We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
EDF have changed my direct debit - it's too low?!
Comments
-
I called them to ask them how to reduce my bills. They then just reduced the direct debit, they said I was "paying too much via direct debit", a few months went by and I found that I was in debt, the direct debits were wrong by about £60 per month.
This is what EDF have said to me;
I am pleased to confirm that EDF Energy has received the Ombudsman Services: Energy's Final Decision in respect of your complaint.
Please accept my sincere apologies for the shortfalls in customer services that you experienced and for any inconvenience caused.
In accordance with the Ombudsman's decision, please find enclosed three account statements; two for your seperate gas cover and electricity accounts, and one for your joing gas and electricity account.
These statements show all charges and payments made on your account and also any goodwill payments applied by EDF Energy. As you will see although the Ombudsman advised we have credited your account with a total opf £220.00 goofwill, we have actually credited a total of £310.00. Please see the joint account for reference.
After all of this they still had the compensation value wrong. The compensation was paid as goodwill payments in stage of £45 x 3, £100, and then various other amounts, at one point they called me and asked what I wanted, I said £100 more, she said okay well how about £50, so I said let's have a deal at £75. It really did just go like that...
Will post the details from the Ombudsman in a few moments.
I hope this helps someone...
Something that might help posters understand how suppliers work would be to understand if the compensation of £310 you negotiated (well done by the way!) was before you escalated to the ombudsman or after.
If before, did you escalate it to aim for your higher target?
The reason I ask is that the supplier is charged £350 for that referral. So, by offering £310, they knew that they were still saving £40 if we don't consider to impact of the recorded referral on their complaints figures & stars.:rotfl: It's better to live 1 year as a tiger than a lifetime as a worm...but then, whoever heard of a wormskin rug!!!:rotfl:0 -
Here is the response, not a lot of detail!
I can confirm the decision was taken as the promise to reduce bills by reduced direct debits is considered misselling. Hope that helps!
YOUR COMPLAINT ABOUT EDF ENERGY
Please find below a summary of the proposals agreed by you and EDF Energy, in full and final
resolution of your complaint.
EDF Energy has agreed to:
• provide confirmation of the total goodwill credits already made, of £220 and explain how the
balance has come about;
• make an apology for the poor customer service and inconvenience; and
• offer a payment plan for any balance remaining (the actual terms of which are a commercial
decision for the supplier).
EDF Energy should provide the remedy within 28 days from the date of this letter.
The Ombudsman is pleased there is a satisfactory outcome to this case.
Yours sincerely
Marcus Osborne
Thanks for providing this.
Am I correct,that the bit underlined at the top is your interpretation of the adjudication of misselling?
The actual wording from the EO and EDF themeselves refers to customer service failings and doesn't appear to mention misselling.0 -
Sorry, but this is rubbish. They can't "take any amount they want, when they want, as often as they want". They can only take the amount that has been agreed to the timescales that have been agreed. Anyhing else is in contravention of the direct debit guarantee.A DD is a powerful tool - EDF (and indeed an other mandate holder) can take any amount they want, when they want, as often as they want. You also agreed to this as part of the T&C.
To prevent this, cancel any DD and pay them by Internet banking, and you retain in full control of your money. It isn't rocket science - just common sense.0 -
Sorry, but this is rubbish. They can't "take any amount they want, when they want, as often as they want". They can only take the amount that has been agreed to the timescales that have been agreed. Anyhing else is in contravention of the direct debit guarantee.
That(in bold) is not entirely correct either!
Utility customers sign a variable direct debit. That does indeed authorise the company to vary the amount of the direct debit - including, if they wish, taking a lump sum to clear a debit balance.
They do not have to seek your agreement - you have already given them that authority.
However, they must give you 10 working days notice of any change in the direct debit amount; and obviously you can then dispute that increase with the company or even cancel the Direct Debit.0 -
Utility customers sign a variable direct debit. That does indeed authorise the company to vary the amount of the direct debit - including, if they wish, taking a lump sum to clear a debit balance.
Well that is technically correct however common practice is quite a one sided supplier-centric application of the process.
A customer signs up to a tariff arrangement incorporating fixed regular payment by direct debit. I think it is an abuse of the process to then seek to collect enormous lump sums at 10 working days notice because although the direct debit mandate allows it with notice, and the tariff terms and conditions may allude to it, there is a process expectation that "fixed regular direct debit" should (approximately) mean just that. A "sudden excessive hike" has to be at least partly a result of supplier failure to properly manage the regular payment adequacy. Yes the customer may have been unintentionally negligent but hey this quite a complicated process not taught well in school.
I think it is an outrage that huge catch-up sums can be collected at 10 working days notice using a payment mechanism intended to collect the fixed regular payment.
IMO catch-up payments should be invoiced separately.0 -
Sorry, but this is rubbish. They can't "take any amount they want, when they want, as often as they want". They can only take the amount that has been agreed to the timescales that have been agreed. Anyhing else is in contravention of the direct debit guarantee.
Oh please - take those rose tints off!
If you cannot understand what a continuous variable mandate is, I sugges you take advice on be matter. As for any DD guarantee having been 'contravened' I'm still laughing at this :rotfl:
The authority you give is wide ranging and virtually limitless. In effect, you TRUST the supplier to bill you correctly, then only take the amount due on the date they said they would.
You must have missed the countless stories of incorrect or fabricated bills, where even if the consumer was quick off the mark to point out any error, the amount STILL gets taken because of the 5 day processing period they take to run the debit tapes. This means you have to beg to get your own money back. Is there any automatic compensation for your extra work? Don't be silly.
Then there's when DD runs are taken early, or better yet, duplicated. Ditto. It is you who must be the gatekeeper on your own account - sorry, but I have better things to do than ensure the correct amounts are taken. The same too for those firms who have a DD but do not take the money. In law, the onus to pay still remans my sole responsibility and if they do not, I will suffer.
Lastly, your guarantee. This only provides a very limited (60 day) period to reverse a debit if you can prove an error. You then indemnify your bank for this process. Whilst out the money, you get no inferest, compensation or any benefit for the work you put in to sort out the matter that was not of your making. If a single DD emptied your account, and (say) 4 other debits failed because you had no money, the guarantee provides for the first error, but the rest won't because it was your fault you did not have the funds. So no benefit there with this 'guarantee' or indeed the fees charged by the other firms because you failed to make a payment. This is called 'consequential losses' and is excluded from this guarantee.
In essence you are denying their mandate allows them to take anything they feel is due, when they want and as often as they want - which is a simplistic and wrong.0 -
Lastly, your guarantee. This only provides a very limited (60 day) period to reverse a debit if you can prove an error....
By and large I agree with your position, though I don't want to get embroiled in the spat, but I disagree with the remark quoted.
The "guarantee" requires an "immediate refund by the bank". In practice there is an incompatibility between "immediate" and "proof". My experience (of course I insist under implicit threat of bank complaint) is an immediate refund normally citing "no notice". In practice the bank treats that assertion at face value and cashiers terminals have a workflow to implement an immediate refund.
This provides a breathing space for the customer and originator to sort things out.
I agree the "consequential losses" issue is completely unsatisfactory. In practice if the customer can "prove" the supplier acted in error then there is always recourse to the suppliers complaint's procedure with a "demand" for ex-gratia "compensation".0 -
Well that is technically correct however common practice is quite a one sided supplier-centric application of the process.
IMO catch-up payments should be invoiced separately.
Agree with that - but the point I was making to 'neilmcl' is that with a DD, agreement of the customer is not required when the DD amount is varied.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards