EDF direct debit manipulation

jalexa

backfoot wrote: »

... Any changes in payment now take into consideration all discounts and the predicted use up to the month of the annual reassessment...

Well that is interesting and will be even more interesting if and when I receive an explanation of the calculation.

What I can say is that the Edf "take 1" explanation quoted ex-discount, ex-VAT annual cost. I note that your provided explanation makes no reference to current account balance.

Anyway it is the provenance of the "predicted use" which is the significant "non matter of fact" variable, something our explanations completely lack. Only 2 working days into the 5 days response target, so early days.

victor2

Will be interesting to see what happens in future.
I might even give them a reading in January and see what recalculation comes back. I figure I'm slightly underpaying at the moment, so for once an increase in the DD amount could be justified. Plus my review date is May, which means I'll almost certainly have a debit balance, so they might try to zero that.
Could use a mild winter....:)

snowcat53

backfoot wrote: »

Based on the feedback provided by our customers, we have made changes to the way our Direct Debit reassessment process works. Any changes in payment now take into consideration all discounts and the predicted use up to the month of the annual reassessment which in the case of Mr X is August.'

Well done Backfoot. Looks promising but we'll see

It is now day 9 of the 10 for Edf to reply to my complaint and provide a calculation. Bated breath time.

backfoot

snowcat53 wrote: »

Well done Backfoot. Looks promising but we'll see

It is now day 9 of the 10 for Edf to reply to my complaint and provide a calculation. Bated breath time.

Thanks snowcat,

EDF's final letter is very significant to me.

It vindicates my request to see the calculation of the DD. The system was flawed and with the information, I would have been able to agree a more appropriate level.

It shows that the calculation they did was basic and simple. They had argued it wasn't readily available, when anyone could see they could have provided it within minutes. It took nine months to reveal it.

That the actual calculation process was not compliant with the Regulations.

That EDf obstructed the process for deliberate reasons including their Executive Management and their Legal Department.

That EDf's Customer Service and complaint handling is unfit.

That the Energy Ombudsman did not perform their role and failed to identify the key facts. That they confused judgement against the Regulations with enforcement. They failed to make a suitable award of compensation given the facts.

I have passed on my conclusions to EDF and Ofgem.

backfoot

EDf have now sent the following:

'I acknowledge that the time taken for you to be provided an explanation of how our Direct Debit reassessment is unacceptable and feedback has been provided to the previous advisors that you have been in contact with. In addition, we have recognised that this may be a training issue and all staff are receiving additional Direct Debit training to ensure that they are able to provide the explanation at first point of contact.'

Executive Liaison

I hope this has helped other customers. We will see.

snowcat53

Interesting.
I note the implied blame is on the front line staff/advisors, rather than their system. It has been pretty clear that the advisors have no access to the calculations so how can it be them?

Retrovertigo

Further update on my direct debit calculation.

As suspected I am being given the runaround. I received an email a couple of days ago saying it would be with me shortly. However, today I received another email telling me it would be with me on Monday instead.

I am now being told that there is a delay because an annual review was due in May 2012 but wasn't carried out.

Now, this has absolutely nothing to do with what I have asked for. I asked why they upped my direct debit, while in the same bill, saying I was expected to pay a much lower figure over the coming year. I wanted to know why the higher DD figure was set, and how it was calculated. I wanted to see those calculations, which I am entitled to.

It is irrelevant if my annual review didn't take place, because they calculated the higher figure anyway. Those calculations must have taken place in order for my DD to have increased, and I want to see those calculations.

Whatever they do now, any calculations they send won't reflect the higher figure, but will be manipulated to reflect my actual annual usage.

They seem determined to not show me the calculations I am entitled to.

But no wonder earlier this year I was presented with a 14month+ bill if they weren't doing an annual review.

This is all baloney on their part of course, as my last bill did have estimated usage for the next 12 months pretty much in line with what I'd used the previous 12 months. I suspect they think they can pull the wool over my eyes. But I'm not caving in. Calculations exist that gave me a £75 per month cost for my electricity, and I want to see them seeing as they upped my DD based on it.

jalexa

Retrovertigo wrote: »

As suspected I am being given the runaround.

Funny you should feel that because they are also playing silly b***ers with me.

Possibly where I differ is that on balance I think the customer facing staff are just headless chickens, though I don't exclude the possibility of behavior that they *think* is "smart", but which is "stoopid" really because it will backfire.

I have a slightly different tactical approach. I don't expect to get the calculation I seek. Instead I am managing the process to result in an EO referral on *either or both* the calculation issue or complaints process. For example, they have failed to provide me a reference number and named adviser contrary to the procedure stated online.

On the calculation, I will not consider the complaint resolved until an explanation is provided which numerically explains the "hike". They have 8 weeks or they may wish to declare "deadlock" earlier. No bothered really. Playing a long game.

When/if an explanation is provided a second front will have to be opened because the "hike" cannot be reasonable. Page 5 of the statement is proof of that. My "Page 5" is perfectly reasonable, the calculation is an absurd non-compliance with their own narrative. They cannot have it both ways.

snowcat53

10 working days now up on my complaint and no reply, so more ammunition there.

Like you Jalexa, I will not be satisfied until I see the detailed calculation as carried out at the time of the hike - i can then argue about the lack of logic in it.

jalexa

I referred to the Edf current (or "old") format bill "Page 5" (Page 4 where there is no DD change). I think "Page 5" is provided to comply with SLC 31.A.2...

31.A.2...
(i) the quantity of gas supplied to the Domestic Customer’s Domestic Premises during the previous 12 months; and

(ii) an illustrative projection of the cost in pounds sterling of the quantity of gas supplied to the Domestic Customer’s Domestic
Premises for the forthcoming 12 months assuming those premises are supplied with the same quantity of gas as during the previous 12 months.

However the Edf treatment goes further than the regulation I quote (consolidated to 10/11/2011) in that as well as a column for previous 12 months kWhrs, a column for the next 12 months projected kWhrs is included, then a cost projection. Taking two recent bills at random the "cost" is based on the "projected" consumption not the previous consumption. While that may on the face of appear reasonable (assuming the projection is reasonable) it does not appear to comply with the regulation.

Looking at the two bills, the most recent one shows a tiny projected increase which resulted in a 43% increase:eek: in the gas DD component, a previous bill showed a significant decrease but there was no DD change.:rotfl:

Edf appear to want their cake and to eat it.