British Gas delaying transfer unfairly

snowcat53

I wonder if any one can advise me. I finally persuaded my 83 year old mum that loyalty to British Gas was maybe not the best option when her Discount tracker deal was due to end, so I arranged a switch to edf (online saver 7, dual fuel) for her on energyhelpline on 26Nov. Electricity got switched ok in early Jan but BG wrote at the same time with a gas bill of about £500 (because her DD amount– as set by BG –was way too low for her useage, and had not been adjusted despite regular meter readings). She paid it by cheque on 14 Jan and it was credited on BG’s system on 21 Jan.

Despite this on 4 Feb eDF notified her BG had objected to the transfer, and then again on 8 Feb. BG told her this was because of the outstanding balance,.. They finally switched her in mid March but her final bill was based on the expensive standard tariff from the end of her discount tracker deal (31 Jan) to the switch date. So BG benefited from delaying her switch .

Cockup or sharp practice? Can they delay switching on spurious grounds like this, when there is only a small balance owing (a couple of weeks usage since the last bill)? Should I complain and who to?

Cardew

C0ckup theory is the best fit! - and could be on EDF side as well. It is just computers 'talking' to each other.

The £500 would clearly have been grounds for objection, but not a couple of weeks owing.

That said the period of time from 21 Jan(when cheque cleared) to mid March is about normal for a switch - it is usually 6 to 8 weeks.

birkee

Cardew wrote: »

C0ckup theory is the best fit! - and could be on EDF side as well. It is just computers 'talking' to each other.

The £500 would clearly have been grounds for objection, but not a couple of weeks owing.

That said the period of time from 21 Jan(when cheque cleared) to mid March is about normal for a switch - it is usually 6 to 8 weeks.

Computers do not talk to each other! They are inanimate devices.

The are told to communicate information, entered into them my negligent people.

I had a boiler installed by BG. (Well contracted for it! They subcontracted it to a private individual.)
Anyway, they invoiced me for fitting a timeclock supply, which they didn't fit as it was already there, so I deducted the sum from what I paid. Then came the threats of debt collectors, to collect money I didn't owe them.
In the end, I decided to pay them, and claim the payment back, as the easiest way to clear up the issue. Got my money back no problem, but BH!

They are incompetent little employees with no flexibility, and go through the procedures like the little automotans they are. They are more machine like than the computers, but are subject to lots of mistakes, that computers RARELY make.

Can you see someone overlooking them, and saying "if we hold off on this one till next week, we can get them onto the next tarif band!"
Negligence! Pure and simple.

victor2

birkee wrote: »

Computers do not talk to each other! They are inanimate devices.

The are told to communicate information, entered into them my negligent people.

They do, just not like normal human beings would hold a conversation.
As you said, they communicate. While it may be negligence by the operator, it's more often a deliberate "feature" of the programming to refuse to do things that do not conform to exact details set, or simply delay the outcome where it can be beneficial to the company to do so.
I was waiting for the outcome of a planning permission request and was told by the council it would take up to 8 weeks. It wasn't difficult and probably took a human 5 minutes to decide. But 8 weeks to the day after submission, I got the formal response. Bet there was a computer behind that. Can't see how the council got any benefit, but why rush into these things when guidelines say you have so long?

birkee

victor2 wrote: »

They do, just not like normal human beings would hold a conversation.
As you said, they communicate. While it may be negligence by the operator, it's more often a deliberate "feature" of the programming to refuse to do things that do not conform to exact details set, or simply delay the outcome where it can be beneficial to the company to do so.
I was waiting for the outcome of a planning permission request and was told by the council it would take up to 8 weeks. It wasn't difficult and probably took a human 5 minutes to decide. But 8 weeks to the day after submission, I got the formal response. Bet there was a computer behind that. Can't see how the council got any benefit, but why rush into these things when guidelines say you have so long?

I think you misunderstand the word 'talk' as opposed to 'communicate'.

Don't forget, that the programmes in a computer, whilst not flexible enough to perform outside certain parameters, are programmed like this by humans.
The programme is designed to drive negligent humans down certain paths of data entry, because they can't be trusted to do it, because they are not trained or qualified to use initiative. (From the programmers perspective.)

Even your home video recorder makes you proceed through certain sequences to get somewhere, rather than just go to what you want to do. It won't let you do certain actions voluntarily.

5 minutes for a planning decision yes, but 8 weeks for people to get round to converting it from paper form, and entering it in the computer, which will record it instantly. Then they will wait further time, to tell that computer to transmit the information to the wider database, because they only do that once a week / month.

Cardew

birkee wrote: »

Computers do not talk to each other! They are inanimate devices.

The are told to communicate information, entered into them my negligent people.

.

Really! Wow thank you for letting us know - I now understand why mine sometimes crashes even when I have told it not to!

Did you not understand what was meant when I wrote 'It is just computers 'talking' to each other'. i.e did you not notice the inverted commas?

I suspect nobody else thought I meant a verbal dialogue;)

Again I suspect everyone else was aware this meant that the 'decision'* to block the transfer was probably not caused by human intervention!

*Computers do make 'decisions'! Or do you wish for a semantic discussion on that issue?

Premier_2

snowcat53 wrote: »

I wonder if any one can advise me. I finally persuaded my 83 year old mum that loyalty to British Gas was maybe not the best option when her Discount tracker deal was due to end, so I arranged a switch to edf (online saver 7, dual fuel) for her on energyhelpline on 26Nov. Electricity got switched ok in early Jan but BG wrote at the same time with a gas bill of about £500 (because her DD amount– as set by BG –was way too low for her useage, and had not been adjusted despite regular meter readings). She paid it by cheque on 14 Jan and it was credited on BG’s system on 21 Jan.

Despite this on 4 Feb eDF notified her BG had objected to the transfer, and then again on 8 Feb. BG told her this was because of the outstanding balance,.. They finally switched her in mid March but her final bill was based on the expensive standard tariff from the end of her discount tracker deal (31 Jan) to the switch date. So BG benefited from delaying her switch .

Cockup or sharp practice? Can they delay switching on spurious grounds like this, when there is only a small balance owing (a couple of weeks usage since the last bill)? Should I complain and who to?

First check with your elderly mother that she has given you all the facts over this. (My mother is also elderly and can sometimes forget important information either deliberately of due to old age)

The supplier is only permitted to prevent a switch on the basis of an outstanding debt if the debt is owed. A debt is not a debt until at least 28 days after it is formally demanded.

So find out has your mum ever been previously sent a bill for the amount and if so when.
If not, complain, complain, complain!

http://www.britishgas.co.uk/complaints

snowcat53

Thanks for the replies. Not quite sure why the odd detour into computer communication but very interesting anyway

Premier you are right, my mum doesn't always remember everything but I have seen all the correspondence and it is clear BG refused to switch despite the big bill having been paid and credited 2-3 weeks before. The transfer took 3.5 months (end nov to mid march). I will be complaining. In general it seems obvious the host company has a financial interest in delaying a transfer so it is not inconceivable there may be a policy to object if they can.

cing0

Sorry I can't add to this thread with similar experience.
I will tell you that British Gas will ring her to switch her back in a few week after taking new supply.
Email British gas to op out of marketing and sales calls and make sure you don't give any other energy suppliers a contact number.

snowcat53

Update - my written complaint on behalf of my mother - spelling out the sequence of events - resulted in British Gas crediting her account with £21 (my calculation of the extra she paid due to the inappropriately delayed transfer ) plus £10 goodwill gesture. Fair play to them - they responded promptly and held their hands up.

Thanks all who advised here. Complaining works!