Meter reader damaged box - E.On says tough

lemontart

http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/6716B396-E88E-4776-86C8-6E35415E4348/54981/DetailedMeterBoxSparesStepByStep.pdf

Terrylw1

chanz4 wrote: »

The supplier c/service wouldn't be trained up on boxes or if the locks are available, as its not the suppliers asset

Another possibility is that the advisor does know more than he/she has let on and attempts to put a brick wall up testing to see if the customer accepts it before backing down.

To think that meters and meter readers are nothing yo do with the supplier suggests this person thinks there is a company operating for free that just read the meters without the supplier asking.

Call centre staff may be basically trained but I bet they understand the basics of suppliers, MRA/DC and Meter Operators/MAM's. They may not understand the complexities and the contracting but they know the supplier sends them out there, hence has a relationship that would allow them to investigate the standards involved or complain...since they would be right on them if they didn't read the meters.

My point was as Jalexa says. Ofgem & Elexon hold suppliers responsible for the actions of their agents due to the relationship.

undaunted

chanz4 wrote: »

What your forgetting is that the meter box is not in the suppliers contract of responsibility. Complaints can be raised, but as the op has no evidence will be a none starter

The evidence as to whether or not they did / will admit damagaing it is key here, the supplier contract angle is a red herring.

To give an analogy if I backed my car into your leaning gates and demolished them you'd expect , me to make good the damage wouldn't you - despite the fact we have no contract for that, it was just an accident, there was already a lean on the gates etc?

Why should a meter reader be any different?

gas4you

Unbelievable.

What some people have to worry about in life!

chanz4

undaunted wrote: »

The evidence as to whether or not they did / will admit damagaing it is key here, the supplier contract angle is a red herring.

To give an analogy if I backed my car into your leaning gates and demolished them you'd expect , me to make good the damage wouldn't you - despite the fact we have no contract for that, it was just an accident, there was already a lean on the gates etc?

Why should a meter reader be any different?

But the op has no evidence

[Deleted User]

I think Chanz4 is right regarding evidence. Theres plenty of people mangling their own boxes if they dont happen to have a key handy.some look as if they ve been attacked with an axe. No supplier could admit to replacing the complete boxes, its an expensive job. I am always getting people ordering me to get them a new box after they ve, driven into them, vandalised them etcetc. they re not happy when I tell them its your ( or the councils/landlords ) property. Replacing the broken lock is the limit to what the suppliers will stand

jalexa

sacsquacco wrote: »

I think Chanz4 is right regarding evidence. Theres plenty of people mangling their own boxes if they dont happen to have a key handy...

Lets look at the "facts" as posted. The OP says "however since he visited the box no longer opens". Nothing about the box being mangled. You have posted there is a known weakness with gas cabinet spindles (and that that particular fault is easily and inexpensively repaired).

Regarding "evidence", though I don't condone this, some people are found guilty of very serious offences on circumstantial, or even trumped up evidence. I don't accept that the level of proof required regarding an allegation surrounding a known weakness is anywhere near the level of proof required for a criminal conviction.

Anyway the primary issue is the incompetent advice "not our problem" and "buy a new box" given by the E.ON so-called adviser, something Chanz4 disingenuously skated over when challenged.

There is a perfectly valid complaint to the supplier, possibly handed on to the meter reading organisation by the supplier. The complaint outcome *may* be influenced by the (lack of) evidence, on the other hand, on balance of probability the "known weakness" may be recognised as relevant.

One thing is clear, free issue parts will be cheaper than the complaint handling costs.

[Deleted User]

Fully agree , EON call centre staff sound like they havent quite understood what a small problem it actually is in this case, as they can buy these locks in for no more than 50p each and detail a meter reader in the area to replace it in no time,replacing the whole box is ridiculous, probably costing more than a £100 as National Grid may have to come out to take the meter off etc. EON need to do what we do now at B.G. and give their men a handful of locks to stop a problem developing at source
I was referring to countrywide damage to boxes in general as it is one of my managers most frequent complaints, not the OPs minor problem. When boxes are damaged over and above a mere sheared lock that is where they will start to cite such things as evidence and wont budge at all. I have never known them replace a complete box or even a door. The OP may have helped to confuse the matter by not making it clear to EON of a sheared lock, not just, " meter box wont open "

Terrylw1

undaunted wrote: »

The evidence as to whether or not they did / will admit damagaing it is key here, the supplier contract angle is a red herring.

To give an analogy if I backed my car into your leaning gates and demolished them you'd expect , me to make good the damage wouldn't you - despite the fact we have no contract for that, it was just an accident, there was already a lean on the gates etc?

Why should a meter reader be any different?

Not really, suppliers are held responsible for the performance of their agents by both Ofgem and Elexon.

If you call an agent direct, they may refuse to speak to you as you are not their customer. The supplier is their customer.

If a suppliers staff advises a customer to contact an agent over an issue that the supplier should do on their behalf, they will complain via the contract management route. They do use it this way and suppliers do the same back.

In this case, there isn't proof by the sounds of it and the agents employee may deny it completely however that doesn't mean they won't get anywhere.

I'll highlight an example.

- engineer is sent out to do a job.
- engineer tells the already annoyed & confused customer a load of rubbish which resulted in no work being done.
- customer complains back at supplier that the engineer is right and supplier experts are wrong.
- supplier experts spend a load of time convincing the customer that they were right, apologise for the inconvenience and persuade the customer a different, more senior engineer will come out.
- customer reluctantly agrees but not happy.
- supplier compensates the customer for the inconvenience.
- supplier (more senior person in charge of the initiative) contacts their equivalent at the other side (Meter Operator).
- Meter Operator apologises as engineer proved to be wrong, agrees to speak to engineer, allows a swift rebooking so no waiting, a more senior engineer, waives cost of the previous job, new job in a slot favourable to the customer to reduce inconvenience.

That's an example of one that has happened but there are many cases where something unexpected happens and parties start waiving the costs.

I guess its a question of a how much is a meter box? If this was a supplier only scenario, its going to cost them more to let it go to the ombudsman so may just throw money at you.

In this case, the supplier is trying to remove their responsibility to their contracted agent by arguing they have no relationship with them. You may require their help in resolving this...perhaps by at least telling you who to contact to make a complaint at their agents.

undaunted

Terrylw1 wrote: »

Not really, suppliers are held responsible for the performance of their agents by both Ofgem and Elexon.

Sorry I think I've made myself a little unclear as you & I basically agree.

I meant Chanz4 statement that it wasn't in the suppliers contract of responsibility was ared herring.

I would expect the customer to contact the supplier in the first instance. Whether supplier then wishes to just end it & provide a lock or pass it on to their contractor to do so is neither here nor there I don't think just as long as one of them fixes the lock that they / their representative broke.

Where Chanz4 & I do agree on this occasion though is that as I said above if they deny breaking the lock it will probably be difficult for the customer to prove otherwise.

As you say they could state that they will take it to the Ombudsman, I doubt the Ombudsmans decision would get them a lock but perhaps it would incur the supplier in more costs than its worth to find out