Npower bill - had an increase?

foxgloves

Npower bill arrived Aug requesting an increase in our monthly payment from £66 a month (dual fuel) to £136 a month. As we are pretty stingy with gas & electricity on the whole, this seemed ridiculously steep so sat down with bill & calculator. The rise was because we weren't paying quite enough & so there were arrears on the account. The arrears came to £36. Divided between 12 monthly payments, that amounted to £3 a month, yet Npower had increased our monthly payment by £70 a month. The final page of the bill looks like information only & so may sometimes get ignored, but it contained a very useful statement from Npower giving an estimate of how much gas & electricity they expected us to use over the next year, based on all the info & meter readings they have on us, as well as how much it will cost for the next year. It does say that this is an estimate & could be more or less depending on any economies we make with useage. I divided that figure by 12 and it came out at £85 a month. So why were Npower asking for £136. Their two sets of figures didn't even appear to be related to each other. I contacted them, paid off the £36 and requested a new bill based on their own figures showing what they estimate I will use. They instantly reduced the new monthly payment to £95, but would go no lower even when I pointed out that this was still £10 a month higher than what they themselves were estimating I would use. I'm changing to another supplier now (Co-op energy) as I'm sick of the way the 'Big 6' energy companies seem to stitch up the market so they all raise their prices together & there's very little competition for customers. Just thought I'd post this in case it helps anyone else who has had an astronomical rise in monthly payments from Npower. Look at that final page and see how closely what they are asking you to pay in one set of figures matches what they say you are likely to use in another. I do understand that an estimate is just that.....but asking someone to pay a £70 a month increase for what turned out to be a monthly shortfall of just £3 on the previous monthly amount is just ridiculous. Yes, I know they'd eventually have to credit it back to me, but there's a global recession, everything's going up, jobs are not secure & that money should be in OUR bank account, not their's! Right, I'm off the soapbox now! Hope this story helps someone.

beanys

move supplers and get a better deal and your DD wil go down . plus u will get a cheaper fuel hopefully

jalexa

foxgloves wrote: »

Right, I'm off the soapbox now! Hope this story helps someone.

BTW, this a pro-consumer post, not a pro-NPower post.

You were half on the right lines with your calculations but lost focus when you got on your soap-box.

To fight this (and win) you need a different attitude. First of all a recognition that a "zero balance" in August is proof that the monthly payments are inadequate because there should (reasonably) be a significant balance ahead of the winter heating season.

A customer cannot win a "zero-balance in August" argument.

Have a study of this...
https://customerservices.npower.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/39

The fundamental thing you need to establish is the date of what is described as your "annual" review, I predict it will be sometime next spring. Then you need to consider whether you accept NPower's assumption regarding your annual consumption. The last 12 month's consumption should be known as a matter of fact. Whether that is a reasonable assumption going forward, given the severity of last winter, is another matter.

It is much better insisting that NPower provide a detailed explanation in writing (or by email), under threat of Complaint if they decline, than debating on the phone, because then you can potentially pick holes in their calculation. Do not be afraid to use the Complaints process if any error is not corrected at the first time of asking. In particular ensure you are not being disadvantaged by any NPower failure to observe the Direct Debit review procedure to the letter.

Regarding switching away from NPower, be alert to the possibility of Early Termination Charges and the probability of losing your "deferred discount":eek:

DirectDebacle

A customer cannot win a "zero-balance in August" argument

.

They can if their anniversary date is August.

For some time now suppliers have been reviewing DD with a zero balance target around the end of winter/beginning of spring, irrespective of a customers anniverary date. This has been the subject of many posts on here complaining of large and unexpected increases in DD payments because of this policy.

Suppliers are riding roughshod over the principles of the DD scheme in order to improve their cash flow. In their ideal world DD accounts will always be in credit.

As a reminder the DD scheme was introduced to smooth out payments for customers and to simplify and regularise receipts for the suppliers. It was accepted that over the 12 month period there would be occasions when accounts would be in credit or in debit but should be around zero at anniversary date.

It is incorrect to say that there should always be a healthy credit balance ahead of the winter because it depends upon a customers DD anniversary date. An account with an anniversary date of November will be in debit by the spring and zero by November. That is how the DD scheme should operate and how it has always operated.

Since the credit crunch the suppliers have tried to manipulate the scheme to improve cash flow and have customers providing them with (interest free) finance previously supplied by the banks.

jalexa

DirectDebacle wrote: »

They can if their anniversary date is August.

What you say may be right but you quote my post very selectively. The key clause was "The fundamental thing you need to establish is the date of what is described as your "annual" review, I predict it will be sometime next spring."

An answer to that is required in order to counter the detail of the NPower calculation.

You disparage (as I do) supplier treatment of consumers. Do you *really* think they will have an "Aug" annual review date? That would indeed be very generous. But IMHO deluded.

Edit: OK I see your approach. You are linking "annual review" with "anniversary" but (I predict) that the "annual review" is aligned with "spring" not the "12 month anniverary" of first custom. Anyway, its only a prediction and I stand to be corrected.

Bronnie

jalexa wrote: »

What you say may be right but you quote my post very selectively. The key clause was "The fundamental thing you need to establish is the date of what is described as your "annual" review, I predict it will be sometime next spring."

An answer to that is required in order to counter the detail of the NPower calculation.

You disparage (as I do) supplier treatment of consumers. Do you *really* think they will have an "Aug" annual review date? That would indeed be very generous. But IMHO deluded.

Edit: OK I see your approach. You are linking "annual review" with "anniversary" but (I predict) that the "annual review" is aligned with "spring" not the "12 month anniverary" of first custom. Anyway, its only a prediction and I stand to be corrected.

Correct. My "anniversary" is Oct to November (2010), depending on what you deem "anniversary" ( agreeing contract or supplying fuel). My recent (September 22nd 2011) bill includes a "6 monthly review" and they aim for a zero balance by my annual review in Spring.

There is no old debt on the account whatsoever but I have a debit balance for this year of £165, which I can pay off. However my monthly payments have increased from £62 to £158!! I will wait til I'm eligible for my deferred bonus in November, then jump ship. I will let them take the increased dd payment, as it will serve to pay off some of the debit balance before I leave. Just need to plot the earliest date I can safely advise them of leaving. Hopefully I've played them to the best of my limited abilities

DirectDebacle

I did not link link anniversary date with annual review. I thought I had made it clear that they were separate mechanisms.

Put simply anniversary date is the date the customer and supplier should be using to achieve a zero balance.

Review dates are used by suppliers in an attempt to have DD accounts at zero around end of winter/beginning of spring irrespective of anniversary date.

Failing to understand this is why customers seem to be under the impression that zero balances must be achieved by the end of each winter even if their anniversary date is some other time of the year.

If this is allowed to continue then customers are losing out. They are no longer in the DD scheme as intended when it was first conceived and introduced. They are in an advance payment scheme where the account is more than likely to be continuously in credit.

First of all a recognition that a "zero balance" in August is proof that the monthly payments are inadequate because there should (reasonably) be a significant balance ahead of the winter heating season.

The above statement is only correct if the anniversary date requires that such a balance needs to exist to achieve a zero balance at the end of the winter heating season, not simply because that is what the supplier would like.

Correct. My "anniversary" is Oct to November (2010), depending on what you deem "anniversary" ( agreeing contract or supplying fuel). My recent (September 22nd 2011) bill is a "6 monthly review" and they aim for a zero balance by my annual review in Spring.

A prime example of the point I was making. The supplier is attempting to deceive the customer into believing that a zero balance must be achieved by Spring whereas the contract is for the zero balance to be in the autumn.

Bronnie whoever you switch to is likely to try the same on you. Make a note of the precise date your switch is completed and use that as your anniversary date for calculating 12 monthly DD payments. If your switch is completed Nov/Dec then a review requiring a zero balance in the spring is going to mean a higher DD than you would have budgeted for.

meggsy

Bronnie, jump ship is the best advice

My anniversary date was 13th March on Sol 19 but when npower switched to only two bills a year I received them in June and December so the deferred discount didn't appear until the June bill! They reviewed the DD on last Decembers bill with a huge increase as they had based this on 6 months ! I was furious and told them to recalculate over 12 months and the DD didn't change. This worked out fine until I switched recently and only owed them £70 to settle final bill.

jalexa

DirectDebacle wrote: »

Put simply anniversary date is the date the customer and supplier should be using to achieve a zero balance.

You say "should" but I say "ask what it is". You are fighting (and losing) the issue on the "should", I fight it on the "what it is". You are fighting an "unwinnable" fight, hence "debacle" I guess, my approach demands supplier (in this case NPower) compliance to the letter of their published procedure on pain of Complaint and the potential of Energy Ombudsman referral.

What is the problem with the defined "annual review" being aligned on April (say) as long the first (less than a year) achieves an account balance by the first April (say) and then the (next and only) "interim review" sets payments to achieve a zero balance by the defined "annual review" date?

An "annual review" based on a summer "zero balance" is a completely illogical and unwinnable argument.

Bronnie

Well according to npower's friendly little videos numbers 2 and 3 and 7, uneven loading of the dd payments in the winter months doesn't happen. https://www.npower.com/dde/#___revealer_ident_1

I notice the woman in the videos is doing a lot of hand-wringing, which can be interpreted as an overwrought expression of concern and guilt. Maybe she needed the money and had to compromise her principles in appearing in these npower videos!! ;-)


And here is their reasoning for delaying the 6 month review and why it does not correspond with the anniversary date.

QUOTE If you are a new customer your first statement may not include a review of your payment amount. When we set up your account, we match your statement dates to the dates our meter reader will call; to make sure your statements are accurate. Sometimes this means your first statement will be sent before we have supplied you for 6 months. When this happens, we haven't got enough data to complete your mid-term review, so we delay the review until your next statement which will be in 6 months time. After that we review your payment amount every time your statement is due, to make sure you're not paying more or less than you should be. QUOTE

jalexa

Bronnie wrote: »

And here is their reasoning for delaying the 6 month review and why it does not correspond with the anniversary date.

That is very interesting (and statistically reasonable). Just something that Edf overlooked in the specification for their new billing system:D.

Having skimmed through the description of most of the videos you linked to, I could not see where the calander date of the "annual review" was mentioned. Whatever the date, it is something a customer should ask and "diarise" the response (yes, something MSEers are required to be able to do:)).

This is not to defend NPower or suppliers who employ "interim reviews" but two factors conspire to exaggerate the recalculation, if there is a deficit, the "6 months to the review" doubles the required correction. Secondly the "assumption" of annual consumption. The previous 12 months consumption is a matter of fact but may include exceptionally severe weather which IMO should not be included in consumption projections. Neither should "exceptionally severe" projections be made of a forthcoming winter. Customers need to be more aware of their "typical" (i.e non exceptional) annual consumption. That, and the "annual review" date, is the key to correct calculation.

Customers would be more successful fighting incorrect and unreasonable reviews by aggresively requiring the supplier to "come clean" on the calculation and usage assumptions, give the supplier one and only one opportunity to correct any found errors, then Complain (in writing or by email). The videos you post are a great "hostage to fortune" to be exploited.

Unfortunately the "soap-box" technique is a dud.