Scottish Power cancellation charge (when switched!)

backfoot

I would be asking for £20. Which is about the same as they were trying to get passed you.(and everyone else by the looks of it)

Scottish_Power

Morning all,

The cancellation charge issue is not as simple as you would think.

If a cancellation charge has been charged and you are under the impression it should not have been you should contact us directly for your own explanation as it is not a one size fits all scenario.

If you wanted to transfer and reject the price increase when in contract you did need to register your right to cancel, this means contacting ScottishPower directly not your new supplier contacting us to start the registration process. Once your right to cancell has been registered you have a 15 working day window for your supplier to contact us to start registration.

As I said every case can be reviewed on its own merits so if you do not believe the charges to be correct then contact us to get confirmation.

Kind regards

Graeme @ ScottishPower

jalexa

scottishpower_company_representative wrote: »

The cancellation charge issue is not as simple as you would think.

In making that comment are you 100% satisfied there is no systematic error evident at Scottish Power? From the posts, I'm not.

Indeed it is "not entirely simple". For example the need to "reject" and the need to be informed by 15 working days after "rejection", on the face of it is "a trap" for the customer and a challenging timeframe for the gaining supplier. Which "trap" is it you "allege" Scottish Power customers are falling foul of? Going further, this is the first forum "industry post" where strict enforcement of the "15 working day rule" is implied. Can you confirm that Scottish Power does strictly enforce the "15 working day rule" after an acknowledged telephone "rejection"? Can you also confirm whether there is any difference in treatment of "early termination charges" and "tariff increase avoidance" as a result of the "15 working day" rule? And whether the telephone "script" addresses that during the "rejection" contact?

Perhaps the issue is that the process is too complicated for *your* staff. Can you confirm that the Scottish Power billing system has been updated, validated and independently audited to comply with SLC23 as recently "advised" by Ofgem. (BTW, that is a "trick question" because IMO and IME, the timeframe since the Ofgem clarification letter is too short for a "update project" to have been authorised, funded, specified, tendered, coded, tested, signed-off and implemented. So that'll be a No then):D.

Or is "manual billing" required, which perhaps only occurs when a customer challenges "incorrect" final billing?

backfoot

None of the cases,within this thread fall into the category of a customer not having given notification. Indeed, the evidence is that something is remiss in the procedures, which seem to charge first and ask questions later.

Such a hardball response smacks of 'you will have to jump through hoops' before you get your termination fees waived.

In my view,the default position of a Supplier should be the reverse. We have increased prices, customer's may leave and under the intentions of the SLC's they should be free to do so.

It was always going to be the next area of dispute, where the ordinary Joe doesn't get the procedure just right to their liking.

Are SP absolutely sure that that the License Condition of letting the Supplier know 'by any means' doesn't include the acquiring Supplier doing so?

These Termination Fees on Variable Contracts are really a nasty piece of policy. Basically a random amount charged to maximise profit at the expense of individuals trying to do their best.

backfoot

You beat me to it Jalexa. Very good post. Thanks given...:rotfl:

backfoot

Why are the Suppliers still mucking around with Termination Fees.

Apart from a handful of Serial switchers, now we have the Ofgem Guidance,they are hardly ever going to correctly charged.

Unless a Supplier wants to be known for having a Business Model of finding ways to charge for procedural errors (15 day rule not within the customer's power),written notice not given to them etc,then they are now defunct.

Why don't SP or the others bite the bullet and remove them?

They simplify their operation,avoid manual processes,don't have complaints and time spent resolving them.

Isn't this basis Business sense?:)

DirectDebacle

scottishpower_company_representative wrote: »

The cancellation charge issue is not as simple as you would think.

It is. The only complications are those invented by suppliers intent on circumventing the existing regulations.

If you wanted to transfer and reject the price increase when in contract you did need to register your right to cancel, this means contacting ScottishPower directly not your new supplier contacting us to start the registration process. Once your right to cancell has been registered you have a 15 working day window for your supplier to contact us to start registration.

All becoming rather surreal now. There is already a right to cancel these contracts built in and the right to cancel is also enshrined in the SLC. As all suppliers are aware of this why should there be a need for a registration processs?

Domestic contracts are required to be as simple and clear as is possible and SP and other suppliers should be striving to comply with this requirement, not making them more complicated.

I switched from SP earlier this year and that switch followed the usual practice of the new supplier dealing with the switch after receiving my request to join them.

There was no objection from SP on the grounds that I had failed to register my right to cancel. This registration of a right to cancel is a load of baloney. Is it something you have just made up or do SP really have this as a part of their terms and conditins now?

SP and others need to concentrate on making a profit by selling energy at competitive prices and not making money out of inventing perverse regulations of their own and ignoring regulations put in place to protect consumers.

If you don't like the regulations then lobby Ofgem to change them.

In the meantime comply with existing regulations.

la_tronc

scottishpower_company_representative wrote: »

Morning all,

The cancellation charge issue is not as simple as you would think.

If a cancellation charge has been charged and you are under the impression it should not have been you should contact us directly for your own explanation as it is not a one size fits all scenario.

I emailed Scottish Power on 28th July to register my right to cancel and then emailed onlinecomplaints@scottishpower.com on 5th August to get confirmation that my new supplier had contacted them and that I wouldn’t be charged a cancellation fee or pay the increased prices.

I received this confirmation on 9th August so I was disappointed when my final gas and electricity bills included cancellation fees and the gas bill charged the increased prices from 1st August.

I have emailed Graeme for an "explanation".

wakeupalarm

This is an incredible reply from the scottishpower company representative. My example (family member), correctly rejected the prices increase and informed Scotch Power of their intention to leave quoting the relevant paragraph from SP's own email.

An email confirmation was received in which SP confirmed that no cancellation charges would be charged.

On the same day a switch was processed.

Now in effect SPR is saying that if the new supplier didn't notify SP of the switch within the short timeframe then the customer is liable for the cancellation charge.

Now lets assume the new supplier did not meet that deadline. SP is penalising the customer for another energy companies delay which the customer has no control over.

This sounds like another money making scheme from the energy companies.

There are posts from several different people on this thread who have changed to different suppliers.

The one common factor is Scottish Power. That should give a clue to where the fault lies.

jalexa

wakeupalarm wrote: »

This sounds like another money making scheme from the energy companies...

I believe there is a slightly different explanation. The "guaranteed discount" tariffs were designed "deliberately to circumvent regulations" and Customer Focus pusillanimously remained silent for over a year (and still are). The billing and customer information systems cannot deal (automatically) with the recent Ofgem "guidance". So the choice is to manually process the final bills or do *exactly* as the Scottish Power rep stated in his post. But there are insufficient resources for manual billing.

I expect that managers are running around like headless chickens unable to comply with the Ofgem "guidance" and with insufficient financial authority to commission the necessary changes to the billing system. But with sufficient authority to "instruct" Graeme.

You are right that the rep's post was "incredible". I think he is totally "discredited" in the eyes of anyone here "expert" enough to understand what is going on. He should "consider his position".

I'm still waiting for a response to my "billing system" challenge. Early days but important enough for a "holding response". Anyway this issue is up and running. Lets keep it that way.