EDF Fail Ofgem Direct Debit Rules

Terrylw1

I find it unethical that the EO amends your complaint to remove references of SLC's that are relevant and in the public domain.

It could be argued that by doing so, they are attempting to "weaken" your complaint by removing your research of regulations thus attempting to put you on a par with the less informed consumers that don't fully understand their rights and their suppliers obligations.

I would be asking why they believe that course of action is appropriate.

It seems to me that the EO slant towards the supplier. I find this bizarre since they have no affiliation...of course some staff leave their suppliers and work for industry bodies...

backfoot

Terrylw1 wrote: »

I find it unethical that the EO amends your complaint to remove references of SLC's that are relevant and in the public domain.

It could be argued that by doing so, they are attempting to "weaken" your complaint by removing your research of regulations this attempting to put you on a par with the less informed consumers that don't fully understand their rights and their suppliers obligations.

I would be asking why they believe that cause of action is appropriate.

It seems to me that the EO slant towards the supplier. I find this bizarre since they have no affiliation...of course some staff leave their suppliers and work for industry bodies...

Terry,

Thank you.

You have expressed that very powerfully and if I may, I will utilise your words if the EO do not reinstate the references.

Of course,EDF are also not abiding by the layman's version of SLC27, which is the Ofgem's Customer Factsheet on Direct Debits.

Terrylw1

Use anything you want Backfoot.

I'm a big believer is referencing things in complaints like this to make them aware they won't be able to use a standard fob off response.

The complaint handler Snowcat has is clearly incompetent. They exist to act to resolve these disputes to the standards in their ombudsman framework, so they should know the difference between commercial decisions and failures in service. I find them to be obstructive in that case. Maybe we have suffer the curse of poor training, poor management and inexperienced new starters even at that level?!

EDIT: I've amended my typos, damn text software on tablets!

snowcat53

Backfoot - have sent you a PM re the 'enquiry officers'.'

I have sent them a 'howler' back - telling them i regarded their response as a clear dereliction of duty, and patronising; that I had no confidence the officers replying had any understanding of the issue, and demanding a review by a more senior person. I also stated I wished to raise a formal complaint about their handling.

Will keep you posted. Not giving up now

backfoot

Different Enquiry Officers are dealing with snowcat's and my complaints.

We will compare and contrast any different treatment in the complaint handling.

backfoot

This thread is interesting in that appears to show a customer has been given an explanation of a DD change at the time of the change.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4031639

The calculation looks flawed but at least they were given something to validate.

If it is a genuine supporting calculation it drives a wedge through their complete refusal to explain the calculation of my DD change.

snowcat53

Today I had a phone call from the Energy ombudsman's office with an apology that the replies I had had earlier "er...were not correct' and that the complaint would now be taken forward and all the correspondence reviewed. A summary of the complaint would be sent to me to check (this despite the fact they already have a summary from their online form) . Anyway encouraging signs, not before time

backfoot

Snowcat,

Very good news. Well done.

I also received updated complaint forms back from the EO which now include references to SLC27 and to EDF's defence of SLC31A. It is now amended much more in line with my original.

I have been keeping Ofgem in the loop as well regarding our respective complaints.

I also phoned the EO today to check that they had all the e mail correspondence of my complaint. I was met with a very positive response. My relative needs now to sign off the revised complaint and hopefully we can then get the adjudication done.

Hopeful signs

Terrylw1

That's all good news.

Its still rather sad that you have to "manage" the EO on the basis that they will try it on themselves to water down a complaint or turn them away when they shouldn't.

I just hope others don't back down when confronted with these issues, on the basis its the EO, although less assertive or aware people may do and lose out on that basis.

What you need now is someone starting a thread about a non disclosed method of calculating the DD in a <12 months scenario where the bill is dates later than that other thread. That then would prove no improvement.

If they added it to their bills though, that's something that has passed the full change management process.

snowcat53

The EO rep kept emphasising they can only deal with individual complaints not policy questions (eg re failure to abide by SLCs) but that Ofgem might notice and take up if a number of complaints were upheld on the same point. I get the impression they realise they have cocked up in attempting to reject this out of hand, and are nervous it could come back to bite them.

They also want to know what resolution I am after . Any thoughts on that?