Help with Huge Elec Bill

lazyjack

Terrylw1 wrote: »

The thing yo do first is determine whether they have caused it.

It could have been sent to them this way. It could also be one of the agents that caused it.

So first ask about what they received so you can fund out who is at fault.

Thanks again Terry. I will check what they received from EDF (as EDF now seem to have their start readings correct).

Where do I stand with BG allowing it to get to this situation ? Surely this would have been picked up a long time ago if BG had bothered to get actual meter readings onto their system ?

[Deleted User]

Hi Lazyjack, are you saying that you have had no visits from meter readers in two years. B.G. are I think the only supplier who makes quarterly visits at the moment. Meter readers also have the habit of just imputting digital E7 reads as rate 1= night, rate 2=day, which may lead B.G. to flip the readings. The only person who would know which is correct would be you ( assuming the timer is set correctly ) B.G. would have no idea really, neither do the meter readers. B.G. flag up only the gas meter for their one year " must be read " inspections

jalexa

lazyjack wrote: »

Where do I stand with BG allowing it to get to this situation ? Surely this would have been picked up a long time ago if BG had bothered to get actual meter readings onto their system ?

Study the Billing Code...
http://www.energy-uk.org.uk/publication/finish/43-code-of-practice-for-accurate-bills/411-the-code-of-practice-for-accurate-bills.html

As was pointed out very early in the thread, there is only a statutory requirement to read the meter every two years. There will be a requirement to send a bill or statement (only) as often as specified in the terms and conditions.

In between these requirements the customer has control of the frequency of reading submissions and full responsibility for checking the accuracy of estimates. The customer shares significant responsibility through omission for the situation you post about.

Can I also reiterate my earlier advice about early recourse to the complaints process "a customer is entitled to raise a formal complaint on the first occasion a supplier does not deal with an issue 100% to the customer's satisfaction. Having done that if the customer remains dissatisfied on "deadlock" or after 8 weeks, whichever occurs first, the issue can be referred to the Energy Ombudsman".

lazyjack

sacsquacco wrote: »

Hi Lazyjack, are you saying that you have had no visits from meter readers in two years. B.G. are I think the only supplier who makes quarterly visits at the moment. Meter readers also have the habit of just imputting digital E7 reads as rate 1= night, rate 2=day, which may lead B.G. to flip the readings. The only person who would know which is correct would be you ( assuming the timer is set correctly ) B.G. would have no idea really, neither do the meter readers. B.G. flag up only the gas meter for their one year " must be read " inspections

Thanks for your reply. What I can confirm is that every reading from Jan 10 to July 11 was estimated, even though on the BG paperwork it states they 'aim to read the meter every 3 months to ensure payments keep up with usage'. I can only assume either:

1. No actual readings were taken during this period, or
2. Readings were taken but not used (which happened in Aug 11 with EDF)

It doesn't sound very good that the energy supplier / meter reader would have no idea which way around the readings are.

lazyjack

jalexa wrote: »

Study the Billing Code...
http://www.energy-uk.org.uk/publication/finish/43-code-of-practice-for-accurate-bills/411-the-code-of-practice-for-accurate-bills.html

As was pointed out very early in the thread, there is only a statutory requirement to read the meter every two years. There will be a requirement to send a bill or statement (only) as often as specified in the terms and conditions.

In between these requirements the customer has control of the frequency of reading submissions and full responsibility for checking the accuracy of estimates. The customer shares significant responsibility through omission for the situation you post about.

Can I also reiterate my earlier advice about early recourse to the complaints process "a customer is entitled to raise a formal complaint on the first occasion a supplier does not deal with an issue 100% to the customer's satisfaction. Having done that if the customer remains dissatisfied on "deadlock" or after 8 weeks, whichever occurs first, the issue can be referred to the Energy Ombudsman".

Thanks jalexa, I'll have a good read through that link.

Regarding the formal complaint, I know about contacting the Ombudsman after 8 weeks if I'm not satisfied.

My question really is what should I be expecting from BG in this situation ? If you were in the same situation, what would you be asking them to do ? When I phone BG, do I advise them straight away that I am making a formal complaint ?

jalexa

lazyjack wrote: »

My question really is what should I be expecting from BG in this situation ?

Apologies if I have missed something but I find this thread very difficult to follow. In that case you can be certain the customer facing staff you get to speak with have no chance of delivering for you.

In your OP you mentioned a £2k bill for the last 10.5 months. You mentioned there had been a switch and that (I think) Edf is the current supplier. What that means is that Edf (not BG) has primary responsibility for managing the switch issues.

What is the outcome of your dealings with Edf regarding the "£2k" bill? Do you have a revised bill from Edf showing opening readings and latest readings which are consistent with the readings currently shown on the meter? Including day/night the correct way round?

Until you have established the situation with Edf to your satisfaction, if necessary using the Edf complaints procedure, there is little point in dealing with BG.

spiro

lazyjack wrote: »

Thanks jalexa, I'll have a good read through that link.

Regarding the formal complaint, I know about contacting the Ombudsman after 8 weeks if I'm not satisfied.

My question really is what should I be expecting from BG in this situation ? If you were in the same situation, what would you be asking them to do ? When I phone BG, do I advise them straight away that I am making a formal complaint ?

With regard to complaining to BG there are a limtied number of things you could possibly complain about:
1) Did they try to read you meter every 2 years whilst you were a customer of theirs?
2) In terms of the CoS reading issue it would normally be expect that any issue with this reading be identified (normally by customer) well within the time to ensure it is resolved before the 14 month cut off. If it is not then they will have to pay for what you have been billed for and will have no way of correcting this. What happens in that instance I dont know.
3) BG may ask why you never provided any readings in line with their t&cs, if your MIL was not on the priority service register they will have assume she was capable of complying with this.
4) A formal complaint to BG should be in writing setting out the reason for your complaint dont do anything like this over the phone.

lazyjack

jalexa wrote: »

Apologies if I have missed something but I find this thread very difficult to follow. In that case you can be certain the customer facing staff you get to speak with have no chance of delivering for you.

In your OP you mentioned a £2k bill for the last 10.5 months. You mentioned there had been a switch and that (I think) Edf is the current supplier. What that means is that Edf (not BG) has primary responsibility for managing the switch issues.

What is the outcome of your dealings with Edf regarding the "£2k" bill? Do you have a revised bill from Edf showing opening readings and latest readings which are consistent with the readings currently shown on the meter? Including day/night the correct way round?

Until you have established the situation with Edf to your satisfaction, if necessary using the Edf complaints procedure, there is little point in dealing with BG.

Thanks again and I do appreciate that the thread has become a bit messy due to the issues with both current (EDF) & previous (BG) supplier.

As it stands, we've had the £2k back from EDF and they have issued a bill based on revised switch readings, which have been agreed with BG. The revised switch readings seem about right based on readings I have taken over the last few weeks. Night & day are both the right way around, so the EDF issue is pretty much resolved.

Now, BG have the same switch readings as EDF but the wrong way around, hence the massive £1400 revised 'final' bill. I have no idea whose fault this is but I need to get it corrected ASAP. I will also ask BG to confirm the exact date of their last 'actual' reading - every bit of BG paperwork I've seen to far shows 'estimated'.

jalexa

lazyjack wrote: »

As it stands, we've had the £2k back from EDF and they have issued a bill based on revised switch readings, which have been agreed with BG. The revised switch readings seem about right based on readings I have taken over the last few weeks. Night & day are both the right way around, so the EDF issue is pretty much resolved.

Now, BG have the same switch readings as EDF but the wrong way around, hence the massive £1400 revised 'final' bill. I have no idea whose fault this is

OK, some progress then. Based on what you have said you should dispute the revised BG final bill strictly in accordance with the BG complaints procedure in writing by recorded delivery, or by email, on the grounds that the day/night readings are transposed "per agreement with the gaining supplier".

My strong recommendation is that you do not mention the "estimated reading" issue. That is irrelevant now you have agreed the Edf transfer readings.

Some posters have mentioned a "14 month issue". I do not know the answer to that but I do not think it should be a customer concern. If necessary the Energy Ombudsman can adjudicate the issue.

For the benefit of others, posters including myself have also mentioned the customer responsibility to submit regular readings and/or to check supplier estimates. That omission has contributed to the problems in this case and for that reason I recommend you quit the BG "blame game". That said, it is not reasonable to expect customers to identify the known industry problem of transposed day/night readings on meters which are not clearly so identified.

Terrylw1

spiro wrote: »

2) In terms of the CoS reading issue it would normally be expect that any issue with this reading be identified (normally by customer) well within the time to ensure it is resolved before the 14 month cut off. If it is not then they will have to pay for what you have been billed for and will have no way of correcting this. What happens in that instance I dont know.

In terms of correcting the customers bill, they can't refuse because its crystallised. I'm sure they may try but they can't legally justify overcharging on the basis of passing into a DF settlement period.

The supplier makes an internal correction to resolve the customer side. In terms of settlement, the agent is under no obligation to make a correction in DF unless there is a Dispute Run in place by the Trading Disputes Council (TDC) but even then its no longer than 28 months. Even after 28 months, the supplier can still make a non settlement impacting correction to correct the customers billing.

Per BSCP504 Gross Volume Correction, the supplier is compensated in the Fluid Period. So, they provide an AA to correct it in the current RF period.

(And in English for everyone else before Jalexa tells me off! If previously overcharged 5000kwh over 12 months ago, they can't use those dates and make a correction to error data but provide a correction of the 5000kwh but using dates in the current 12 month run...well its actually a calendar so the 12 months are a snapshot based on a starting date for the Run, but I doubt you need to know all this)

Jalexa - if you think about the EDF consumption issue, can you imagine a system coping with such corrections which will have dates that don't correspond to the usage.

Suppliers can take a hit on settlement.