Edf - 2+2=3

molerat

Signed up to EDF Blue April 2014 last September.

I have lived here since 1990 and have records of my annual electric and gas for each year and love Excel spreadsheets so I can be fairly accurate about my energy costs.

My average use as given to EDF when I signed up, just heading into winter, worked out at £116 pm. EDF decided that I needed to pay £104 pm. I had a review in May and was £216 in debt so my dd was increased to £156. I queried why so high and they said they needed to bring the debit down in time for the July / August review so I reluctantly agreed to their logic. I submitted readings in June and my debt was down to £70, after July's reading the account is £28 in credit. Having the heating turned obviously reduces my consumption. They have now, bearing in mind that they decided earlier that a payment of £104 pm does not cover my use, reduced my DD to £93 from August. :rotfl:

admania

Seems pretty logical to me

Simon7685

I can completely sympathise with you and as someone who also has my own spreadsheet, that correctly calculates my usage, bills and forecasts, based on accurate usage. I too joined my supplier last October, was given a 12 month plan based on my previous 12 months use.

All was fine until April when they wanted to increase my payments from £97.65 to £125 a month. I had to fight and make a complaint to get my DD reset back to what it was. I knew that over the course of the plan it would work out, my 9 years worth of records told me that. Granted they did not have this but it was offered to them to back up my argument, they declined.

I have now had another bill and this time they wanted £120 a month, the reason? They have decided that I will now be using over 4000 units more in the next 12 months than I have ever used before. How do they come to that assumption? The computer says so!

My usage since I joined last October has been covered by the payments made up to July, so with 3 months remaining of the year, they cannot justify it. Another complaint and another resetting of the DD has taken place. Not without a blazing row though, which is resulting in a detailed complaint going up to the their second tier of the complaints system. If I get no satisfaction I will go to the Ombudsman and also the media.

They are all the same at the end of the day, only concerned with constantly increasing their obscene profits every year.

molerat

The difference here being you are paying enough to cover your use but they want more whereas I am not paying enough but they want to take less. Not too fussed as the difference is in my bank account earning 2.7% net, every little helps as they say.

Richie-from-the-Boro

molerat wrote: »

Signed up to EDF Blue April 2014 last September.

I have lived here since 1990 and have records of my annual electric and gas for each year and love Excel spreadsheets so I can be fairly accurate about my energy costs.

My average use as given to EDF when I signed up, just heading into winter, worked out at £116 pm. EDF decided that I needed to pay £104 pm. I had a review in May and was £216 in debt so my dd was increased to £156. I queried why so high and they said they needed to bring the debit down in time for the July / August review so I reluctantly agreed to their logic. I submitted readings in June and my debt was down to £70, after July's reading the account is £28 in credit. Having the heating turned obviously reduces my consumption. They have now, bearing in mind that they decided earlier that a payment of £104 pm does not cover my use, reduced my DD to £93 from August. :rotfl:

- I'm with SP
- they've only ever done this to me once
- I asked the poor 'phone jockey' what my CAC was
- and told him I'd pay CAC ÷ 12 + 10%

The thing is the automated 'bean counting bot' is calculating next years [weather-cost-curve] estimated bill against the coldest for 100 years last winter repeating itself. Its a bit of a gamble, I'm a convenient sort of bloke and would rather be on a 'payment plan' [CAC ÷ 12] you and I can work it out, but of the millions in the UK many can not. I see a YoYo effect on estimated bills over the next several years till the weather-cost-curve settles down again.

Simon7685

Richie what does CAC stand for? I've come up with all sorts of ideas but not sure if any will match what it actually is........
some are a bit rude as well:rotfl:

Simon7685

molerat wrote: »

The difference here being you are paying enough to cover your use but they want more whereas I am not paying enough but they want to take less. Not too fussed as the difference is in my bank account earning 2.7% net, every little helps as they say.

Yeah, I realised that but it is the point that none of these companies seem to be able to get things right, whether it's too much or too little.......

I think that they should come up with a standardised system along the lines of;
Next 12 months usage based on the average actual consumption for the previous 3 or maybe 5 years. I think that should allow for years where we have mild and harsh winters. It shouldn't be too difficult for them to either have or get that information. I think it might produce better results in the long term. It could still be checked after six months to see if useage is running true to the average. If it is leave things alone, if its not look to consult with the customer to alter the payments and get back on track.

It needs to be done and compared against actual usage though not whether your account is in credit or debit, as this can and does vary throughout the year especially coming out of winter.

Whatever plan was adopted should be used by every company accross the board and I am convinced that between them and with input from customers they should be able to come up with a better way of setting payment plans up.

I read on this forum last night of someones payments suddenly changing from £30 something to over £100 just like that. People just cannot afford such ridiculous hikes in this day and age but they just impose them with out regard to a customers circumstances.

SwanJon

CAC - Calculated Annual/Average Consumption (to me anyway)

Simon7685 wrote: »

I think that they should come up with a standardised system along the lines of;
Next 12 months usage based on the average actual consumption for the previous 3 or maybe 5 years. I think that should allow for years where we have mild and harsh winters. It shouldn't be too difficult for them to either have or get that information. I think it might produce better results in the long term. It could still be checked after six months to see if useage is running true to the average. If it is leave things alone, if its not look to consult with the customer to alter the payments and get back on track.

Don't you think they do this already?
The system is going to be a lot more complicated than a straight average, and they also have to take into account that the climate in different parts of the country can be wildly different, let alone the weather.
Look at what iMeasure do to account for weather, then imagine what these companies have.

Simon7685

I don't think they do do this already no, I do believe they have a system that does something similar, or tries to but I don't think it operates in the way I am suggesting.

Maybe I am not articulate enough to explain exactly how I mean I don't know but what I am certain of is if they did there would not need to be these horrific payment fluctuations that some people get, or these wild estimates of usage, like mine where they have come up with me 4293 units more next year, which is a 32% increase in consumption. It just doesn't make sense.

Also they do not consult with customers, they tell customers you are going to be paying this much a month from next month, with no regard as to how someone is going to afford it. In some of these cases they know that the customer is getting the WHD, therefore they know they obviously have to have a limited income and already suffering fuel poverty.

then when the customer rings up the customer service agent says tough thats what you need to pay to cover your use the computer says so. A lot of people then just accept this and end up in a right mess trying to find the money to pay. Which in some cases is blatantly not necessary.

If you take a look at my thread later today you will see a very interesting exercise I have done for usage and forcasting for my personal situation, which might explain what I am getting at a bit better.

SwanJon

Simon, your case is based on nine months, not five years. You have no idea what other sources were or were not used to make this calculation.
The main reason for 'horrific payment fluctuations' is a lack of data - meter readings. If you get an estimated read and don't correct it, the system takes it that you have accepted it is accurate. Correcting a read two estimated bill later gives a weird skew to the consumption pattern.

You say they do not 'consult' with customers, but there are nigh on 50m gas/electricity accounts in GB, around half of which are on DD. The DD guarentee means that they have to advise you of any change in advance, giving you time to cancel/negotiate the DD amount - this empowers the customer.
The DD amount is an agreement - neither side can impose an amount on the other. If there is not an agreement, then the DD can be cancelled and the account revert to payment on bill.

If a customer is struggling to pay for energy, the important thing is not to let them build up a debt, but to help them control it, either through efficiency measures, a more appropriate tariff or both.

Richie-from-the-Boro

Simon7685 wrote: »

Richie what does CAC stand for? I've come up with all sorts of ideas but not sure if any will match what it actually is........
some are a bit rude as well:rotfl:

CAC = Calculated Annual Consumption.

When you ring or write they already know to two decimal places of a penny what your consumption for the next 12 months will be. These computer based accounting predictors are often-times 'conveniently' inaccurate. One example, basing next years minimum average consumption on last years extreme and prolonged cold -12C° Lapland type weather repeating itself is a bit of a gamble. One which, if we do have another '13-'14 at -12C° that runs as this year did, right up to and including BST we [E& users in particular] will be pleased our CAC was 'over-egged' by the accounting bot. However many of the accounts given daily by posters in these threads suggest that even accounting for the recent cold winter many energy companies are requiring in advance unrealistic kW for kW useage - year on year increases.