EDF bill rip-off

intermynan

backfoot wrote: »

The issue here was the price change on the 2nd March and the apportionment of units billed pre and post that date.They have accepted that their apportionment was faulty and are correcting it.

i.e. The OP had a valid complaint.

I don't think any customer has a responsibility to submit a meter reading. It may be advisable to keep your billing record up to date but the only responsibilty lies with the Supplier.

Which renders your post........:D

100% wrong...which renders your post....:D

If a customer wants accurate bills, it is the CUSTOMER'S responsibility to provide those meter readings. This is a fact, not an opinion. As I said, the meter reading companies only legallyl have to read the meters once every two years. Other than that, the onus is on the CUSTOMER to check their meter and provide regular meter readings.

Feel free to disagree if you like, but you'd be wrong.

backfoot

intermynan wrote: »

100% wrong...which renders your post....:D

If a customer wants accurate bills, it is the CUSTOMER'S responsibility to provide those meter readings. This is a fact, not an opinion. As I said, the meter reading companies only legallyl have to read the meters once every two years. Other than that, the onus is on the CUSTOMER to check their meter and provide regular meter readings.

Feel free to disagree if you like, but you'd be wrong.

I am not sure who you are or your background.

Your posts on this thread are aggressive and unhelpful to the OP and didn't address the key issue of whether the apportionment was fair.

Perhaps you could tell us how many customers would have taken their own reading on the day in question? 0.5%, 1%, or what?

Your semantics over 'responsibilty' are futile. The only 'legal responsibility' is the one you have referred to. Any other responsibility is academic. As I said, it's advisable to submit readings but not obligatory.

You should also know that it's the supplier's responsibilty to obtain meter readings and they sub contract that task to meter reading companies to provide that service.

I will look forward to your future postings. It's always interesting when newish posters put themselves forward as experts.

intermynan

backfoot wrote: »

I am not sure who you are or your background.

Your posts on this thread are aggressive and unhelpful to the OP and didn't address the key issue of whether the apportionment was fair.

Perhaps you could tell us how many customers would have taken their own reading on the day in question? 0.5%, 1%, or what?

Your semantics over 'responsibilty' are futile. The only 'legal responsibility' is the one you have referred to. Any other responsibility is academic. As I said, it's advisable to submit readings but not obligatory.

Oh I am not saying it is OBLIGATORY for a customer to provide a meter reading, but it is not OBLIGATORY for a company to ensure that an accurate meter reading has been provided before billing either. The company only has to ensure they have receive an accurate reading within a 2 year period. Other than that, if the customer does not provide an actual reading, they will receive an estimated bill...which is their responsibility, not the company's responsibliity!


You should also know that it's the supplier's responsibilty to obtain meter readings and they sub contract that task to meter reading companies to provide that service.

I will look forward to your future postings. It's always interesting when newish posters put themselves forward as experts.

Well again, you are absolutely incorrect. It is NOT the supplier's responsibilty to obtain meter readings. Yes, they sub contract to meter reading companies but again they only have to read the meter every 2 years.

AGAIN, the onus is on the CUSTOMER to take responsibility and provide up to date meter readings.

You can argue against that all you like, but you'd be wrong.

I'll stick to my guns on this particular point because I know for a 100% fact, that I am right. You can argue until you are blue in the face.

Before you humiliate yourself further, I suggest you check up on who is responsible to provide accurate meter readings...

Thank you

intermynan

I'm still correct, regardless of what you think of my other posts. So you can smile all you like. xx

backfoot

intermynan wrote: »

Well again, you are absolutely incorrect. It is NOT the supplier's responsibilty to obtain meter readings. Yes, they sub contract to meter reading companies but again they only have to read the meter every 2 years.

AGAIN, the onus is on the CUSTOMER to take responsibility and provide up to date meter readings.

You can argue against that all you like, but you'd be wrong.

I'll stick to my guns on this particular point because I know for a 100% fact, that I am right. You can argue until you are blue in the face.

Before you humiliate yourself further, I suggest you check up on who is responsible to provide accurate meter readings...

Thank you

Making a point to you is hilarious. :rotfl:It's one of those loops where you say, I'm incorrect and then you quote what I have said as the correct position.

You also messed up the quote thing in post 24, embedding your words into a quote from me.

Can't wait for more pearls of wisdom. I bet you are a former complaint handler for BG or NPower. It all seems so painfully familiar.

Tomo85

intermynan wrote: »

Well again, you are absolutely incorrect. It is NOT the supplier's responsibilty to obtain meter readings. Yes, they sub contract to meter reading companies but again they only have to read the meter every 2 years.

AGAIN, the onus is on the CUSTOMER to take responsibility and provide up to date meter readings.

You can argue against that all you like, but you'd be wrong.

I'll stick to my guns on this particular point because I know for a 100% fact, that I am right. You can argue until you are blue in the face.

Before you humiliate yourself further, I suggest you check up on who is responsible to provide accurate meter readings...

Thank you

Been reading this thread with interest and although its gone off point from from the original topic I have to agree with Backfoot on this.


intermynan 1st of all it is the responsibility of the Energy Compaines to read the meter of their customers. The OFGEM regulations states every 2 years at the VERY LEAST.

Please show me where it states a customer has a responsibility to provide meter readings?

A customers only responsiblity is to allow the energy provider access to the meter and to be co-operative with the supplier to allow readings to take place.

Secondly and the biggest reason a supplier has an active interest in getting more regular readings is so they know that the energy they have bought and supplied to properties they are charging customers for the same amount
.
Energy companies need to prove how much energy has been transported to properties and if the this is estimated they themselves could be charged for more energy than was actually transported.

I could go into the technical details of this such as annual quanity settlement charges for transportation costs that suppliers pay but I wont.

I rarely comment as I only do so when i feel I can offer different advice to that already given or I am sure of my facts

intermynan

Let me make myself clear.

1. The meter reading company only have to read the meters once every two years legally. End of. Fact.
2. There is NO OBLIGATION for the customer to read the meter, BUT, also the onus is NOT on the company to obtain actual meter readings - so if a meter for example was read in January 2009 by a meter reader, and then every bill until May 2010 was estimated, and then the customer decides THEN to provide a reading, and receives a massive bill as a consequence of all former readings for the past year being estimated, this is NOT the fault of the company, this is the fault of the CUSTOMER for not being pro-active enough to bother reading the meter regularly.

Perhaps I came across as suggesting that the customer was legally responsible to read their meter. I didn't mean that so apologies if it sounded like that - but what I am saying is that if a customer is unhappy at receiving a year's worth of estimated bills....and the meter was read at least once in that two year period...then the customer doesnt have a leg to stand on, as the company does not have to obtain regular meter readings.

All about being pro-active and reading one's own meter at the end of the day - if a customer can't be bothered doing that, then they DESERVE estimated bills!

intermynan

backfoot wrote: »

Making a point to you is hilarious. :rotfl:It's one of those loops where you say, I'm incorrect and then you quote what I have said as the correct position.

You also messed up the quote thing in post 24, embedding your words into a quote from me.

Can't wait for more pearls of wisdom. I bet you are a former complaint handler for BG or NPower. It all seems so painfully familiar.

Nope, but I bet you're one of those idiot customers who think they don't have to do anything for themselves! :beer:

Tomo85

intermynan wrote: »

Let me make myself clear.

1. The meter reading company only have to read the meters once every two years legally. End of. Fact.
2. There is NO OBLIGATION for the customer to read the meter, BUT, also the onus is NOT on the company to obtain actual meter readings - so if a meter for example was read in January 2009 by a meter reader, and then every bill until May 2010 was estimated, and then the customer decides THEN to provide a reading, and receives a massive bill as a consequence of all former readings for the past year being estimated, this is NOT the fault of the company, this is the fault of the CUSTOMER for not being pro-active enough to bother reading the meter regularly.

Perhaps I came across as suggesting that the customer was legally responsible to read their meter. I didn't mean that so apologies if it sounded like that - but what I am saying is that if a customer is unhappy at receiving a year's worth of estimated bills....and the meter was read at least once in that two year period...then the customer doesnt have a leg to stand on, as the company does not have to obtain regular meter readings.

All about being pro-active and reading one's own meter at the end of the day - if a customer can't be bothered doing that, then they DESERVE estimated bills!

1. There is no legal requirement it is a regulatory requirement
2. The onus IS on the supplier to read the meter

Every supplier wants to read the meter as often as they can to produce accurate billing, for 2 main reasons. Better customer service and also the previous point I made about settlement and transportation charges.

I would love to know if you worked for a supplier and if so that your company stands behind your statement "if a customer can't be bothered doing that, then they DESERVE estimated bills"

I know that most suppliers are trying to promote more accurate billing and that is why 2 major suppliers are actively installing SMART meters.

Neither me or Backfoot is saying a customer should not have to provide readings however in the case of a when price increase occurs in the middle of a quarter/billing period, suppliers should actively promote to customers to provide accurate readings on the dates of price increase, which they dont currently do.

intermynan

Yes - eventually smart meters will be in everyone's homes by the year 2020 (government initiative didn't ya know).

But no, the onus is NOT on the supplier to read the meter (more than once every two years).

I'm afraid I'm 100% right on this issue, so I won't be continuing this, er, debate. Ta.

Customers need to take some damn responsibility and stop blaming everyone but themselves, it's as simple as that to be honest.