E.ON press the re-set button

backfoot

jalexa wrote: »

Sorry, I don't take lessons...

... on this because IMO the "principal problem" is facile regulation. An opinion I am entitled to express in an open forum.

It wasn't a lesson, but a genuine plea to be aware that it is believed that CF are onside with our Campaign. We have unified against the Eon policy and have the press on board, probably CF and possibly Ofgem.

I totally agree that soft touch regulation has been a problem and this has been another case. The context for CF is that ,on limited resource, they are reactive to volumes of complaints rather than proactive in sniffing out problems.

Eon throughout all this, presented customers with a take or leave it response,threatening discount loss or follow up action. Nearly all customers will have accepted those options and not used Consumer direct or CF to help them. So my view is that I can understand how CF needed to be made aware of the issue before they could act.

Like the exit fee issue, it took a determined individual to bring out the issue. Once done, we saw action and I think we will see DD's being revisited by Ofgem sooner or later.

I agree with DirectDebacle that the hostile criticism of CF is unfair and we want to retain their help while we still have it.

DirectDebacle

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Helena wrote: »

Hi guys,

I don't normally start threads as you will know:o, but thought some of you may be interested in this and didn't want it all over the place.....


.......Regarding The Direct Debit issue, I just want to say that we are always reviewing all of our policy's including the way the Direct Debit works and how this is calculated.

We can only deal with the issues as it stands at the moment and help and explain how they work

Helena

The original post was full of promise which has not yet been delivered.

What is all over the place (including another site) are the sparse details that have been extracted from E.On in respect of their original zero spring balance policy, introduced in April 2009.

It will be a simple task for the details of that policy (including how it works, how it is calculated, the detailed explanation that is given to customers prior to sign up and at subsequent reviews. The information that is included on the 'Your Payment details' on the reverse of the T & C's and whether or not those details form part of the T & C's.), to be posted here immediately. They have existed for almost 3 years.

Also why the balancing date can be any date within a 3 month period (April-June) and how a customers balancing date is determined and at what point the customer is notified of that date.

The method that is used to apportion seasonal usage over each month of the year and the amount allocated to each month. The explanation given to customers of how that impacts upon the DD calculation.

I suspect the above information is still in use. Although E.On have announced a change it appears the details are still being hammered out at the top. If E.On haven't worked out the details of the changes then it is difficult to see how they are already being implemented and are most likely temporarily continuing with the original zero spring balance methodology.

By E.On publishing all the details of their DD policy and the changes to it on this one thread will help in their drive for clarity.

E.On claim help and explanations are something they are keen on.

Regarding The Direct Debit issue, I just want to say that we are always reviewing all of our policy's including the way the Direct Debit works and how this is calculated.

We can only deal with the issues as it stands at the moment and help and explain how they work

Of course all of this information should be readily available to prospective and existing customers, on their website and in their literature. It is basic information that a consumer requires before making any switching decision and should be easily accessible.

A complex system usually requires a more detailed explanation than a simple one. I am pleased that E.On have now stated they are willing to take the time and trouble to fully explain their DD scheme and I look forward to seeing very soon the details of the scheme introduced in April 2009, which presumably are not still being hammered out.

It will give customers an opportunity to understand for the very first time how their DD should have been calculated and thus be able to fully understand the changes to it as and when they are made.

Any E.On rep authorised to post on MSE should have the bulk of this info at their fingertips, so we shouldn't have long to wait.

backfoot

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/51158547#Comment_51158547

Post 37 of the above thread makes uncomfortable reading. The take it or leave it response to a valid complaint is shameful. No clear explanation or justification for the DDincrease was provided.

Their couldn't be more blatant abuse of the Licence Conditions. I don't see anything offerred by the 'reset' to address this non compliance. Such procedures should already be in place since 2010 as well as appropriate complaint handling.

SnowMan

Just to add my calculations to the early calculations by Jimmy the Wig.

Consider a customer who joined EON in mid September for example and who has a Spring review in April 2012. They have dual fuel and it cost them £1,200 a year and is used seasonally exactly in accordance with the twitter table that someone earlier mentioned.

As a result their extimated cost of 7 months gas and electricity to the Spring review is £900.91 (= 62.96 + 111.80 + 154.01 + 172.47 + 140.89 + 137.92 + 120.86).

Because of the Spring review policy (and because the period is more than 6 months to the review) the monthly payments up to the Spring review would be set at 128.70pm (= 900.91/7). At the Spring review the payments would then go down to £100 pm (= 1200/12).

Under the fair and simple and traditional scheme of basing direct debits on 12 monthly usage the payments would be a constant £100pm throughout.

So even allowing for the recent announcement that leaves this person paying an extra £28.70pm for 7 months under the EON direct debit scheme (relative to the fair payment) so in total just over £200 in extra payments before April 2012 (relative to the fair payment).

Now my understanding is that direct debit payments should be set with the aim of a constant monthly payment (even the EON booklet Jalexa linked to earlier in this post states 'but with direct debit you pay the same amount each month' confirms this should be how direct debits are set). Well clearly they are not expected to be constant under the EON scheme.

So my question to EON (Helena and Malc) is, how can EON continue to justify not completely abolishing this unworkable and unfair scheme (which contradicts their own literature) and revert to the simple 12 month anniversary review?

backfoot

Excellent post Snowman,:T

The reset is more of a gentle tweak.

It is still unduly complex.

It isn't supported by explanation of what it really is. SLC27 refers.

It still is a cash flow manipulation by Eon at customer's expense.

It is consistent with other Eon practices, which don't meet their written goals of the 'Reset'. I said they would be judged on the detail. It is deficient.

I doubt Eon will respond directly to your points.

DirectDebacle

backfoot wrote: »

Excellent post Snowman,:T

I doubt Eon will respond directly to your points.

Entirely agree.

It is three months since E.On started this thread and in that time have made only two useful posts. The O.P. and a copy of their press announcement.

It seems to me that the intention of this thread was to stem the tide of criticism and delay providing any answers.

For reasons already given in this thread it is likely there was no policy change implemented, over a month ago, on 16/1/2012. If that is the case then E.On have seriously mis-led C.F., the press, the public, MSE and last but by no means least, their customers.

If that is not the case then the announcement on 7/2/2012 should have been accompanied with a full explanation of the changes, website update as to how DD works, etc.

At the moment they have virtually no credibility on this matter.

Hopefully C.F. have requested details of how the revised DD scheme works from E.On and when they recieve it will forward it as part of a request to Ofgem for an investigation.

E.On have no legal requirement to answer questions from posters on MSE but they do to the regulator.

It is a pity they started, what appears to be, a thoroughly disingenuous thread.

DirectDebacle

Time for a bump.

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc wrote: »

Hi all

Sorry for the continued delay on these concerns.

We're awaiting the results of discussions at the top of the business. Don't have a time frame as of yet but it certainly won't be this week now.

Will let you know as soon as we know.

Malc

Well that was last week. Doesn't look like it is going to be this week either.

Seems the 'top of the business' are having trouble understanding and explaining the details of an approved, implemented and announced DD policy/practice change, to their customers. It has allegedly been operating for over a month so there must be someone at E.On who can explain (to them or anyone) how the policies they approve actually work.

Has anyone thought to check the Re-set button isn't malfunctioning?

From E.On Rep. Post #1

Regarding The Direct Debit issue, I just want to say that we
are always reviewing all of our policy's including the way the Direct Debit works and how this is calculated.

We can only deal with the issues as it stands at the moment
and help and explain how they work

In the meantime perhaps someone from E.On would have the courtesy of explaining, as promised, on their own thread, the full details of their previous DD zero spring balance policy, as requested in previous posts.

jalexa

DirectDebacle wrote: »

If that is the case then E.On have seriously mis-led C.F., the press, the public, MSE and last but by no means least, their customers.

I know that not everybody agrees with my analysis of Consumer Focus (though I accept it is not reasonable to expect their open comment on a developing issue). That said, only one organisation was responsible for the gushing press release welcoming the E.ON annoucement as (from memory) a "victory for common sense".

Yes E.ON appear to seriously mislead as you state but is it not time for clarification from CF as to *exactly* what was being welcomed and *exactly* what was the victory?

And please (anybody), what *exactly* is/was the "Q1 adequacy review". I can see no reason why there cannot be a factual explanation from the (usually) helpful and engaging E.ON reps.

meggsy

As a 'potential' E.on customer I am now thinking there is no chance of me ever switching to them. I would think that everyone else who reads this thread must be taking the same view !

DirectDebacle

jalexa wrote: »

I know that not everybody agrees with my analysis of Consumer Focus (though I accept it is not reasonable to expect their open comment on a developing issue). That said, only one organisation was responsible for the gushing press release welcoming the E.ON annoucement as (from memory) a "victory for common sense".

Yes E.ON appear to seriously mislead as you state but is it not time for clarification from CF as to *exactly* what was being welcomed and *exactly* what was the victory?

And please (anybody), what *exactly* is/was the "Q1 adequacy review". I can see no reason why there cannot be a factual explanation from the (usually) helpful and engaging E.ON reps.

This was their 'gush', as you put it.

Audrey Gallacher, Director of Energy
at Consumer Focus, said:


‘We welcome the move by E.ON to change its
Direct Debit policy. It is a victory for common sense and hopefully the first of
many steps the company will take in its Reset Review programme to improve the
experience of its customers.


‘With this in mind we call on E.ON to look
again at doorstep selling, which it continues to do despite all of its major
competitors stopping the practice. If E.ON is serious about listening to
customers then it must explain why it is the only one of the Big Six to still
sell energy on the doorstep.

• ‘We know from our research that customers
  don’t welcome doorstep selling. It doesn’t offer the best rates and hundreds of
  thousands of people have been switched to a worse deal. We would always urge
  people to think twice before buying at the door. You will usually get a better
  deal by shopping around, and taking time to weigh up all your options before
  making a final decision.’

Only the first two sentences have any relevance to the DD issue.

I take it to mean they welcome the fact that E.On now recognise there is a problem with their DD policy, whereas previously they didn't.

The victory for commonsense is, having identified a problem they are showing willingness to solve it.

I suspect C.F. at the time they issued this press release had no more detail of the changes made than given in E.On's announcement.

If you require C.F. to clarify their statement then you might consider asking them for a personal explanation. Making such requests on this thread only serve to divert attention from E.On. It is E.On who are the ones who really do need to clarify their position.

And please (anybody), what *exactly* is/was the "Q1 adequacy review". I can see
no reason why there cannot be a factual explanation from the (usually) helpful
and engaging E.ON reps.

A good question and puts E.On back, where they should be, as the focal point in the thread.