Scottish Power - when paying for your energy used isn't enough!

Cardew

DirectDebacle wrote: »

In respect of the DD demand by SP I remain of the opinion that the OP is entitled to challenge it.

Hi DD,

He has challenged and the point has been accepted in that his DD has remained the same based on his estimate.

My point is that the OP cannot seem to accept that SP(also BG and EDF) are doing nothing wrong by using an independantly audited algorithm on their computer to produce an estimate. Read his opening post again!

After a year's consumption history my 2013/14 estimate is based exactly on my 2012/13 consumption. With 4 reviews and a year's history all accounts should balance at the end of the review year.

I am confident if all my [STRIKE]lodgers[/STRIKE] children;) left home SP or any other Utility company would reduce my DD if I explained the case.

Simon7685

Cardew there are a number of issues I have none of which are entirely about any companies systems, although based on the evidence of there assumptions in consumption, there would appear to be some sort of problem with the model, or more probably the information that is put into it.

There is no way any company should be assessing someone 9 months into a 12 month payment plan with an increased usage of over 4000 units. It does not take a genius to look at that and realise that something is wrong. Especially when the amount used in those 9 months has been covered by the first 9 payments, which I have demonstrated and is factual.

As you clearly stated earlier today, you believe that it is entirely fair for a company to do that just because their computer says so. If that is the case then it is entirely fair for me to challenge them and insist on them substantiating there assumptions and refuse to pay the amount they have asked for until they do. It cuts both ways.

As it would seem from what Direct Debacle has found suggests there asumptions on consumption were unfair. Which is probably why once I was able to get past the initial so called specialist, they had no hesitation in returning my payments to what they were before. This has happened not once but twice so far in the last 3 months (April & July). If as you say has happened with you, things settle down at the 12 month point then there should not be a problem moving forward and I will not have any issue with SP. I am only asking for what is fair after all and that is to pay for what I use and not an additional 4000+ units on top.

I describe the intitial person I spoke to as a so called specialist, as owing to the utter rubbish he spouted to me, he has no idea of what their own directions are regarding mid term reviews and payments. Not only that but his words when suggesting that paying for the amount you use is not enough is ridiculously incorrect and quite frankly he needs urgent training and probably some maths lessons as well.

It is abundantly clear that we are not going to agree on what is or is not acceptable practise, so I suggest it is left as it is and agree to differ.

I have however looked at the payment methods on my current deal again and you were right about those, I had miss read it.

jamesmorgan

I have been a (satisfied) Scottish Power for many years. I suspect there has been a change to their estimating/charging models this year. For most of the year I am in significant credit (often over £500). At the end of the winter I am usually down to around zero. This year I had a small deficit. SP's response was to try to raise by DD by £50/month. The process to resolve this seems fairly straight-forward. You talk to customer services who are unable to do anything, so you raise a formal complaint. You get a call back in the next few days from someone who immediately agrees to put you DD back to what it was. There is no need to get agitated with anyone - the whole process only takes a minimum of time.

From the outside I am guessing that SP are suffering some cash flow problems and trying it on with customers. If you object then they are quite happy to put your DD back to what it should be. In their position I would probably do the same. I suspect the only real solution would be for the regulator to enforce interest rate charges for customers who have their account in credit. At the moment the utility companies have a huge carrot of free money by simple manipulation of DD charges.

Simon7685

Whilst I can agree somewhat that it can be resolved fairly easily, it something that as customers we should not have to do all the time. They need to get their side of things sorted so this is not happening.

Part of my main gripe, which I have stated a few times is, there are an awfull lot of people out there, many in fuel poverty that do not have the ability to check that their payments don't actually need to go up, so just accept it and end up having to unecessarily economise on other things to cover their mistake. I can easily see that in some cases you could be talking about people with very limited incomes that as a result end up in the "heat or eat" situation.

It may be taking it to the extreme but you could end up with people dying in winter because they stop turning the fire on to try and reduce their consumption in order to get the payments reduced again at the next review. A company the size of Scottish Power should not be acting in this way, it is not acceptable.

Also a lot of people will not bother to raise a complaint after the first person tells them they can't reduce the payments. In my experience they have yet to advise me that I can raise a complaint voluntarily, I have had to demand to speak to someone with more authority. Even then I have been told that a higher authority will only concur with what you have already been told, so you are wasting your time.

I totally agree that the regulators need to be taking some action but they won't/can't. The problem is that the regulator no longer has any real power over the energy companies and hasn't for many years now.

Cardew

jamesmorgan wrote: »

From the outside I am guessing that SP are suffering some cash flow problems and trying it on with customers. If you object then they are quite happy to put your DD back to what it should be. In their position I would probably do the same. I suspect the only real solution would be for the regulator to enforce interest rate charges for customers who have their account in credit. At the moment the utility companies have a huge carrot of free money by simple manipulation of DD charges.

You only have to go back a year or two on MSE to see a major complaint with literally hundreds of posts was that all the Utility customers set the DD far too low and customers were running up huge debit balances, which they couldn't pay off.

The major cause of this was the call centres/doorstep salesmen/comparison networks set the initial DD low enough to lure the gullible into switching and hence the salesperson got their commission.

Ofgem stated that companies were owed many millions of pounds - and this was when interest rates were far higher than today.

The theme of the 'conspiracy theorists' was that companies allowed debit balances to rise so that customers were trapped and couldn't switch because they couldn't clear their debt - which they need to do before switching.

So it seems companies are in a lose/lose situation.

Cardew

Simon7685 wrote: »

Whilst I can agree somewhat that it can be resolved fairly easily, it something that as customers we should not have to do all the time. They need to get their side of things sorted so this is not happening.

Part of my main gripe, which I have stated a few times is, there are an awfull lot of people out there, many in fuel poverty that do not have the ability to check that their payments don't actually need to go up, so just accept it and end up having to unecessarily economise on other things to cover their mistake. I can easily see that in some cases you could be talking about people with very limited incomes that as a result end up in the "heat or eat" situation.

It may be taking it to the extreme but you could end up with people dying in winter because they stop turning the fire on to try and reduce their consumption in order to get the payments reduced again at the next review. A company the size of Scottish Power should not be acting in this way, it is not acceptable.

Also a lot of people will not bother to raise a complaint after the first person tells them they can't reduce the payments. In my experience they have yet to advise me that I can raise a complaint voluntarily, I have had to demand to speak to someone with more authority. Even then I have been told that a higher authority will only concur with what you have already been told, so you are wasting your time.

I totally agree that the regulators need to be taking some action but they won't/can't. The problem is that the regulator no longer has any real power over the energy companies and hasn't for many years now.

I promised myself I wouldn't reply, but!

Can you not accept that your case is atypical? You know your unusual annual consumption pattern to a kWh and know that the the algorithm on the computer does not match your usage; and they have not had a year's history of your consumption to feed into their computer.

You apparently had the same trouble with EDF and BG.

Also, as you now concede, you could have paid by a number of other methods and avoided the high blood pressure inducing rows.

The Algorithm is an independantly audited method of estimating future consumption. When SP have a full year's consumption history there isn't a problem. As I posted above, my 12 month forecast is based exactly on the last 12 months history.

All this emotive nonsense about people 'dying in winter' is just that - nonsense.

The system is designed to get payments as even as possible if they have no consumption history. You seem to be making the assumption that all companies over-estimate future consumption like your case. In many cases they under-estimate; they did in my first year and I underpaid £69.

You also ignore the 3 monthly reviews which refine the level of the DD with the aim of bringing ithe account to zero balance. To read your posts - with references to £100 in a shopping basket - you give the impression that people will be paying more for their gas and electricity - they won't! at worse they will have a credit balance until the next review.

Even with your account if you had done nothing you would have paid £20 a month for 3 months and then the system would have adjusted it down. You would have literally lost pence in interest from the £10.50 you get for paying by DD.

Present a reason, as you do, why your DD shouldn't rise and they comply.

You criticism of SP(and BG and EDF) in this respect is unfounded. Their system has checks and balances with the 3 month review to make it as foolproof as possible.

zagfles

Cardew wrote: »

You only have to go back a year or two on MSE to see a major complaint with literally hundreds of posts was that all the Utility customers set the DD far too low and customers were running up huge debit balances, which they couldn't pay off.

The major cause of this was the call centres/doorstep salesmen/comparison networks set the initial DD low enough to lure the gullible into switching and hence the salesperson got their commission.

Ofgem stated that companies were owed many millions of pounds - and this was when interest rates were far higher than today.

The theme of the 'conspiracy theorists' was that companies allowed debit balances to rise so that customers were trapped and couldn't switch because they couldn't clear their debt - which they need to do before switching.

So it seems companies are in a lose/lose situation.

Ah yes, the old "people complained about one polar extreme, so I tried the other polar extreme and people still complained, I can't win" argument :rotfl:

But perhaps people wouldn't be so cynical if SP and others actually told customers when in the year they expect the account to balance. As discussed above, the only evidence we have, from Ofgem and as per DD's post, is the anniversary date. Is this right? Is it not? Where on the SP website can I find out? It's a simple question, but there doesn't appear to be a simple answer.

IME it seems they review it when they feel like and when they do they use 12 months from the date of review. That's what they did in Nov when I joined, that's what they did in April (which I complained about and they backtracked, not altering my DD), and that's what they did in July.

But I somehow expect they won't do the same thing in October!

Cardew

zagfles wrote: »

But perhaps people wouldn't be so cynical if SP and others actually told customers when in the year they expect the account to balance. As discussed above, the only evidence we have, from Ofgem and as per DD's post, is the anniversary date. Is this right? Is it not? Where on the SP website can I find out? It's a simple question, but there doesn't appear to be a simple answer.

IME it seems they review it when they feel like and when they do they use 12 months from the date of review. That's what they did in Nov when I joined, that's what they did in April (which I complained about and they backtracked, not altering my DD), and that's what they did in July.

But I somehow expect they won't do the same thing in October!

I agree that they should just state their policy on review date.

There is 'evidence' from a couple of people here(including myself) that it is a Spring review regardless of aniversary. I went on my tariff in Sept got a review in May.

Whilst I understand reasons that people might object i.e. you build up a credit balance over summer, which is whittled away over winter, and they make interest on your money.

Personally I think the objections are over-hyped. Even if you had an average credit balance of £200 for the whole 12 months(an unlikely occurance) you would lose £2 or £3 interest, and you get £16.50 for payment by DD. If the balance is more than £100 at review date(whenever that might be;)) you get compensation

Or, you can elect to pay by a different method - it ain't compulsory to pay by DD, you can pay quarterly in arrears and leave the money in your own bank earning a fortune.

I wish the Scottish Power rep would come on and answer this point.

P.S. The only advantage of say, a Nov review, is that you would initially have a debit balance which would be whittled away over Summer.

P.P.S.
I intend to stick £1000 on my account 2 days before my review and get max compenation;) Actually as it is all done by 'The computer' i suspect that 'cunning plan' would work!!!

nsdlil

Dear Forum ,
I rejoined SP for their Dual Fuel Online Fixed Price Energy January 2014 on 18/10/2012 and followed steps to have the DD reset back to it's original value after a January and then an April review . With the recent website upgrade SP stopped providing the online 'rest of the year forecast' that they used to , although I have been told that they plan to reinstate this feature later in the Summer . The view I expressed to SP , who reset the DD based on the advisor's acceptance of it , was that providing monthly DD cost figures for an Autumnal new customer was mis-selling where they had a Spring zero balance algorithm , and that it would be a simple matter for them to include appropriate DD payment representations automatically linked into their customer marketing plans . However they probably don't want to do that as I suspect the majority of new customers join in the Autumn and would baulk at a forecast of erratic DD payments , especially for the forthcoming winter .

Simon7685

As I said before we are not going to agree.

I have no problem with any company estimating someones use, as long as it is done in a fair and just way. Just because they have these wonderfull industry standard computer programmes, does mean they are always right. If they were there would not be as many compalints as there are about their forecasting (there are a number just on this thread).

As has been pointed out to you yesterday by DirectDebacle Scottish Powers own literature states that when someone joins their usage is calculated on their previous 12 months with their last company. The anniversary of someones account is when they joined and a review should be carried out on the anniversary. Unless it becomes clear that the current payments are no where near covering their usage.

Scottish Power are not doing this in my case and in other peoples cases. In my case my payments are covering my usage therefore a payment hike of £20 a month cannot be justified.

On investigation it transpires that their reason for the hike is because their wonderfull system estimates that I will use 4293 units more over the next 12 months than in this 12 months. There is no evidence that this is correct, as you keep insiting they only have 9 months usage to go on which leaves 3 months of the year to go. If that 9 months usage has been covered by the 9 payments that have been made, how can they suggest an increase based on an estimate of 4293 units more next year???? It does not stack up and clearly in breach of their own literature.

You think that them saying my estimated usage will be 4293 units units more is fair, you stated this yesterday in an earlier post. Well it is only fair if they can justify it, which they clearly cannot based on the 9 months history they currently have.

Why? Because the 9 months payments made cover the 9 months of energy used.

So effectively for them to come up with this figure suggests;

1. They can foresee a new ice age coming next winter.
2. They seriously believe that the next 3 months use will be the same as last year plus 4293 units.

Or;

3. They completely got it wrong, perhaps the all singing, all dancing industry standardised algorithm, had the wrong information input into it.
4. The computer got it wrong - it can and does happen
5. They do this on a regular basis to a lot of people, knowing that a higher percentage will just pay it than complains.

I do not know why they have done it and to be fair neither do you. We will see when they respond with an explanation.

As for the "heat or eat" situation, if you seriously believe that this is not correct then you need to do your research a lot better. Just because you may be able to afford your payments, does mean everybody else is in the same boat.

There are around 4.5 million families living in fuel poverty, they can't afford to heat their homes. Elderly people are dying every winter because of this, it is not fiction it is fact. Most elderly people will just pay what they are told to pay, whether it is correct or wrong. This forum is littered with cases of peoples elderly relatives paying way over the odds for their energy every month because that is what the companies have told them they have to.

If you do not believe that this is a fact, then cleary you are out of touch with the real world.

As for payment methods, yes I hold my hands up, I missread it and yes I can choose to pay by alternative means, which will resolve the issue but it does not rectify the problem, of them over estimating and breaching their own advertised preachings.

I will remind you of what was found yesterday by DirectDebacle from Scottish Powers own literature;

However their explanation of their DD scheme is one of a regular fixed DD as defined by Ofgem, Standard Licence Condition 27.13-16 accessed from here.

They do say in their video that they will conduct an annual review of the DD at the end of the payment year. The payment year and its annual review must be calculated from the date of the account opening. As they do not define it as being anything other than this then the common usage and commonsense interpretation has to be taken.

A review, quarterly or otherwise is simply that and intended to ensure the DD is kept at an appropriate level. It has no bearing on the anniversary date of the account or annual review date which will be usually the same date and in the main, for balancing purposes.

SP have a duty to adjust the DD if necessary and are required to do so by the SLC. They are also required to provide the reasons why any adjustment is made and upon what basis.

Clearly from this information they cannot move the goal posts 9 months into a year, without showing it is necessary. Simply saying the computer says it has to be this, is not substantiating there reasons. Otherwise I entitled to say, well my computer syas this, so bog off...............

They have nine months to compare which shows use and payments have balanced. So there is no justification in a payment hike at this time.

As for other people and other energy companies, yes I am saying that they all do this because they do. I have evidence that SP, BG, EDF have all done it to me and others, it happens on a regular basis. I also have evidence of N Power doing the same to a family member as well as myself.

Am I against all energy suppliers? I think they all look after their own interests and don't give a damn about their customers yes, that is of course my personal opinion. However if they play fair and by the rules, I do not have a problem. I am not anti them, until they overstep the mark and try to take the ****!

If you do not like my attitude towards them, then perhaps you should start your own Energy Companies Appreciation thread and see how many people from this forum and MSE want to leave lovely glowing tributes.

Scottish Power have got it wrong in my case, badly wrong, the evidence of the last 9 months substantiates that (energy used = payments made). If they want the last 9 years of usage history, I will give them it willingly, I have offered, they declined. Therefore unless they can substantiate their payment hike and a 32% increase in usage for the year, they don't get the money. That money is better off in my pocket than theirs because it is my money!

If you wish to keep arguing they are right please substantiate the figures and saying the industry standard audited algorithm says so is not substantiating a 4293 unit increase (32%).