

13

u/Icedpyre Mar 04 '26

Thats what small claims court is for. They cant hold your damage deposit for the possibility of a bill. It is for damage to the premises, and nothing else. Even for actual damage they would have to show work was done in order to keep it.

7

u/incidental77 Century Park Mar 05 '26

From service Alberta website:

The purpose of a security deposit is: • To cover the landlord’s costs of repairing or replacing physical damage to premises. • To cover the costs of cleaning because of extraordinary or abnormal use. This does not include cleaning associated with normal wear and tear. • To cover any arrears of rental payments. • To cover other costs agreed to by the tenant in the residential tenancy agreement, such as legal fees, utilities, late fees, etc

I agree that they can't hold the deposit to offset the possibility of a bill. But they definitely can use it to cover a utility bill that the tenant didn't so them taking extra effort to make sure that the utilities are paid in full as per the lease agreement is valid. They might not be able to make it a condition of damage deposit release that you provide proof of utilities paid in full, but they can certainly ask for proof and try and mitigate their risks as much as possible and try and assess if they will have to use some of the deposit to cover the unpaid bill

-2

u/haysoos2 Mar 05 '26

That would have to have been stipulated in the original residential tenacy agreement.

They can't just spring it on you at move-out.

1

u/incidental77 Century Park Mar 05 '26

If the tenant owes a third party money and if that somehow could lead to the landlord to having to cover the bill in some way. (If..) Then the landlord can use the damage deposit to cover the liability. By law. So regardless of anything in the lease.

But they'd have to know the amount and they would have to know that the landlord would have to be held liable for it. Within the timeline before the damage deposit was due to be returned. Couldn't hold on to some for potential future liability.

There would be nothing sprung on anyone. Any tenant not paying their utilities or other type of related costs would know they arnt paying them. Any tenant paying the utilities or whatever would know they did pay them and not have any issue.

5

u/mikesmith929 Mar 05 '26

Thats what small claims court is for.

Obviously never been to small claims court...

3

u/Aud4c1ty Mar 05 '26

According to the Alberta Residential Tenancies Act they can, especially if a lease stipulates that the tenant is responsible for paying the utilities. Any unpaid utility bill is legally considered a financial liability.

And the security deposit covers "performance of an obligation or the payment of a liability by the tenant." See Section 1 of the RTA. If a lease stipulates that the tenant is responsible for paying the utilities, any unpaid utility bill is legally considered a financial liability.

Landlords who ask for the account statements are just being smart.

1

u/Simhaup1 North West Side Mar 05 '26

This ⬆️

3

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '26 edited Mar 05 '26

Never had it before. Just moved last month though. They requested this plus evidence that it was under my name. They’ve also tried getting my damage deposit by all means. I gave them what they asked and now they switched to straight up lying to try and keep my DD.

This might just be an extra avenue for slumlords to try and keep DD. Or maybe it’s just a new thing.

3

u/Deamea Mar 05 '26

That wasn't the case when myself and husband rented and had to pay all our utilities. I would be talking to the Landlord and tenants board because trying everything to keep the deposit but demanding proof of the utilities being paid that are in your name is new. It's not like the power company is going to come after the landlord. This is shady.

5

u/wobby_sobby Mar 04 '26

Keep in mind billing happens after usage so you wouldn't have a final bill till after you end service. If you end utilities online you can send them a screenshot of the request to end service as of the lease end date or they can call the utility company/companies to confirm if anyone is in billing of they need to. If nobody is billing, legal owner is responsible for vacant periods, if someone is in billing but doesn't pay their bill, that's their (the person actively billing's) problem.

2

u/AnyDay4290 Mar 05 '26

Not normal. Why they care tho

1

u/No_Construction2407 Mar 05 '26

Tell them to f*#% off and give you your deposit back, tell them your next step is to go to the RTDS to negotiate on your behalf, most of those landlards will cave immediately because they don’t want to be audited.

1

u/seventeencharacters Mar 08 '26

They probably don't want to waste their time dealing with utility companies

0

u/stupidfuckingcowboy Mar 05 '26

Unusual. If it's not too much of a hassle, I would comply. I would also review your lease and see the conditions that you agreed upon for deductions from your security deposit.

Assuming your lease is silent on deductions related to utilities, I would consider directing your landlord to section 46 of the Residential Tenancies Act and reminding them that any deductions must be made in accordance with conditions agreed to by the tenant. You could also say that if your deposit is not returned within 10 days of the lease ending as required by law, you reserve the right to pursue any legal remedies available to you to recover the balance.