Big hikes in direct debit payments - EON

SiWilts

Just joined the forum this evening.

I've received a Change of DD letter from E.on today - my monthly DD has increased from £90 to £109 wef 1.12.11.
Am i happy? No!
I tried to call E.on this evening and constantly engaged or just held waiting for a cust serv rep - this is not normal for E.on cust servs - they usually answer v quickly. I can only guess that loads of these letters have gone out to thousands of their customers over the last couple of days and everyone's trying to call them to complain!
My account was updated 10 days ago, after a meter reading by an E.on rep - i'm £110 in credit. About same situ as this last time last year.
I've lost one adult out of the house (since July) - just me and my wife at home now - i think usage will be a little lower than last winter in our house. I think i don't need to increase my monthly payt.
Do you think E.on will listen to my rationale, if i can get hold of them tom?
It seems to me that they're just on the make in time for the winter.
I've been a householder for 24 years - a few years ago the energy co.s just let u roll over each year and either suggested an increase or decrease - why are they increasing my DD now, when my 'renewal' is May? Anyone know?
The plan i'm on finishes on 15 January 2012 - if they're obstructive tom morning i'll move suppliers in January.
Last time (about 2 years ago) i called them to dispute a DD increase the cust serv rep was v rude and adamant they would increase it anyway - basically ignored by protestations. To be honest i'm expecting the same tom.

jalexa

SiWilts wrote: »

...why are they increasing my DD now, when my 'renewal' is May?

First of all welcome to the forum.

My answers are not to excuse what Eon are doing, only to help you understand the mechanism, and therefore be better able to excercise your customer rights.

Eon operate a "spring-aligned" account balance policy and, like all suppliers, also perform an "interm review" approximately mid-year. To answer your "why now" question, that is what has just happened. It is a relevant fact that a large proportion of annual heating fuel use occurs in just a few winter months. That (mainly) and the various other "excuses" you have or will hear, when you succeed in getting through, conspire to result in a "sudden excessive hike". Though yours is relatively modest.

Up to you how you react. My initial advice is not to discuss the issue by phone, the factors are too complex to absorb in a phone call and "the computer says" is too easy for the adviser. Instead request a written or email explanation of the calculation and consumption assumptions "in accordance with Standard Licence Condition 27.14", something regulations require the supplier to provide. A failure to provide this would be grounds for formal complaint.

If you like share the information with the forum for further advice. The calculation may or may not be "correct" in accordance with Eon's interpretation of the regulations but that cannot be confirmed without all the data.

SiWilts

Thanks Jalexa

I did read most of this thread earlier, so am now aware of the issues.
You're correct - it is a modest increase, but still not justified in my view.
I know, after increased winter consumption, it would 'even out' by June/July - i thought that was the point of fixed monthly DDs on energy plans - certainly going back a few years co.s didn't adjust monthly amounts so frequently.

Mitonski

jalexa wrote: »

Have you your own idea what monthly payment would be accurate?

Thanks Jalexa,
We had a review of our past payments last night and during last winter we were paying approx £50 a month and building up a credit so with price increases I'd hope to only go up to as much as £60-£65.
We will certainly look into things a bit more and then decide what to do. Thank you for your help.

DirectDebacle

BenNevis wrote: »

I’m sure no one is... blah, blah

I find your post offensive and an insult to the many posters on MSE who do genuinely try to help others.

Your recent posting record does not support your claim that the reason you post on MSE is to help. It indicates the opposite. It seems you would prefer to criticise those who do want to help.

I am seeing a pattern here.

On the npower thread you linked to you, none of your posts were in direct response to anyone seeking assistance.

On this thread up to and including post #73 none of your posts were in direct response to anyone seeking assistance.

The above unhelpful behaviour is the same as that you showed on the npower sculpting thread. Not good enough is it?

The pattern of your posts on this and other threads,to me, display all the traits of a troll.

You have now been replied to up till now, in what I consider to be a very reasonable way to address trolls.

BenNevis

DirectDebacle wrote: »

I find your post…blah blah

Well you’d say all that wouldn’t you? Using the muck spreader technique when you’ve been caught out and throw the whole lot you can at me. Your post’s offensive and rude… again. Fact is that at the end of my previous post I asked you a simple question that you’ve avoided answering. For third time of asking here’s it again

Question=You wrote the words in the quote below do you stand by them yes or no?

SLC 27 prohibits this type of action. It requires that suppliers set DD payments at an appropriate level in accordance with the Domestic Supply Contract and that as far as possible that this is maintained throughout the life of the contract. The reasoning behind this is to avoid excessive credit or debit balances occurring.

As an example a customer entering into a DSC which is for 12 months in October and requires monthly DD payments would not expect the DD payments to be set at a level to achieve a zero balance by the end of March.

This would be in breach of SLC 27.

You owe it to all of the readers of this thread and posters of MSE to answer. Come on now…what’s the problem in answering it.

SiWilts

Update from me after my posts last night on the Eon DD issue.

Called them this morning, just after 8.00am - waited about 4 mins to connect to an adviser.

Result!!!

The guy was v understanding - i explained that we were now just a 2-adult household, that i was £110 in credit and didn't expect to use so much energy as last Winter, plus (a fact i forgot to post here last night) that thru' Eon in August we had new loft insulation installed and cavity wall insulation.

He immediately said i could keep the monthly DD at £90 but advised me to take monthly readings thru' the winter and submit them to Eon - then if we were exceeding energy usage expectations they'd advise an
increase in DD amount.

I think that's a fair result - so am satisfied.

The cynic in me says they've had so many complaints that they may be acting in a more 'open' manner to their customers' views on this issue.

Thanks for the advice last night

backfoot

Good result. Well done. :T

DirectDebacle

This is what you asked me to agree to.

My view is that SLC 27 is well drafted and I see no weasel words nor any reason for tariffs or seasonal consumption to be included. Your view now seems to conflict with what you wrote as quoted above. Don’t you agree?

The request is unreasonable, the assertion is drivel and you have deliberately misinterpreted the quote from the npower thread.

Then you squeal like a stuck pig when you don't get the answer you want. What sort of poster behaves like that.

I note you didn't rebut my comment on the drafting of SLC 27. You avoided it.

BenNevis

The request is unreasonable, the assertion is drivel and you have deliberately misinterpreted the quote from the npower thread.

It’s not unreasonable and I didn’t misinterpret anything as I only copied what you wrote and your words were so definite there’s only one interpretation possible.

Then you squeal like a stuck pig when you don't get the answer you want. What sort of poster behaves like that.

Back to abuse … again. What sort of poster behaves like that?

I note you didn't rebut my comment on the drafting of SLC 27. You avoided it.

You’re saying you think SLC 27 is well drawn in spite of the fact that it doesn’t include words that specifically protect the public from energy companies forcing oversized monthly payments onto its customers and caused lots to suffer financial hardship. I’m disagreeing with you and I’ve avoided nothing.

If it could be shown the energy companies involved are acting in breach of their licence conditions in this then Ofgem would have to do something and stop it. You’ve obviously did some research and wrote as follows.

SLC 27 prohibits this type of action. It requires that suppliers set DD payments at an appropriate level in accordance with the Domestic Supply Contract and that as far as possible that this is maintained throughout the life of the contract. The reasoning behind this is to avoid excessive credit or debit balances occurring.

As an example a customer entering into a DSC which is for 12 months in October and requires monthly DD payments would not expect the DD payments to be set at a level to achieve a zero balance by the end of March.

This would be in breach of SLC 27.

According to you the energy companies concerned were in breach of s27 of the licence conditions.

At that point jalexa asked you what words or phrases in SLC 27 you were relying on as he couldn’t find anything to support what you’d written. Your reply was sarcastic and you’ve failed to answer his question. I then asked you the same question and you accused me of attempting to trash that thread. I’ve never had a proper answer BTW.

I’ve asked you 3 times on this thread if you stand by the words you wrote that I’d copied and every time you’ve replied with abuse but you’ve still failed to stand by those words. It’s plain the reason you won’t is because they’re WRONG as is much of what you wrote on that thread along the same lines. Then you realised you were wrong and needed to cover up that’s why what you’ve written on this thread is saying the opposite. About half of what you’ve written says the opposite of the other half and that’s why people of these 2 threads are confused.

It would’ve been better if you’d held up your hands and said hey sorry I’ve made a mistake I misread a bit in the conditions of SLC 27 and got the gist of it wrong. People would’ve respected you and understood but you thought you could bluff and bully your way out instead. What sort of poster does that?

We know that SLC 27 doesn’t contain any words or phrases that stops the calculation of oversized monthly DD payments and IMO SLC 27.15 is the condition that deals with calculating fixed payments and the wording is ambiguous. Earlier I posted that IMO the only reasonable way this section could be interpreted is all energy companies should follow their established practice on calculating DD payments based on 12 months consumption and not just the winter months. I reckon this interpretation is strong enough to be put to Ofgem for clarification and I’ve read Consumer Focus is on the case. I’m going to post again soon mentioning other things that strengthen this. This seems the only sensible way forward and Direct Debacle you might do everyone a favour and stop undermining my efforts to help and stop being abusive.

BTW you’ve might have noticed I’ve posted on another thread asking the EON rep Helena these two questions

If you’re here to help maybe you can assist many of your customers at one go by answering these questions

1. Do you believe that EON has fully complied with SLC 27.14 in explaining the direct debit increases?

2. Would EON be willing to write to Ofgem to seek clarification as to whether or not EON is in breach of SLC 27.15 in basing its direct debit calculations on periods of less than 12 months?

If you can’t answer these questions it’d be a help if you’d get someone in your company to answer them and then you can post the answers but please let us know what’s going on Helena. Thanks in advance.

I don’t think she’ll reply but you never know. Jalexa’s right that these companies aren’t giving their customers a full explanation of their calculations as required by SLC 27.14 and are breaching that condition. I think that’s because their lawyers aren’t sure that what they’re doing is allowed by SLC 27.15 and that’s why they’re introducing this new approach by the backdoor with no real explanation of things and without complying with SLC 27.14 and hey Ofgem ignores the whole thing.