12 month billing ruling?

peggydoodaa · 15 April 2008 at 3:08PM

Hi,

I've done a search on the forums, but can't find anything.
Does anyone have any links to the actual wording of the 12 month billing ruling that energy suppliers must adhere to since July 2006? The one where they can only charge you for the last 12 months of fuel if they've not been billing you/not been billing you accurately? I'm having major issues with British Gas!!! Surprise, surprise!

Hope that makes sense... :rolleyes:

Thanks in advance

UtilityMan_3 · 15 April 2008 at 3:23PM

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldselect/ldrgltrs/189/7041711.htm

Back-billing: energy suppliers should, by July 2006, stop seeking payment from customers for any energy supplied where the supplier is at fault for not billing the customer for two years. From July 2007, energy suppliers should stop seeking payment for unbilled energy where a supplier has failed to bill for over 12 months and is at fault for not doing so.

"Unbilled" is open to interpretation, but the most obvious one is if your property i.e. invoices addressed to "The occupier" has been unbilled for a 12 month period, then it is uncollectable.

I want to bring into question the fact that a statement of account, which you receive when paying by Direct Debit, is not in itself an invoice. But that's a different can of worms.

Can you expand on your problem?

peggydoodaa · 15 April 2008 at 4:46PM

Thank you for that link, just what I was looking for!

Basically, my electricity meter was changed in March 2005 but the new meter details were never passed to BG. I didn't realise there was any issue, but then in Oct 2006 realised that the bills were always estimated even though I always provided up-to-date readings when requested. Looking at the bill more closely, I noticed they still had the old meter details!

Anyway, long story short.........Since that date I've not received one bill and I've been trying to get this sorted out. It turned out that somewhere along the line BG has us as de-energised!

My main problem, is that throughout this whole period I've kept paying the monthly direct debit as I didn't want to be in breach of any contract. Wanted to ensure that I wasn't ever in the wrong! Seems this was not the best way as they are now claiming that they HAVE been billing me over this period (although kind of admit it may be the wrong meter!) plus I've not actually received them but that because I've been paying, the 12 month rule doesn't apply.

Can't help but feel that I'm being penalised for keeping the DD running and not wanting to get into debt! Whilst I appreciate that the ruling was to ensure that people don't get into huge amounts of debt, surely it should apply to my case too meaning they should owe me anything prior to 12 months...or can they just pick and choose when it's applicable? :eek:

Hope this makes sense as it's a long standing problem that would take days to explain in full detail

I guess you work for a utility company then!?

Edit: forgot to add that I've asked them to provide copies of the bills they claim they sent over the last couple of years. I suspect that even if they can provide them they will be estimated, but more importantly on the OLD meter. Not sure where I stand with this?

UtilityMan_3 · 15 April 2008 at 6:34PM

Invoices have to be held for 6 years. Copies have to be sent on request. No invoice no pay! If they have no invoices it is clear cut. Oct 06 - Oct 07, you say you have not received an invoice, it's up to them to prove it.

Although a grey area the meter issue has to be fought, even if you lose it will clear it up for a lot of others! (you hero!)

You have done everything you can, phoning up and correcting estimated bills and the like. If they choose to ignore you, thats their loss.

Yes, I used to be in the industry, but felt so disillusioned I had a career change. This new Ombudsman they have set up themselves has crucified me, so I will use my knowledge to fight back and help others.

My main bugbear is the cost of prepayment meters. Robbing the poor to pay the rich!

peggydoodaa · 15 April 2008 at 6:56PM

I shall keep you updated. Thanks for your input!

i have got Energywatch involved and will keep going back to them each time I get an unsatisfactory answer from BG.

Cardew · 16 April 2008 at 12:44AM

UtilityMan wrote: »

"Unbilled" is open to interpretation, but the most obvious one is if your property i.e. invoices addressed to "The occupier" has been unbilled for a 12 month period, then it is uncollectable.

I don't understand that sentence - could you clarify what you mean about "The occupier" please.

I would hate people to get the impression from your statement that they can ignore bills addressed to 'The Occupier'

You will know, but others may not, that under the Gas and Electricity acts if you use any energy after moving in, you are legally bound under a deemed contract and that bills addressed to 'The Occupier' are your responsibility(obviously only for the energy used)

UtilityMan_3 · 16 April 2008 at 7:35AM

Hi

Sorry if I created any confusion.

Invoices addressed to "The Occupier" are VALID. You cannot state that because the invoices were not addressed to you in name, they were not received.

My point is that if NO invoices have been received, even in the name of "The Occupier" the 12 month rule applies.

Hence my statement "The Occupier, has been unbilled for 12 months then it is uncollectable".

An interesting point regarding "deemed contracts" is they cannot be refused a transfer due to debt. Just to tie this in with the debt threads.

The contract is made as soon as energy is being used and the money is due. However, than can be no breach of contract, where a physical contract does not exist.

peggydoodaa · 16 April 2008 at 1:48PM

Well, it appears more fool me for keeping the direct debit running and not wanting to get into debt!

They are adament that the ruling doesn't apply to my account as I've let the DD continue over this period, paying for the electricy i've used (that they didn't know I was using)!!!

Not happy at all.................. :mad:

UtilityMan_3 · 16 April 2008 at 4:13PM

Hi Peggy

Says who, the ruling does not apply?

If it was EW, then I would appeal it. I fancy taking one of these to Court to find out exactly what the rules are.

It's either unbilled, or it isn't. Yours is unbilled. To me, that is that.

peggydoodaa · 17 April 2008 at 12:01PM

Its BG that have given me this decision. I'm due to speak again with EW about it all this week so will be asking them to take it further

Cardew · 17 April 2008 at 12:26PM

I agree with Utilityman on this point about a DD being left in place; from a moral aspect anyway - the 12 month ruling is about receiving a bill, and you haven't!

Not sure that his argument would stand up in Court though. It is a code of practice they have broken, not a law and the Court may take the view that you have undoubtedly 'received the goods' so BG are within their rights.

Put it this way, I wouldn't risk my money on a court proceeding. I doubt if it would be covered under the Small Claims court.

That is just my view, I would be delighted to be proved wrong!!!

12 month billing ruling?

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free