Ofgem's Retail Market Review - Have Your Say

Cardew

KimYeovil wrote: »

What difference does it make to an established business with reserves to receive one payment twelve times a year or three times that payment four times a year? The 14 days later is not relevant - the due date (including 14 days (or 28 days if using TNT ) remains constant and at three months apart.

Take two customers paying £1,200pa. The DD customer pays £100 a month. and the credit customer £300 a quarter.

At the end of month 1 the company have £100 of the DD customer's money in the bank. They have nothing from the credit customer.

At the end of month 2 the company have £200 of the DD customer's money in the bank. They still have nothing from the credit customer.

At the end of month 3 the company have £300 in the bank from both customers.

With the DD customer there is an average credit balance with the company of £150 over the year.

I can't see how it can be construed that DD doesn't give a better cash flow. Virtually every company in all fields offer an incentive for payment by DD(or a penalty for not paying by DD)

Cardew

Nuuk wrote: »

I propose a two-tier tariff such that the first X amount of energy that you consume is at a much lower rate. Then it goes up for those that want to use more.

In some places in the USA that is exactly what happens.

Over there I pay a lower rate for the first 1,000kWh a month(all electric property) and any consumption over that costs 20% extra.

MartinWickham

I'd like to see consumers given immediate, direct access to complain to Ofgem for any complaints about any dishonest practices by the energy companies. For example:-

1) Misleading bills (omissions or wrong descriptions, is you haven't noticed them, you probably don't check your Scottish Power bills!)
2) Misleading products
3) Dishonest commercial practices

If a consumer is prepared to find, research and report any dishonest practices, then it is counter-productive to fob them off, back to the supply company to pursue a complaint which should be resolved expediently in the interests of all consumers.

MartinWickham

The energy companies should be regulated in the number of products and tariffs they are allowed to market. It would help if there were also regulation in the amount of cross-subsidy that lurks below the surface of these products.

In the end, it's the same gas molecules and the same electrons we are buying. The multiplicity of products and tariffs and the constant introduction of new ones, the price slide of 'old' ones and the consequential 'cross-subsidies' which result, is simply designed to confuse consumers who lack the ability, or the time, to protect themselves.

Cardew

MartinWickham wrote: »

The energy companies should be regulated in the number of products and tariffs they are allowed to market. It would help if there were also regulation in the amount of cross-subsidy that lurks below the surface of these products.

Some of those cross-subsidies have been imposed by the Government.

For instance pre Pay Meters(PPM) are expensive to administer and even when those tariffs were higher than the Standard tariff, the bosses of the Big 6 stated(to the Parliamentary Energy Committee) that PPMs were un-economic.

However despite that the Government 'applied pressure' to ensure that PPM tariffs were reduced further because, in general, PPMs were used by the poorer members of society.

The same with 'Social' tariffs - another case of Robbing Peter to pay Paul'.

andycooper

I would also like to see pricing of supplies for rural communities considered as part of the consultation.

Many of us aren't on the gas grid and as such can't benefit from cheaper dual fuel tarrifs as well as having to pay substantially more for heating oil or bottled gas. The price of heating oil in some areas increased by nearly 70% this winter.

rogerblack

MartinWickham wrote: »

I'd like to see one change which would to some extent address all the following issues very effectively : -

1) reduce carbon emissions
2) help those with limited economic means
3) cope with increasing world shortage of energy
4) encourage insulation and thrift

I have just mailed a response to the consultation, under the topic of simplification, proposing something along these lines.
Basically - eliminate the A/B unit pricing, above X Kwh/year.

You pay C/Kwh. Your minimum spend per year is capped at an industry wide figure negotiated by OFGEM - I suggested 80/year, or 150 with dual-fuel.

This means that those with the lowest electricity and gas usages do not face higher tarrifs.

There are problems with 'encourage insulation' - some homes are practically impossible to insulate without spending on the order of 10 grand on them.
Green deal sort-of-helps with this - but you end up paying over-the-odds to pay back your expensively installed system - which you cannot do DIY, so the actual moneysaving is very limited.

sugar2babe

Re: Cardew posting. I agree since it encourages more economical use of energy. this would work very well if all the energy companies had to fis the unit levels change at the sme number for both gas and electricity. Plus I wonder how many people know about the social tariffs which most companies offer for people over 60, in receipt of benefits or disabled. These tariffs are not shown on comparison websites and you have to phone each company to find out what there tariff rate is. They go by different names with different companies but I know the npower one is called Spreading Warmth.

blue-eyes1955

Ape_tWiN_on_Prim8 wrote: »

I think it's scandalous that existing Customers aren't auto-switched to the cheapest tariff

I agree. I recently changed supplier after going through comparison sites. I could save almost £300 pa. I was then contacted by my original supplier saying I could save almost that amount by swapping to one of their other tariffs. They also disputed the savings I was being quoted by the comparison sites as they assumed I had input my DD amounts rather than my actual annual usage.

Because I had used the actual usage I could see what the differences were and I told them I wasn't going to accept their 'other tariff' as I should have been told about it before.

They shouldn't have so many different tariffs which we can't possibly know about. Keep it simple and you'll keep your customers.

Cardew

Ape_tWiN_on_Prim8 wrote: »

I think it's scandalous that existing Customers aren't auto-switched to the cheapest tariff :mad:

However the cheapest tariffs have penalty fees for leaving early and there was an outcry when that happened.