We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
EDF Energy overcharging hell... final update!
dantheman1975
Posts: 22 Forumite
in Energy
As you may have read in my other posts I had absolute hell after discovering edf energy had been overcharging me ever since I joined them. after finally addressing this matter I decided to name and shame, I advised several members of edf, including their ceo, of my intentions to publish the involved emails but they did not respond so here goes.
underneath is the chain of emails that led to the matter being resolved… I personally found the ‘moral perspective’ paragraph in the last email quite amusing… enjoy…
From: #### #### <########@edfenergy.com>
To: ###########
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 8:49
Subject: Customer Account Number: ##########
Dear Mr ####
Thank you for your emails.
The Ombudsman’s job is to investigate complaints fairly by looking at the facts and deciding what action, if any, should be taken when the customer and an energy company cannot agree a suitable resolution. I understand that following a review by the Investigation Officer they issued their report which requires us to:
send a letter of apology; and
send a direct payment of £60 as a gesture of goodwill for the customer service shortfall and inconvenience caused.
I understand that you have rejected the Ombudsman’s proposed remedy and whilst I am disappointed that we have not been able to reach an amicable resolution of this matter with you, your next option is to seek legal advice and/or take legal action. If you should decide to pursue this avenue, our Litigation Legal team will respond accordingly; I confirm that I am now unable to respond with you further regarding this matter.
Should you wish to issue proceedings, the correct entity responsible for supply obligations is EDF Energy Customers plc, service can be accepted at our head office, which is EDF Energy, 40 Grosvenor Place, Victoria, London, SW1X 7EN.
I trust this now clarifies our position.
Yours sincerely
#### ####
Executive Liaison
From: ###########
Sent: 30 May 2013 10:52
To: ######
Subject: Re: Customer Account Number: ########
Dear ########
Thank you for your email.
Having previously successfully addressed a matter similar to this I am fully aware of my options, and as your Litigation Team will be aware, if this matter was to reach the County Court both parties would have to demonstrate that they had done everything possible to resolve the complaint prior to involving the County Court, therefore I would advise you seek advice from your superiors and legal team before responding.
Whilst I appreciate the Ombudsman Service taking the time to investigate my complaint their decision failed to resolve the matter to my satisfaction, for your benefit I have taken the time to list my reasons below,
Paragraph 4 of the ombudsman’s decision letter states,
You tell us that you joined EDF Energy in October 2012 and agreed a daily standing charge and unit price for your electricity on a prepayment meter. You received a letter from EDF Energy in April 2013 advising you that the incorrect daily standing charge was set on your electricity meter and you had therefore been undercharged. You contacted EDF Energy and it was highlighted that the company had overcharged the unit price for electricity also.
The letter I received from EDF in April 2013 advised that whilst checking my account, they had noticed a technical error on my electric prepayment meter and that my meter had not been using the correct prices for Standard (Variable) prepayment tariff and that I’d been underpaying for my electric. EDF advised that they would correct the daily standing charges and unit rates over the next few weeks and that I did not need to do anything. Had I of followed this advisement and not investigated the matter and then repeatedly attempted to contact EDF Energy this matter would not have been addressed and EDF Energy would have succeeded in overcharging me for a period of at least 6 months.
Paragraph 5 of the ombudsman’s decision letter states,
You raised concerns regarding the waiting times you experienced when calling EDF Energy before you were able to speak with an agent. EDF Energy’s account notes confirm it checked the call waiting times during April for its ‘tariff reconnection’ option and the longest delay was 3.34 minutes. However, we can see from copy email correspondence submitted that your phone company provided an itemised account of calls you made to EDF Energy. This details four calls made on 19 April 2013, 22 April 2013, 23 April 2013 and 25 April 2013, each call lasting 15 minutes, 14 minutes, 16 minutes and 14 minutes consecutively. While we appreciate that these calls may not have been connected to the ‘tariff reconnection’ option, we are satisfied that you experienced a delay when contacting the company. We are mindful that call waiting times can vary depending on a number of factors such as the time of day, and we are satisfied that the company has acknowledged a shortfall in service in relation to this.
When calling the ####### listed on the letter, the call is immediately answered by an automated service asking the caller to wait for an operator, there is no option list to choose from which rules out any issue of the caller being at fault by picking an incorrect option. Whilst EDF have advised they checked their call waiting times and dispute this part of my complaint, I have already supplied an itemised call log showing dates, times and duration of calls made. I also specifically made the point of informing #### at the start of our conversation on 29 April 2013 that I had been on hold for over 18 minutes before she took my call, I requested this be added to her notes and if this call was recorded will be clear at the outset of the conversation.
Paragraph 7 of the ombudsman’s decision letter states,
EDF Energy arranged a time with you for the meter to be exchanged. You confirmed that the meter operative exchanged the meter on 18 May 2013. While we appreciate you had to make time to ensure you were at the property for the meter exchange, we are satisfied that EDF Energy replaced the meter to ensure that you were charged correctly moving forward. During our discussion you confirmed that EDF Energy offered an alternative appointment which was inconvenient to you. We are mindful that there are restrictions on when a meter operative can attend, however we are satisfied that the appointment time was the most convenient for you.
On the 30 April 2013 I was originally advised that the correct setting could be transferred by my taking my payment key to a Pay Point and issuing a designated code, however later in the day I was advised that an engineer would have to attend my property. I explained that I was presently working six days a week and access would be difficult, I was offered an appointment that day but the time frame would interfere with other commitments I already had. The appointment on Saturday 18 May 2013 was the only compromise as I was advised the engineers do not work evenings or Sundays, but as you'll appreciate the meter need to be changed urgently to cease any ongoing overcharging.
Paragraph 9 of the ombudsman’s decision letter states,
While we accept that the matter may have caused you inconvenience, we consider it reasonable that an individual should expect a certain degree of inconvenience when a mistake is made by a provider. It is not within our remit to award formal compensation; that is a matter for the courts. In addition, Ombudsman Services; Energy does not make awards based on an individual’s assessment of the value of their time. We can make a financial award, if appropriate, in recognition of shortfalls in service. These payments are goodwill gestures and are not punitive. We accept that EDF Energy provided you with a shortfall in service and we consider the goodwill gesture of £60 is fair and reasonable to address the shortfall. We will recommend that EDF Energy issues a letter of apology and maintains its offer to send a direct payment of £60.
The offered payment of £60 does not cover the costs I have incurred having to address your companies overcharging, it does not cover any accrued interest of monies incorrectly charged over the six month period and it does not compensate for EDF Energy breaching the terms & conditions of our agreement by failing to act with reasonable care or skill and knowingly overcharging me since the inception of the agreement and then attempting to advise me not to do anything.
As noted in my previous email I explained to the investigating officer, #### ####, the costs I had incurred because of this matter but she openly admitted, and at my request placed in her written decision, that the Ombudsman Service do not retain the powers of a Court to award incurred costs and can only suggest goodwill gestures. I requested this text be placed in her decision so in the event EDF wished to address this matter in Court, I could demonstrate to the Court that whilst I’d made every attempt to resolve this matter I was left with no option but to reject the Ombudsman’s decision.
In summing up, as advised I am prepared to cease any further action if EDF Energy agree to pay a goodwill gesture of £150 with no admission of liability, within seven days to cover the expenses I have incurred addressing your companies overcharging.
I would appreciate if you could advise me of your companies decision by no later than 5pm today, please be advised that any reply or lack of reply will be entered into evidence should this matter have to be addressed in the County Court.
Yours sincerely
######
From: ####### <######@edfenergy.com>
To: ########
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 16:10
Subject: Customer Account Number: #########
Dear #####
Thank you for your email.
In accordance with clause 7 of our terms and conditions of supply, we are not liable to you in any way for any indirect or direct loss of income, business or profits, or for any other loss or damage that could not reasonably have been expected at the time we entered into this contract. Like the Ombudsman we also do not make awards based on an individual’s assessment of the value of their time. Any financial awards are in recognition of the level of service, and as a gesture of goodwill.
Nevertheless, I need to take a pragmatic view around resolving this case to avoid any further protracted correspondence and cost; therefore, in the instance, the decision has been made to arrange for a payment of £150 to be made to you; this should be received within the next 5-10 working days.
I do not believe this to be the right course of action from a moral perspective as the manner in which we have handled your case does not warrant this action. However, I can see no point in continuing with a drawn out argument over this any further.
I trust that the action I have taken now draws this matter to a satisfactory conclusion for you.
Yours sincerely
#### ####
Executive Liaison
Even when faced with overwhelming evidence that they had acted fraudulently they still couldn’t simply apologise and deal with the matter… what a fantastic company :rotfl:
underneath is the chain of emails that led to the matter being resolved… I personally found the ‘moral perspective’ paragraph in the last email quite amusing… enjoy…
From: #### #### <########@edfenergy.com>
To: ###########
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 8:49
Subject: Customer Account Number: ##########
Dear Mr ####
Thank you for your emails.
The Ombudsman’s job is to investigate complaints fairly by looking at the facts and deciding what action, if any, should be taken when the customer and an energy company cannot agree a suitable resolution. I understand that following a review by the Investigation Officer they issued their report which requires us to:
send a letter of apology; and
send a direct payment of £60 as a gesture of goodwill for the customer service shortfall and inconvenience caused.
I understand that you have rejected the Ombudsman’s proposed remedy and whilst I am disappointed that we have not been able to reach an amicable resolution of this matter with you, your next option is to seek legal advice and/or take legal action. If you should decide to pursue this avenue, our Litigation Legal team will respond accordingly; I confirm that I am now unable to respond with you further regarding this matter.
Should you wish to issue proceedings, the correct entity responsible for supply obligations is EDF Energy Customers plc, service can be accepted at our head office, which is EDF Energy, 40 Grosvenor Place, Victoria, London, SW1X 7EN.
I trust this now clarifies our position.
Yours sincerely
#### ####
Executive Liaison
From: ###########
Sent: 30 May 2013 10:52
To: ######
Subject: Re: Customer Account Number: ########
Dear ########
Thank you for your email.
Having previously successfully addressed a matter similar to this I am fully aware of my options, and as your Litigation Team will be aware, if this matter was to reach the County Court both parties would have to demonstrate that they had done everything possible to resolve the complaint prior to involving the County Court, therefore I would advise you seek advice from your superiors and legal team before responding.
Whilst I appreciate the Ombudsman Service taking the time to investigate my complaint their decision failed to resolve the matter to my satisfaction, for your benefit I have taken the time to list my reasons below,
Paragraph 4 of the ombudsman’s decision letter states,
You tell us that you joined EDF Energy in October 2012 and agreed a daily standing charge and unit price for your electricity on a prepayment meter. You received a letter from EDF Energy in April 2013 advising you that the incorrect daily standing charge was set on your electricity meter and you had therefore been undercharged. You contacted EDF Energy and it was highlighted that the company had overcharged the unit price for electricity also.
The letter I received from EDF in April 2013 advised that whilst checking my account, they had noticed a technical error on my electric prepayment meter and that my meter had not been using the correct prices for Standard (Variable) prepayment tariff and that I’d been underpaying for my electric. EDF advised that they would correct the daily standing charges and unit rates over the next few weeks and that I did not need to do anything. Had I of followed this advisement and not investigated the matter and then repeatedly attempted to contact EDF Energy this matter would not have been addressed and EDF Energy would have succeeded in overcharging me for a period of at least 6 months.
Paragraph 5 of the ombudsman’s decision letter states,
You raised concerns regarding the waiting times you experienced when calling EDF Energy before you were able to speak with an agent. EDF Energy’s account notes confirm it checked the call waiting times during April for its ‘tariff reconnection’ option and the longest delay was 3.34 minutes. However, we can see from copy email correspondence submitted that your phone company provided an itemised account of calls you made to EDF Energy. This details four calls made on 19 April 2013, 22 April 2013, 23 April 2013 and 25 April 2013, each call lasting 15 minutes, 14 minutes, 16 minutes and 14 minutes consecutively. While we appreciate that these calls may not have been connected to the ‘tariff reconnection’ option, we are satisfied that you experienced a delay when contacting the company. We are mindful that call waiting times can vary depending on a number of factors such as the time of day, and we are satisfied that the company has acknowledged a shortfall in service in relation to this.
When calling the ####### listed on the letter, the call is immediately answered by an automated service asking the caller to wait for an operator, there is no option list to choose from which rules out any issue of the caller being at fault by picking an incorrect option. Whilst EDF have advised they checked their call waiting times and dispute this part of my complaint, I have already supplied an itemised call log showing dates, times and duration of calls made. I also specifically made the point of informing #### at the start of our conversation on 29 April 2013 that I had been on hold for over 18 minutes before she took my call, I requested this be added to her notes and if this call was recorded will be clear at the outset of the conversation.
Paragraph 7 of the ombudsman’s decision letter states,
EDF Energy arranged a time with you for the meter to be exchanged. You confirmed that the meter operative exchanged the meter on 18 May 2013. While we appreciate you had to make time to ensure you were at the property for the meter exchange, we are satisfied that EDF Energy replaced the meter to ensure that you were charged correctly moving forward. During our discussion you confirmed that EDF Energy offered an alternative appointment which was inconvenient to you. We are mindful that there are restrictions on when a meter operative can attend, however we are satisfied that the appointment time was the most convenient for you.
On the 30 April 2013 I was originally advised that the correct setting could be transferred by my taking my payment key to a Pay Point and issuing a designated code, however later in the day I was advised that an engineer would have to attend my property. I explained that I was presently working six days a week and access would be difficult, I was offered an appointment that day but the time frame would interfere with other commitments I already had. The appointment on Saturday 18 May 2013 was the only compromise as I was advised the engineers do not work evenings or Sundays, but as you'll appreciate the meter need to be changed urgently to cease any ongoing overcharging.
Paragraph 9 of the ombudsman’s decision letter states,
While we accept that the matter may have caused you inconvenience, we consider it reasonable that an individual should expect a certain degree of inconvenience when a mistake is made by a provider. It is not within our remit to award formal compensation; that is a matter for the courts. In addition, Ombudsman Services; Energy does not make awards based on an individual’s assessment of the value of their time. We can make a financial award, if appropriate, in recognition of shortfalls in service. These payments are goodwill gestures and are not punitive. We accept that EDF Energy provided you with a shortfall in service and we consider the goodwill gesture of £60 is fair and reasonable to address the shortfall. We will recommend that EDF Energy issues a letter of apology and maintains its offer to send a direct payment of £60.
The offered payment of £60 does not cover the costs I have incurred having to address your companies overcharging, it does not cover any accrued interest of monies incorrectly charged over the six month period and it does not compensate for EDF Energy breaching the terms & conditions of our agreement by failing to act with reasonable care or skill and knowingly overcharging me since the inception of the agreement and then attempting to advise me not to do anything.
As noted in my previous email I explained to the investigating officer, #### ####, the costs I had incurred because of this matter but she openly admitted, and at my request placed in her written decision, that the Ombudsman Service do not retain the powers of a Court to award incurred costs and can only suggest goodwill gestures. I requested this text be placed in her decision so in the event EDF wished to address this matter in Court, I could demonstrate to the Court that whilst I’d made every attempt to resolve this matter I was left with no option but to reject the Ombudsman’s decision.
In summing up, as advised I am prepared to cease any further action if EDF Energy agree to pay a goodwill gesture of £150 with no admission of liability, within seven days to cover the expenses I have incurred addressing your companies overcharging.
I would appreciate if you could advise me of your companies decision by no later than 5pm today, please be advised that any reply or lack of reply will be entered into evidence should this matter have to be addressed in the County Court.
Yours sincerely
######
From: ####### <######@edfenergy.com>
To: ########
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 16:10
Subject: Customer Account Number: #########
Dear #####
Thank you for your email.
In accordance with clause 7 of our terms and conditions of supply, we are not liable to you in any way for any indirect or direct loss of income, business or profits, or for any other loss or damage that could not reasonably have been expected at the time we entered into this contract. Like the Ombudsman we also do not make awards based on an individual’s assessment of the value of their time. Any financial awards are in recognition of the level of service, and as a gesture of goodwill.
Nevertheless, I need to take a pragmatic view around resolving this case to avoid any further protracted correspondence and cost; therefore, in the instance, the decision has been made to arrange for a payment of £150 to be made to you; this should be received within the next 5-10 working days.
I do not believe this to be the right course of action from a moral perspective as the manner in which we have handled your case does not warrant this action. However, I can see no point in continuing with a drawn out argument over this any further.
I trust that the action I have taken now draws this matter to a satisfactory conclusion for you.
Yours sincerely
#### ####
Executive Liaison
Even when faced with overwhelming evidence that they had acted fraudulently they still couldn’t simply apologise and deal with the matter… what a fantastic company :rotfl:
0
Comments
-
Wow! A lecture on a 'moral perspective' from an Energy Company.You might as well ask the Wizard of Oz to give you a big number as pay a Credit Referencing Agency for a so-called 'credit-score'0
-
they have a point thoughDon't put your trust into an Experian score - it is not a number any bank will ever use & it is generally a waste of money to purchase it. They are also selling you insurance you dont need.0
-
-
its a gesture payment, not compoDon't put your trust into an Experian score - it is not a number any bank will ever use & it is generally a waste of money to purchase it. They are also selling you insurance you dont need.0
-
its a gesture payment, not compo
My point exactly… after discovering they had been knowingly overcharging me, I asked them to compensate me for the time I’d had to spend addressing it. I wasn’t asking for anything excessive, simply for them to cover the cost of my time. Allowing them to pay that as a good will gesture stopped me taking the matter to the small claims court, in essence letting them off. Sending an arsey email just shows how little they think of their customers…0 -
Have to agree wholeheartedly with dantheman1975 - all Utility company "contracts" are heavily weighted in their favour - its about time consumers were compensated for genuine incurred costs due to their inflexibility and incompetence - and I'd love to see BT included as well!!0
-
Well done dantheman!
IIRC the E.O. can award up to a maximum of £5000.00.
An energy company that overcharges from the outset and later claims they have undercharged which would cause even more overcharging, has to be at the more serious end of the scale of complaints the E.O. deals with.
Add to this the supplier makes the customer jump through hoops to get it put right makes it even worse.
E.O. recommend £60.00. Pathetic.
If suppliers used hitmen to cull non-paying customers then the E.O. might start thinking about a £5k award lol.0 -
Thank you all for the positive feedback, well aside from chanz4 who I suspect may be an energy company insider :think:
I think the way EDF dealt with this matter was disgusting to say the least, hence my urge to name and shame.
As for the ombudsman service… hmm… what can you say, their comment of ‘While we accept that the matter may have caused you inconvenience, we consider it reasonable that an individual should expect a certain degree of inconvenience when a mistake is made by a provider’ just goes to show not only how out of touch they are but also whose side they're likely to come down on when addressing complaints.
I do wonder how many other people got the same letter I did and simply followed EDF’s advisement to not doing anything….0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 349.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 452.9K Spending & Discounts
- 242.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 619.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.3K Life & Family
- 255.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards