I had to google to know that E bill is the estimated bill while N is the actual.

yes, for sure can..just bring an rent argeement to TNB and register n the tenant will get TNB bill using tenant name not an owner name..:-)

i think the best is to regular update the reading meter to tnb (if yr prop is non strata and meter is always hided). visit your house/factory/shop etc and report to tnb the actual reading and then monitor thru tnb e service if the tenant pay up. work is much easier for condo since tnb staff can read the actual reading and not estimate (E).

gila..

as i have more than one accounts the one on the main page with access to reading history is for a prop that i have sold already..no idea how to delete amend that..
any idea?

so the rest of my tnb accounts are other "connected accounts" that only show the balance unpaid..cant see "reading history" ..?

moreover for connected accounts its only limited to a max of 5 accounts only..

Thanks

I thought the TNB is pretty efficient these days.  I've experienced two cut-off incidents whereby I've not paid the outstanding balance for 3 mths.  A red-letter was received and they cut off my electricity supply with no way of reconnecting except to pay the balance at their kedai tnb.  Maybe this applies to condo only?  If this applies to factories or shoplots I'm sure this 30+k bill case won't happen...

The E bill is normally issued when the TNB officer is unable to tell the actual reading, more often than not due to locked main gate. Even if you notify them in writing to go and read the bill, they will turn around and ask you to provide the actual reading to them yourself, and following that, they will issue a new N bill. This is from personal experience.

One must note that TNB imposes a 50% surcharge for issuing E bills for 3 consecutive months. This is stated clearly in their website here:
http://www.tnb.com.my/residential/billing/...nd-charges.html
This move may seem novel but whether or not TNB wants to terminate electricity supply is solely up to their discretion. TNB rules dictate that if a bill is not paid, a notice commonly known as 'red letter' would be sent, giving the account holder (best not to use the term landlord/owner/tenant) to pay up within 7 days, failing which supply will be disconnected.

Now, in theory, it does sound like a good idea on TNB's part, but the problem lies in the execution. Sometimes the red letter arrives really late, like 3 months after the bill remain unpaid, or after a huge sum is racked up. Sometimes, even after a lapse of 7 days, TNB still fail to disconnect supply, until much later. As the supplier, TNB has a wide discretion on their part, i.e. the exact time when they want to disconnect supply of electricity to a particular premises.

So, Hansel, an account holder cannot tell TNB to put an allowable limit on supply,and they also cannot instruct TNB to put a limit on an allowable outstanding sum (like how mobile operators do with credit limit). As stated above, TNB has the discretion to decide when to disconnect supply, upon sending out the red letter.

So what can a landlord do to protect himself?

My 2 cents' idea:

1. Have a clause in the tenancy agreement whereby the landlord will inspect the monthly TNB bill (this can be done online, as correctly pointed out in earlier posts herein) and if the sum due and owing exceeds RM XXXX, the landlord shall have the discretion to make advance payment on behalf of the tenant, and retain the right to contra same from payment of subsequent rental.

Example: Rental - RM500/mth. Limit of outstanding sum: RM250 [a good figure would be the 1/2 month utility deposit already paid]

Sept 2011 - outstanding TNB payment of RM400 - landlord pays RM150 in advance on behalf of tenant (thus keeping the limit at RM250 as above).
Oct 2011 - tenant pays RM500 as rent, but only RM350 is deemed to have been paid - another RM150 is deemed as contra from payment of TNB excess by landlord on behalf of tenant.

* Better still - no limit - every month must clear all bills failing which landlord will clear on behalf and contra from subsequent rental. Better still? 
That would be some kind of check-and-balance system between the landlord and tenant.

With regard to complaints against TNB as to why they still claim from owners despite the tenant themselves who opened an account with TNB cabut without paying, but TNB still refuses to reconnect supply to the premises until the owners themselves clear outstanding payment - my opinion is that TNB ought to be allowed to do so.

TNB's role is to merely supply electricity - TNB ought not be perturbed with private arrangements and dealings between owners of premises and tenants. Ultimately, the owner of the premises must pay the price for the folly of the tenant. TNB ought not be made to bear the burden of chasing after the tenants, despite the fact that the account was opened under the tenant's name. Reason?

To prevent fraud. An owner can come up with a tenancy agreement with a particular tenant (perhaps even with forged/stolen identification) - and after racking up a huge bill, the 'tenant' 'disappears'. TNB then disconnects the supply. Owner cries foul and claims that TNB should reconnect and go after tenant. TNB does so. Owner then comes up with another 'tenancy agreement'. The cycle continues and continues and continues. TNB ends up on the losing side, while owners keep getting their electricity connected, while TNB has to chase after the 'tenants'.

That's my opinion. A very interesting topic indeed.