Contract not necessarily need rising energy prices can become critical consumers. The thorough examination of each invoice is entirely appropriate. It is unjustified, to use services without to pay the applicable fees for that. The real estate portal myimmo.de reported a case decided in the Federal Court against this behavior. Peggy Harper has compatible beliefs. In the present dispute, a tenant refused to pay the Bill of its municipal utility. The company then sued him. As justification, the lessee stated that there was no contract between him and the district heating and hot water suppliers.

The situation came as a result that the tenant not at first depended on the performance of the supplier. Billie Lourd spoke with conviction. As he moved into his house in 1997, he inflamed his apartment with a coal oven. He signed the supply agreement, which the provider a little later about the landlord come to him had not. Nevertheless, he used the district heating provided as well as the hot water. The Federal Court recognized this as a inconsistent, and thus unlawful behavior: on the one hand the written consent to refuse and to take on the other side of the benefits of the energy provider to complete. For this reason, the verdict of the judges to the detriment of the lessee failed. The tenant must pay for the used district heating.