Swalec - readjusted bill - huge debt!

jalexa

macman wrote: »

I meant to say that the OP cannot, on the face of the facts given above, invoke the back billing code to avoid payment.

Maybe, but I always post also for the benefit of others. Especially here as the OP appears to have fluffed their Customer Relations opportunity.

Of course the "Billing Code" doesn't apply because SSE are not signatories, preferring an abridged form contained in their own Customer Charter. I will requote a key phrase from an earlier post "... we will not charge you for any additional energy you used more than a year before we discovered the mistake..."

A clear issue is whether or not there has been "a mistake", when "the mistake" was discovered, and whether "the mistake" involved charging for "additional energy".

From the post I cannot exclude the *possibility* that the SSE "backbilling clause" applies, even if only because the key questions are not answered.

What *I* would never stand for ahead of an Energy Ombusdsman referral is perceived customer detriment resulting from an alleged "mistake" not fully explained in a final response.

caz_cardiff87

There was a mistake - the october reading fro the meter man was wrong

the mistake was discovered when i queried the 600 pound bill and when compared with the april reading i submitted the numbers didn’t follow each other.

Regardless, i think I’m past caring now, the damn thing is paid and i haven’t the energy to argue it

Thank you all for your responses, it seems that i can’t do much about it but live and learn!

macman

Unfortunately, when a reading is incorrect and not detected, then the following 'correct' reading tends to be rejected by the system as incorrect. The system then substitutes it's own estimated reading.
Which is why it is essential always to check billed readings against actuals, and if necessary resupply and get rebilled.

caz_cardiff87

yeh i’m going to keep a close eye in future, i gave them new readings when i first phoned, will submit some more so then atleast the next bill will be ok!

jalexa

macman wrote: »

Which is why it is essential always to check billed readings against actuals, and if necessary resupply and get rebilled.

Of course, but the likely causal issue is inadequately (and inconsistently) identified meter registers. Checking the bill against current register readings is one thing, but I do not think it is reasonable for a layperson to recognise an issue which is a known and unaddressed industry issue.