E.ON press the re-set button

quietheart

Helena
I've been with Eon for about 6 years.
Overall I've been happy but am now tired of being put on expensive tariffs when contracts run out, always having my direct debits changed, you reduce them when I don't want you to and then tell me I owe you £200-300 after the winter.
As an existing customer you end up feeling a mug and it's because of this that I am now going to find a new provider.
There needs to be incentives for existing customers to stay put.

backfoot

Helena et al,

As I remember the twitter table didn't that already include recovery over more than 12 months when a late winter starter was affected?

The more I think about this we are done up by a PR kipper aren't we?

As DirectDebacle says how about a 12 month from start scheme. Isn't that simple IT?

Except it doesn't capture seasonality following price rises and still has a net cashflow gain for eon over say 18 months rather than 6 . It also captures the 7 month, 8 and so on in a short year con.

I am going to love the individual explanations of DD increases over all of these variable periods.

The heat is not off

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Helena

quietheart wrote: »

Helena
I've been with Eon for about 6 years.
Overall I've been happy but am now tired of being put on expensive tariffs when contracts run out, always having my direct debits changed, you reduce them when I don't want you to and then tell me I owe you £200-300 after the winter.
As an existing customer you end up feeling a mug and it's because of this that I am now going to find a new provider.
There needs to be incentives for existing customers to stay put.

Hi quietheart,

I am sorry that you feel the need to find a new provider.

I understand your frustrations and changing tariff and Direct Debit amounts go hand in hand.

It sounds like you have come off a cheaper tariff and the Direct Debit hasn't reflected the new tariff, so leaving you with a debt.

Things can be done to help situations like these, you can change to your preferred tariff when your contract runs out and then ask us to do a calculation of the Direct Debit so this fits better with your new prices. This should help things run more smoothly on your account.

If you like my specific help, I will be more than happy to look in to your account for you.

You can email your details to the email address in my profile page.

Helena

backfoot

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

Good plan.

In fact, I believe I suggested this way back when...

Be careful, this was my instant reaction as well.

However, it is still short year alignment for people joining more than six months ago.

It is also very flexible as their spring review is from April to the end of June. So someone starting as late as end of november, after price increases, will no doubt have a end of June Spring Review.

They Gotcha.:(

I may be missing something which Eon can clarify but exactly what has changed. This still looks like the Twitter Table explanation.

JimmyTheWig

backfoot wrote: »

Be careful, this was my instant reaction as well.

However, it is still short year alignment for people joining more than six months ago.

But as long as everyone uses these rules then those switching should be doing so with a positive balance from their previous supplier. I'd like to think that they can pay this to e-on as a lump sum to reduce their direct debits to a more even level (or use it to fund the higher monthly payments, if they are disciplined and want to earn the interest).

[Though I must admit that I think that Spring Zero Balance is an ideal aim for a customer as it means they can switch at any time that want to without having to pay back a hefty debit balance, with the only current problems being for those who need to pay for their first winter in a few months.]

backfoot

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

But as long as everyone uses these rules then those switching should be doing so with a positive balance from their previous supplier.

[Though I must admit that I think that Spring Zero Balance is an ideal aim for a customer as it means they can switch at any time that want to without having to pay back a hefty debit balance, with the only current problems being for those who need to pay for their first winter in a few months.]

Oh please :eek: No.

The whole point of all this has been the pain of the short year alignment which I hope you can see still occurs. It is that process which feathers their nest at your expense.

We don't want all the Suppliers to follow suit so that you have the positive balance to take over on switching. In that way they will all win.

It also would mean that any price increase is recovered over short years rather than spread over the next 12 months until the next rise.

If you like a zero April balance then fine. Pay a one off, but don't force it on everyone and its negative customer implications which some cannot afford as we have seen.

jalexa

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Helena wrote: »

"We'll now look at further improvements, including giving customers more choice about how we deal with any over or underspend at their annual review....

What your boss said...

But the issue is not just "underspend" (to anybody in credit) but "E.ON projected, but not substantiated, underspend, for all reasons including pre-winter heating season tariff increases and including account shortfall resulting from E.ON payment miscalculation, calculated only over whatever remains of the 12 (or 18) month period until the established "annual review" date.

So what exactly does Mr Cocker mean?

I suggest what is needed is a 12 month rolling calculation.

and allowing customers' Direct Debit levels to immediately reflect any change in circumstances which may affect the amount of energy they're using.

Err... SLC27.15 already requires that.

27.15 Save where a clear and express Principal Term of the relevant Domestic Supply Contract provides otherwise, the licensee must take all reasonable steps to ensure that the fixed amount of the regular direct debit payment is based on the best and most current information available (or which reasonably ought to be available) to the licensee, including information as to the quantity of gas which the licensee reasonably estimates has been or will be supplied under the relevant Domestic Supply Contract.

So guilty as charged?

backfoot

jalexa wrote: »

Well done also.

That'll be the turkey panel that voted for "free leccy" and ended up with a two year "deferred discount":eek: tariff.:D

Cheers but I am not sure now there is any progress?

You were hot on the Twitter Table. What is the difference between this announcement and what happened before? I am struggling to spot anything.

p.s.yes it was the same turkeys. except that it was even worse than deferred discount, it was payment in advance. (11 months to get one free). Free meaning free month as you had already paid for it, not 'free')

jalexa

backfoot wrote: »

You were hot on the Twitter Table. What is the difference between this announcement and what happened before? I am struggling to spot anything.

Tried to challenge Helena/Mr Cocker on that in my 17:09 post.

I share your scepticism. I thought the "Twitter table" though of uncertain provenence, was useful. However as tabulated it only provides a supply start date calculation for a future "annual review" date. I had to extract the underlying seasonal consumption by month and they are much more pronounced that the somewhat bland effect on initial payments (unverified figures of 88% heating fuel consumption from October to March).

As it happened that correlated quite well with my own usage, but I have not seen E.ON (or Edf) present figures for seasonal consumption by month even though (I believe) their projections to a short-year "annual review" date do factor seasonal consumption. It is the short-year seasonal consumption which in particular results in the "sudden excessive hike".

Hence my suggestion of a rolling 12 month calculation.

backfoot

It is the 3 month window for Eon's Spring which allows them to short year align most new customers. i.e. starters up to the end of November. The others may get the reprieve of between 13 and 16 months, but that of course includes two peak consumption winter periods.

All very clever and not apparent at first.

So to repeat the question to Eon Reps:

What is the difference between the previous scheme you explained in your Twitter Table and the current announcement?

It's a genuine question because Jalexa and I must be missing something fundamental.

Eon wouldn't have made a big Press hit with something which wasn't a significant change.