Energy meter reader trespass??

Inspectorman

I don't think UK1 is bothered about giving access to his meters (well, hopefully not as we all know online reads or not access is required to the meters ) - just the way this chap from G4S behaved!

[Deleted User]

Inspectorman wrote: »

I don't think UK1 is bothered about giving access to his meters (well, hopefully not as we all know online reads or not access is required to the meters ) - just the way this chap from G4S behaved!

They definitely dont know that access is required, I spend half my day explaining to onliners when I am sent to see the meters. Exterior meters are always accessed at a property if possible, even if they are at rear or side behind a gate or if the house is empty. we are required to knock politely ( not" bang "as uk1 miraculously heard ) He would have correctly tried the gate of course, and found it locked. That should have been the end of it. Trying a garage door is illegal. sometimes we get instructions on the handheld thats its ok to enter a garage as permission is granted. Its a bit odd that this meter reader on the hottest day of the year didnt keep the windows of the car shut and get the air-con on full blast as I do in my G4S car, so theres a few doubts in my mind about uk1 s story

Terrylw1

uk1 wrote: »

Trolling to give meter readers a bad name is a bit silly.

How exactly is sacsquacco trolling to give meter readers a bad name?

On the other points, its not your equipment so I guess the question is whether you eventually want a judge signing off a warrant to gain access without a second thought about your concerns.

On the flip side, of course you want to be secure, who doesn't and online reads are better for you.

You still have to remember though that the supplier has a meter reading policy. If you want to stop this, tell them. Online reads tariffs, as Richie says, are nothing to do with this but it can allow the supplier to scale back their operations if required. However, Ofgem have regulations that are in your interests and instruct suppliers to view your meter. The supplier is at fault for not honouring this and potentially putting your safety at risk.

So, why not work with them?

In terms of an idiotic meter reader, judge him/her, not the company/process until you have evidence its not isolated. Meter readers are on commission which tends to attract the self serving salesman type but they are not all like that. I know many and they conduct themselves with integrity as sacsquacco clearly does given how far out of his way he is going to "out" suppliers who are putting consumer safety at risk.

uk1

Well as you thanked him for his "useful post" in calling me a liar, I would be an idiot to engage in any sort of intelligent discussion in the belief it would be anything other than a waste of time about this issue with you or him (or her) ... and sadly the response rather proves my point.

I am sorry that neither you or he seems to get it.

Terrylw1 wrote: »

How exactly is sacsquacco trolling to give meter readers a bad name?

On the other points, its not your equipment so I guess the question is whether you eventually want a judge signing off a warrant to gain access without a second thought about your concerns.

On the flip side, of course you want to be secure, who doesn't and online reads are better for you.

You still have to remember though that the supplier has a meter reading policy. If you want to stop this, tell them. Online reads tariffs, as Richie says, are nothing to do with this but it can allow the supplier to scale back their operations if required. However, Ofgem have regulations that are in your interests and instruct suppliers to view your meter. The supplier is at fault for not honouring this and potentially putting your safety at risk.

So, why not work with them?

In terms of an idiotic meter reader, judge him/her, not the company/process until you have evidence its not isolated. Meter readers are on commission which tends to attract the self serving salesman type but they are not all like that. I know many and they conduct themselves with integrity as sacsquacco clearly does given how far out of his way he is going to "out" suppliers who are putting consumer safety at risk.

Terrylw1

uk1 wrote: »

Well as you thanked him for his "useful post" in calling me a liar, I would be an idiot to engage in any sort of intelligent discussion in the belief it would be anything other than a waste of time about this issue with you or him (or her) ... and sadly the response rather proves my point.

I am sorry that neither you or he seems to get it.

I've thanked sacsquacco for the information in the post in telling consumers the facts about lack of supplier interest in handling tampers which is raised frequently on this board. Since sacsquacco is pursuing action via Ofgem it proves his commitment to consumer safety.

I also thanked the next post regarding access instructions on handheld and the fact the point of illegal access is supported.

That's not trolling or giving meter readers a bad name. It's the opposite.

The meter reader in your case is clearly in the wrong which I stated but the consumer also needs to accept there are legitimate reasons for access to a meter which are imposed by the regulator.

uk1

You thanked him for a post in which he called me a liar.

In any event there are not legitimate reasons in my case. As I said clearly in my post ... The meter was read six weeks ago. So his point you have "thanked" him twice for in response to my note was irrelevant.

Perhaps, he can quote what law or instruction he has received which empowers him to try to gain access through closed gates onto private properties when the owner is absent, has not given permission, and no suspiciaon of tampering exists. Does he not genuinely understand that such behaviour is both potentially criminal and also potentially dangerous to the meter reader.

Most sensible people would be pretty saddened to hear his attitude to my specific post.

Terrylw1 wrote: »

I've thanked sacsquacco for the information in the post in telling consumers the facts about lack of supplier interest in handling tampers which is raised frequently on this board. Since sacsquacco is pursuing action via Ofgem it proves his commitment to consumer safety.

I also thanked the next post regarding access instructions on handheld and the fact the point of illegal access is supported.

That's not trolling or giving meter readers a bad name. It's the opposite.

The meter reader in your case is clearly in the wrong which I stated but the consumer also needs to accept there are legitimate reasons for access to a meter which are imposed by the regulator.

Inspectorman

sacsquacco wrote: »

They definitely dont know that access is required, I spend half my day explaining to onliners when I am sent to see the meters. Exterior meters are always accessed at a property if possible, even if they are at rear or side behind a gate or if the house is empty. we are required to knock politely ( not" bang "as uk1 miraculously heard ) He would have correctly tried the gate of course, and found it locked. That should have been the end of it. Trying a garage door is illegal. sometimes we get instructions on the handheld thats its ok to enter a garage as permission is granted. Its a bit odd that this meter reader on the hottest day of the year didnt keep the windows of the car shut and get the air-con on full blast as I do in my G4S car, so theres a few doubts in my mind about uk1 s story

Sorry but can you point out where UK1 says he refused access?? I'm sure it even says his wife gave access to the meter in the house but was unable to allow access to the garage as it was locked with no key available? Maybe I'm mis reading :huh:

He just appears to have a valid irritation with the G4S employee.

Terrylw1

uk1 wrote: »

But there are not legitimate reasons in my case. As I said clearly in my post ... The meter was read six weeks ago. So his point you have "thanked" him twice for in response to my note was irrelevant.

Perhaps, he can quote what law or instruction he has received which empowers him to try to gain access through closed gates onto private properties when the owner is absent, has not given permission, and no suspiciaon of tampering exists. Does he not genuinely understand that such behaviour is both potentially criminal and also potentially dangerous to the meter reader.

Most sensible people would be pretty saddened to hear his attitude to my specific post.

They have no additional rights in the case of a tamper as they have to obtain a warrant.

As I said, I thanked sacsquacco on the basis of useful information in general. Sacsquacco often adds extra info about what goes on in the field which is useful for us in challenging the practices of these companies.

In terms of meter reader safety, he/she has been trained on that so if they choose to ignore it, that's on their head.

Sadly, the meter readers are put under pressure to get results so the management encourage this type of behaviour.

Did the reader take a reading 6 weeks ago? That wasn't clear. If he/she did, then providing the required updates were all made via the databases used to control the safety inspection dates, there would be no need for that type of visit. It would seem strange however that they even need to read again this soon.

uk1

I said CLEARLY in my post it was read six weeks ago.

Terrylw1 wrote: »

They have no additional rights in the case of a tamper as they have to obtain a warrant.

As I said, I thanked sacsquacco on the basis of useful information in general. Sacsquacco often adds extra info about what goes on in the field which is useful for us in challenging the practices of these companies.

In terms of meter reader safety, he/she has been trained on that so if they choose to ignore it, that's on their head.

Sadly, the meter readers are put under pressure to get results so the management encourage this type of behaviour.

Did the reader take a reading 6 weeks ago? That wasn't clear. If he/she did, then providing the required updates were all made via the databases used to control the safety inspection dates, there would be no need for that type of visit. It would seem strange however that they even need to read again this soon.

Richie-from-the-Boro

uk1, I don't blame you for being mad, I would be .... and more. Most people end up here :

- because they have a problem
- because believe they are right [ish]
- they read the law
- they check processes and the law
- some might write to the Prime Minister or the Pope

However at the end of the day you need a working solution to an irritating problem, and whilst most people defend their corner believing they are right - that's really not a solution, even if you were 100% right - that's not a solution. All suppliers have a right to inspection and all suppliers will compromise with and liaise with those doing the inspections on your behalf providing they get to do the inspection. All sorts of pre-arranged prior permissions are available to you, speak to your supplier, the motivation to find a solution is yours - only you can effect it - no one else but you can stop this happening to you. You will still get the inspection, you can however avoid the actual monthly meter reader.