Prepay meters

ViolaLass

OH and I are about to rent a flat which has a prepay meter. The landlord is happy for us to get this removed but says we will have to pay any costs. I don't yet know who our supplier is (agent is closed for the day) so I don't know what it will cost.

1. Do we have to get the supplier to remove it?

2. If so, is there anywhere that lists what suppliers charge for this? I've googled but can't find anything. Can anyone give me an idea of what it will cost, how easy it is to have done and how long it will take?

3. Any other tips?

Thanks.

KimYeovil

Standard price is £50 per meter and/or two to three hundred pounds deposit (returned after one year with interest). But if you are not associated with the original debt and have a good credit record the deposit can (occasionally) be waived. Or you can ask around to see if an alternative supplier will change them for you. It will take weeks to a month or two to get an appointment.

Regardless make sure the current suppliers know you are a new tenant and you have a fresh account on the meters in the meantime so you are not paying off any old debts.

t0rt0ise

It's too difficult to generalise. British Gas have charged me nothing to change the meters and after a satisfactory credit check there is no deposit to pay. I was lucky that the previous tenant was with British Gas. I don't know if they will be so obliging if the account is not with them but it's worth a try. Changing to another provider and getting the meters changed would have cost me a lot... from £500 with Ovo to waiting a year and then £100 with Eon. British Gas are also quite good with the waiting time.. seems to be about a week to ten days.

ViolaLass

I've found out that the supplier is NPower and that their policy is that they will not change the meter until I've had an account with them for 12 months and then they'll also charge me. When I pointed out that this is unfair as I'm not in debt with them, never have been and am willing to pay a deposit, they wouldn't budge. I even pointed out that this would force me to go to another supplier but no joy. I'll have a word with British Gas, thanks t0rt0ise.

Premier_2

ViolaLass wrote: »

... When I pointed out that this is unfair as I'm not in debt with them, never have been and am willing to pay a deposit, they wouldn't budge. ...

Just because their terms do not match your desires, it does not mean it's "unfair"

t0rt0ise

I think it is unfair. It's the luck of the draw if the house you move to has these meters or not. If the house has ordinary credit meters you don't have to do anything. You don't have to prove that you will pay the bill. It's then only when you get into debt that they worry. Move into a house with prepayment meters and you have to jump through hoops to gain the same advantage as the other person. It is morally unfair.

Who do you work for Premier? Obviously it's one of the fuel companies as I've only ever seen you toe the company line.

KimYeovil

t0rt0ise wrote: »

I think it is unfair. It's the luck of the draw if the house you move to has these meters or not. If the house has ordinary credit meters you don't have to do anything.

What rot! What sort of idiot draws lots to decide where they should flit? There are far more important criteria that take priority over the negligible cost of changing meters.

Where there is unfairness is where some scummy suppliers choose not to charge a fee and demand a deposit - there should be an industry-wide standard that insists on meters not being changed without a charge.

How ironic that Tortoise cries "Premier toes the company line" whilst simultaneously appearing to think an aggressive free-market free-for-all is not unfair. Bizarre!

ViolaLass

KimYeovil wrote: »

What rot! What sort of idiot draws lots to decide where they should flit? There are far more important criteria that take priority over the negligible cost of changing meters.

Where there is unfairness is where some scummy suppliers choose not to charge a fee and demand a deposit - there should be an industry-wide standard that insists on meters not being changed without a charge.

How ironic that Tortoise cries "Premier toes the company line" whilst simultaneously appearing to think an aggressive free-market free-for-all is not unfair. Bizarre!

Actually, it rather is luck of the draw for us. There were only three properties that fitted our requirements (two bedrooms, within 1 hour's mins walking distance of OH's work place, which is in a town, pref has a shower - that's about it). One place was tiny, the other much further out and this place seems OK. So it's not as if we had masses of choice. It's just bad luck that this place happens to have a prepay meter.

Premier, what I find unfair is the idea that I have to hold an account with NPower for 12 months before they will consider changing the meter, for which there is a charge. Given that prepayment meters are usually put in either by request or because you're in debt, neither of which apply to me, why make me have one? It seems especially strange when all it will do is push me to another supplier. OK, maybe you don't see it as unfair, but not sensible in terms of keeping the customer perhaps?

And no, I don't think it's unfair 'because it doesn't match my desires' but rather because I am being penalised for someone else's behaviour - it's not logical. Charging and/or requesting a deposit makes more sense, both of which I am prepared to go along with.

KimYeovil, I'm a bit bemused by your assertion that 'scummy' companies not demanding a deposit or making a charge is unfair - why? BG, for example, require a credit check, which would seem to replace the need for a deposit. That, to me, seems reasonable. The fact that they don't charge is a bonus for the customer, I guess, and I would have been happy to pay a charge but I don't see that it's unfair not to have to.

Premier_2

ViolaLass wrote: »

...
Premier, what I find unfair is the idea that I have to hold an account with NPower for 12 months before they will consider changing the meter, for which there is a charge. Given that prepayment meters are usually put in either by request or because you're in debt, neither of which apply to me, why make me have one? It seems especially strange when all it will do is push me to another supplier. OK, maybe you don't see it as unfair, but not sensible in terms of keeping the customer perhaps?

Maybe it's the company trying to tell you they don't want you as a customer as their profiling data suggests you may not pay.
As you said, PPMs are installed in properties where where debts have accrued in the past. This may be by force or by the customer's wish. Yes, PPMs can be requested by customers even without debt, but that probably shows an issue with financial control anyway ... so again a risk the customer may not pay.
A non-paying customer is worse than no customer at all.

All businesses assess the risk of extending credit, and yes refusal to credit can often offend ... but you know what they say if that applies to you.

That risk assessment relates to charges the business ultimately makes. For every non paying customer a business has, the paying ones have to pay more!

Where there is huge customer demand, competition will inevitably exist, and companies will target the 'ideal customer profile' they prefer and price accordingly.

It's no different to the supermarkets.
Asda goes for the cheap, no frills approach.
Tesco started off that way but then went for the more upmarket approach.
Morrisons aims for those customers who prefer the old fashioned, friendly approach (market stalls, in store butchers, etc)
Sainsburys used to be the upmarket end but suffered when Tesco liked the idea and beat them at their own game. They finally lost out when Waitrose came along, so changed direction trying first to slash prices until they realised that just lost them money.

It's no difference in the energy business. Do you think there is any correlation to a company that ensures it attracts only those customers it is sure will pay and the lower prices they tend to offer?
(nPower are often close to the top of the list, perhaps also helped by the poor customer care they are renowned for. Customer care costs money too!)

It's a business model they think will win for them.

This property has a PPM already. It is a tenanted property.
Both are higher risks of non payment. (tenants often diisappear without paying the final bill, perhaps because the supplier doesn't know where they've gone at the end of a tenancy ... which I'm sure isn't without coincidence, typically within 12 months - the period nPower want you to remain at the property before they will consider giving you credit)

ViolaLass wrote: »

And no, I don't think it's unfair 'because it doesn't match my desires' but rather because I am being penalised for someone else's behaviour - it's not logical. Charging and/or requesting a deposit makes more sense, both of which I am prepared to go along with.

Who made the choice to live in this particular property at the rental asked, knowing it has a PPM?

Who makes the choice as to which energy supplier you go with, and their associated tariffs i.e. cost you will end up paying?

Who wants credit and can't get it with the current supplier?

Who says it's not logical the supplier won't lend you money? (i.e. extend credit terms to you at present)


Is that not you??? :huh:

ViolaLass

Premier wrote: »

Who made the choice to live in this particular property at the rental asked, knowing it has a PPM?

Who makes the choice as to which energy supplier you go with, and their associated tariffs i.e. cost you will end up paying?

Who wants credit and can't get it with the current supplier?

Who says it's not logical the supplier won't lend you money? (i.e. extend credit terms to you at present)

Is that not you??? :huh:

I don't deny any of this but it doesn't follow that just because I'm not getting what I want and I think the behaviour of the supplier is illogical that I therefore think it's illogical because I'm not getting what I want. I'm bothered about it because I'm not getting what I want but I would think it illogical anyway.

Actually, I'm not seeking credit, I'm happy to pay a deposit as some companies require, which would remove that problem.

Sure, I can choose which supplier I go with but at the moment I can't choose which tariff I go with so I'm not sure what your point is there.

I see your point that a tenanted flat would have a greater chance of defaults especially if it already has a PPM. On the other hand, BG said that provided I passed a credit check, they would take me. This seems logical - the company want to know whether I have a history of paying my bills and I provide proof that I do. NPower actually said that if I had already been a customer of theirs for 12 months elsewhere, they would accept me now. So why not do a credit check? If I fail it, then fair enough.

All that said, I wasn't aware that nPower tend to offer the lowest prices and have a reputation for poor customer service - the two put together and their stance on PPM does make sense so thank you for letting me know (see? I do accept logical explanations!).

mattcanary

Premier - you assume that electric companies carry accurate information. Why would it be a good commercial decision to not even be prepared to do a credit-check on a new customer if a prepayment meter is there currently (thereby quite possibly losing a potentially good customer) - and then not do one on a customer that has a quarterly meter, even when they may have been a customer of that same supplier at a previous address and owed a lot of moeny on that address? A good commercial decision - my ar**e.
It's a nonsensical stupid policy.