Fuel companies holding the poor to ransom

TheWindowCleaner

I tried to switch fuel companies yesterday after finding on uswitch we could save £372,i am currently paying through these prepaid metres as last winter i lost 6 weeks work due to snow and got behind on some bills anyway after 40 mins of phoning people and being given phone numbers to phone other people i eventualy was told that if i wanted to switch to the saver deal Scottish power was offering i would have to have these metres removed at a cost of £100 non refundable and a further £150 deposit for each metre refundable after a year,Seems they only do the deal via any other payment method other than prepaid metres for reasons known to them but i reckon its bang out of order.

shortchanged_2

Unfortunately this is something that has gone on for years and for ages I have said it. The poor have been subsidising the wealthy for many years in some sectors.

Who gets most of the bad deals on things like credit charges, bank charges, utility bills etc. Yes the less well off.

Bank charges, what are they all about if they are nothing but a poverty trap. You are in debt so hey, we'll just add to your debt and make it that much harder for you to pay off. Yes there will be the ususal don't get overdrawn then brigade.

With utilites the worst deals have always been offered to the people with pre payment meters who are commonly the less well off.

It's things like this which make this country so great. :mad:

spiro

TheWindowCleaner wrote: »

i would have to have these metres removed at a cost of £100 non refundable and a further £150 deposit for each metre refundable after a year

The £100 (2*£50) is to pay the metering company for a 'non essential' meter changes, the £150 is a security deposit because you have failed their credit check/criteria and they want to make sure they get paid.

Lucky you live in the UK were they use PPMs, in nearly every other EU country 'no pay means no fuel' you get cut off with no PPM meter until you pay what you are owed. Which would you prefer?

Cardew

shortchanged wrote: »

Unfortunately this is something that has gone on for years and for ages I have said it. The poor have been subsidising the wealthy for many years in some sectors.


With utilites the worst deals have always been offered to the people with pre payment meters who are commonly the less well off.

In the case of the Utility companies the opposite is true!

Some years ago Pre Payment Meter(PPM) tariffs were considerably higher than even the Standard rate tariff of the Big 6 companies. The bosses of those companies gave formal evidence to the Parliamentary Committee on Energy that even those differentials in price did not cover the cost of administering the PPM system.

However under political pressure and the threat of government action the companies removed the differential between PPM and Standard tariffs and in some cases PPM tariffs can be cheaper than Standard.

These reductions in price are funded by a cross-subsidy from non-PPM tariffs.

Additionally the 'social' tariffs for those in financial hardship are similarly funded.

i.e. to use your terminology;) it is the 'wealthy subsidising the poor'.

IMO fuel poverty is an issue for the Government to address by way of Social Security payments from taxation. Private companies should not be put in the position of cross subsidising tariffs - which is another form of taxation.

shortchanged_2

http://www.housing.org.uk/campaigns/past_campaign_successes/ending_the_prepay_rip-off.aspx

I was referring to a historical context in that until action was taken these people were the ones who were being ripped off.

undaunted

TheWindowCleaner wrote: »

I tried to switch fuel companies yesterday after finding on uswitch we could save £372,i am currently paying through these prepaid metres as last winter i lost 6 weeks work due to snow and got behind on some bills anyway after 40 mins of phoning people and being given phone numbers to phone other people i eventualy was told that if i wanted to switch to the saver deal Scottish power was offering i would have to have these metres removed at a cost of £100 non refundable and a further £150 deposit for each metre refundable after a year,Seems they only do the deal via any other payment method other than prepaid metres for reasons known to them but i reckon its bang out of order.

If you are currently in debt you will probably find the existing supplier would block any transfer anyway (unless either you pay it off or the new supplier agreed to take it on)

I agree the poor are at a massive disadvantage in terms of obtaining the best deals. Perhaps you ought to point this out to your MP & Mr Hune (given his recent comments on people not making the effort to change supplier) as it's about time something was done about it by someone.

If you aren't in debt there are companies who will change the meters for free (you may still have to pay a deposit) or in Ebicos case (if it offers a reasonable deal in your area) they will supply all customers at the same rate hence the payment method / PPM wouldn't be an issue in that same way

Cardew wrote: »

In the case of the Utility companies the opposite is true!

Some years ago Pre Payment Meter(PPM) tariffs were considerably higher than even the Standard rate tariff of the Big 6 companies. The bosses of those companies gave formal evidence to the Parliamentary Committee on Energy that even those differentials in price did not cover the cost of administering the PPM system.

However under political pressure and the threat of government action the companies removed the differential between PPM and Standard tariffs and in some cases PPM tariffs can be cheaper than Standard.

These reductions in price are funded by a cross-subsidy from non-PPM tariffs.

Additionally the 'social' tariffs for those in financial hardship are similarly funded.

i.e. to use your terminology;) it is the 'wealthy subsidising the poor'.

IMO fuel poverty is an issue for the Government to address by way of Social Security payments from taxation. Private companies should not be put in the position of cross subsidising tariffs - which is another form of taxation.

Whilst I accept they gave such evidence whether it was truthful and complete (money in up front = interest earned and no costs to chase it - savings the energy companies conveniently overlook in their calculations perhaps?) is another matter. The Politicians and Civil Servants didn't necessarily appear to believe them and thougfh the change is only quite recent ended this shabby practice at last