Npower bill - had an increase?

mardatha

Absolute nonsense expecting people to pay that kind of money. I think somebody in their office has a page of numbers, shuts their eyes, and sticks a pin in - then tells you that's your new DD. I recently joined Co-op Energy too.
Only a halfwit would hand over money like that every month - for goddsake people get a grip!!!

jalexa

backfoot wrote: »

I found the above ever so difficult to follow.

If there is something you don't understand feel free to post a shorter quote and I will be happy to help.

davidgmmafan

"I have read all the views on here about how bills are calculated/time of year/etc, but using the figures Npower themselves sent me, there is in my mind, no way that the new direct debit amount they requested comes close to reflecting the amount of energy even they themselves say we are likely to use over the next 12 months. When I complained that the 2 sets of figures didn't match, they knocked £41 off the new amount instantly without hesitation, which I took as proof that they probably know that they don't actually have any arguments to counter the fact that what they are doing is chancing their arm & deliberately asking people to pay more than they actually need to pay under the terms of their direct debit agreement."

With respect I disagree. The difference in the figures could be simply in taking the calculation over 12, rather than 6, months. Think about it you are 'only' thirty six pounds in debit. Is it logical to assume your consumption will be identical in the next six months? I would say not. Plus there is a price rise if you aren't on a fixed rate tariff.

If you multiply the six month figure by 12 then it'll be a massive a mount, but why would you do this if it says on the bill its calculated over six months?

It is right to say they use the day you started with them as the anniversary date, maybe its better to have a fixed date for everyone as some suppliers do although this could have its own issues. Or maybe it would be best to let people pay whatever they want and take any balance owing or refund any credit in twelve months time. I would be happy with such a system as I generally leave a bit of leeway in the calculations. My logic is simple if I need to use more I can, if something unexpected happens I have a bit of a buffer.

If I were going into Winter with a debit and then say I had a reduction in income right away I'm struggling. If I a have a buffer on the account I know I have something to play with. When I inevitably end up in credit I can easily have it refunded and spend it. I wouldn't be getting anything worthwhile in the bank on this credit.

BTW the Co-Op have just announced a price rise so hope you got a fixed rate

mardatha

The Co-op even with the price rise is less than I paid with SP.

jalexa

mardatha wrote: »

The Co-op even with the price rise is less than I paid with SP.

That may be the case, however Scottish Power Online Energy Saver 15 is 15 to 20% cheaper (post-increase) than Co-operative Energy will be post November increase. (The increase is announced but not yet (Sun 2 October) on all comparison websites. Give it 2 to 3 days and check for yourself).

Bronnie

mardatha wrote: »

The Co-op even with the price rise is less than I paid with SP.

....but how competitive was the SP tariff you were on previously?

Is the Co op (updated prices on their own website ) still significantly cheaper than current best online tariffs for you or is it the customer service/Co-op ideals that make you consider it a worthwhile switch?

meggsy

I have always emailed npower with my complaints, you need everything in writing due to their devious nature

They will try to phone you first, they left messages on our answerphone saying they would email as we were out, this is part of the reply received on 3/12/2010 when I complained about an increase.

"Unfortunately the Energy Regulator have advised that we must reassess all direct debit account's on a 6 monthly basis rather than 12 monthly to stop customers building up debits on their accounts.

We can however if requested recalculate this over 12 months which I have done for you today"

jalexa

meggsy wrote: »

"Unfortunately the Energy Regulator have advised that we must reassess all direct debit account's on a 6 monthly basis rather than 12 monthly...

What, the "Energy Regulator" being pro-active? Pull the other one NPower.

Anybody got "chapter and verse" on the Energy Regulator "so-called" advice?

DirectDebacle

jalexa wrote: »

What, the "Energy Regulator" being pro-active? Pull the other one NPower.

Anybody got "chapter and verse" on the Energy Regulator "so-called" advice?

It is more than advice. On 18/1/2010 Ofgem made it part of suppliers Standard Licence Conditions (SLC) that they must provide consumers with all relevant information as to how a DD amount is calculated and how any variation to the DD is calculated. Further that DD must be based on the most up to date information available or that which can be reasonably expected to be available. This includes reasonable estimates of previous or future useage.

This decision followed an investigation into suppliers management and implementation of DD. It is clear from the consulatation document that Ofgem expected that DD were based on a 12month period.

My earlier posts that annual reviews of DD should be conducted on the anniversary date, ie 12 months after the start, is correct and npower are not adhering to this in some cases.

npower are masters of deception and their defininition of an annual review is I suspect a modified re-incarnation of their discredited 'tariff year'.

We can see that in Bronnies case with an anniversary date of Oct/Nov npower have given the account an annual review date in the spring. npowers annual review requires accounts to be balanced therefore they would be requesting a DD increase to cover all winter useage over around 6 months in order to achieve a zero balance. Whereas it should be zero in Oct/Nov.

This is against the intended aim of the DD scheme and a practice that Ofgem would likely condemn if brought to their attention.

Any customer who is requested to provide DD payments which will provide a zero account balance which is not aligned to their anniversary date should be immediately challenging their supplier and citing the suppliers SLC, which can be found here:

http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Consumers/Documents1/Direct%20Debits%20Notice%20of%20Reasons%20Modification%20Gas%20Supply%20Licence.pdf

This refers to gas. An identical condition was imposed for the supply of electricity.

jalexa

DirectDebacle wrote: »

It is more than advice. On 18/1/2010 Ofgem made it part of suppliers Standard Licence Conditions (SLC) that they must provide consumers with all relevant information as to how a DD amount is calculated and how any variation to the DD is calculated. Further that DD must be based on the most up to date information available or that which can be reasonably expected to be available. This includes reasonable estimates of previous or future useage.

I think Condition 27 is quite clear. BTW this is reluctant "nitpicking" because I think we are basically on the same side of the consumer fence.

As an aside, I manage my "typical annual consumption" and "monthly payments" very closely. I recall once (pre "Condition 27" as it happens), challenging Scottish Power and receiving a detailed and acceptable explanation. More recently, on holiday, I received an unwelcome Atlantic notification of a payment hike. I challenged that (by email) and they declined to justify it and restored the previous payment. On return from holiday I calculated that it was not unreasonable (had they only justified it).

Any affected consumer should indeed demand a written justification, not a telephone "niet".

This decision followed an investigation into suppliers management and implementation of DD. It is clear from the consulatation document that Ofgem expected that DD were based on a 12month period.

Maybe, maybe not, but the actual "Condition 27" appears silent on that requirement.

My earlier posts that annual reviews of DD should be conducted on the anniversary date, ie 12 months after the start, is correct

where does it say that in Condition 27?

npower are masters of deception

On that I do not disagree

This is against the intended aim of the DD scheme and a practice that Ofgem would likely condemn if brought to their attention.

I'm not convinced about that because a 12 month "year" aligned on "spring" can easily be argued to be in compliance with Condition 27.

Personally I am happy with "spring alignment" and unhappy with "6 month interim review". I cannot see anything in Condition 27 to support the "unfortunately the Energy Regulator have advised that we must reassess all direct debit account's on a 6 monthly basis rather than 12 monthly..." that I challenged in my previous post.

Unless you know to the contrary.

Whatever, customers should ask their supplier the date of *their* "annual review", "diarise" it and hold their supplier to the letter of any published procedure.