EDF Fail Ofgem Direct Debit Rules

jalexa

backfoot wrote: »

I just noticed the entry on the leaflet and was helpfully pointing it out...

I don't imply you haven't read this, but for the benefit of others the Edf (non-annual) Direct Debit Review says this..."We calculate your monthly payments using your current balance and what we expect you to use; we'll then divide this into equal payments."

Then "Based on your reading(s), if you're using more energy than we first forecasted, your payments will need to go up..."

On the first quote, what *exactly* is "what we expect you to use"? Is that projected annual consumption, which as we know the first year customer is not informed of? Is it the previous 12 months consumption obtained per Terrylw1's advice?

The number of "equal payments" is not specified. Is that 10,12,14 or some other number? No number is provided in the Review.

The second quote is more interesting as it refers to "based on your readings...more than we first forecasted..." but "first forecasted" does not appear on the Direct Debit Review.

I believe the conduct of my account has been systemic and fails Direct Debit Rules on procedure but also accuracy of calculation. It is hardly a surprise that CSAs restore previous payment amounts without protest.

wakeupalarm

"what we expect you to use" This could be anything they want it to be, its a made up figure of their choosing. As they drew up the contracts, surely unless they have defined it, it it open to challenge and should favour the consumer.

jalexa

wakeupalarm wrote: »

"what we expect you to use" This could be anything they want it to be, its a made up figure of their choosing.

Indeed, but the last few posts in this thread have been about the fact that for first year customers Edf will not disclose the figure. The monthly payment calculation based on the undisclosed figure is also unsubstantiated, contrary to regulations.

Decisions are always open to challenge but consumer and regulatory organisations appear facile in dealing with the detail, by detail I mean the insidiuous effect on household budgets monthly. So how do you suggest it be "challenged"?

My own conclusion is that the Edf fixed monthly direct debit payment scheme is not fit for purpose. In exchange for a 6% "discount" Edf continually calculated a monthly payment which would have delivered in excess of 35% "free money" for Edf and this continued despite regular customer reads being submitted.

The other "fitness for purpose" issue is that customers are open to a massive 'annual review' payment being extracted at 10 days notice. Assuming that is the notice is noticed. And how many people can budget massive payments at 10 days notice?

bondy01

Paul Lewis did a plug on BBC Breakfast for his midday Radio 4 Moneybox prog. EDF and their ever increasing DD's are going to be featured.

snowcat53

I complained to the Ombudsman regarding EDf's failure to explain their DD calculations (see posts above) . This is their reply.

"Thank you for your E-Mail received on ## April 2012 about EDF Energy.
How EDF Energy provides a service to you, and on what terms, are 'commercial decisions'. For example, if a company decides to increase the charges for providing your energy, this is a commercial decision. We cannot look in to this type of complaint. Your complaint appears to be about a commercial decision because you are complaining about how EDF calculates your predicted consumption on their bills.
However, we can look at whether the way in which EDF Energy implemented its commercial decision was reasonable. For example, if a company decides to use a debt collection agency to chase an outstanding payment, this is a commercial decision, but we consider whether in the circumstances it was reasonable to do so.

The attached booklets explain our role in more detail."

In fact I complained specifically about their non-compliance with the rules and SLC27.14 - a requirement not a 'commercial decision'. Who holds suppliers to account on this?.

Terrylw1

That's good, so you now have to explain the SLC's to the ombudsman...

Sounds like you got an incompetent or someone who just couldn't be bothered to read your complaint!

I remember years ago when Ofgem used to manage the complaints. No matter what you complained to them about, they sent the same standard letter requesting info about the account. In many cases, what they asked for was not even of use in understanding the complaint..,used to laugh at how poor they were...

backfoot

snowcat53 wrote: »

I complained to the Ombudsman regarding EDf's failure to explain their DD calculations (see posts above) . This is their reply.

"Thank you for your E-Mail received on ## April 2012 about EDF Energy.
How EDF Energy provides a service to you, and on what terms, are 'commercial decisions'. For example, if a company decides to increase the charges for providing your energy, this is a commercial decision. We cannot look in to this type of complaint. Your complaint appears to be about a commercial decision because you are complaining about how EDF calculates your predicted consumption on their bills.
However, we can look at whether the way in which EDF Energy implemented its commercial decision was reasonable. For example, if a company decides to use a debt collection agency to chase an outstanding payment, this is a commercial decision, but we consider whether in the circumstances it was reasonable to do so.

The attached booklets explain our role in more detail."

In fact I complained specifically about their non-compliance with the rules and SLC27.14 - a requirement not a 'commercial decision'. Who holds suppliers to account on this?.

This is a totally incompetent response and you should tell them so.

They have produced a standard template response to complaints about price rises. It has no bearing on your complaint.

Please continue with your complaint.

I am due to follow up on my own similar complaint with Ofgem tomorrow. What I am trying to get is a ruling that EDF's defence of under one year's consumption is invalid and an abuse of process.

Given the EO's response to you the chances of them understanding the SLC's,their interpretation and bogus defences makes Ofgem's intervention much more vital.

Do you have any objection in me using your case referal to the EO and their response as evidence of why there is a need for Ofgem to intervene?

Not sure what the complaint route is for EO's failings, but it looks like we should find out. Shocking.:o

backfoot

snowcat,

I would like to send the following to Ofgem. Any objections?

'I am disappointed not to have received even an acknowledgment of my recent emails. I now have the deadlock letter from EDF in my possession but I am prompted to write once again to Ofgem because this is definately a matter for guidance and interpretation on a SLC.

Another Forum member is also in deadlock with EDF on identical issues. (snowcat53)

The initial response to the complaint by the Energy Ombudsman is, in my opinion completely incompetent, as it consists of a standard response to a 'price increase' complaint. i.e.the Energy Ombudsman has no remit over commercial issues'. This shows a lack of depth of understanding and a failure to even consider the SLC governing Direct Debits and EDF's bogus defence under SLC31A.

I am certain that any proper investigation into these and similar complaints would require Ofgem to provide legal guidance on these matters. EDF are quoting legal argument and SLC interpretation which is not open to the ordinary customer without your assistance. In these circumstances, I would hope you will see the obvious need for intervention .

I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible,if only an acknowledgment while investigations are ongoing.'

Terrylw1

The service standards doc explains how to complain about them. Beyond them, they have an in dependant assessor and they are a member of the BIOA.

http://www.ombudsman-services.org/service-standards-os.html

snowcat53

Hi Backfoot,
I have no objection at all to you using my example. (Note though that technically I may not be in deadlock, I went to the EO in the absence of formal deadlock on the 8 week rule).

If they want to contact me for a copy of the correspondence I will be happy to oblige.

I will reply to the EO letter today