I SUED Npower... and I WON.

lstar337

DJMC wrote: »

If meters read "day" and "night" rather 1, 2, 4 or whatever, transposing errors may be reduced dramatically.

Very true. Though I would go with 'Peak' and 'Off-Peak' so that 'Peak' and 'Off Peak' are not locked to being either day or night.

Cardew

DJMC wrote: »

But what IS the price agreed in the contract? Surely it is the price which appears on each bill? Npower sent me bills showing an amount of electricity used with a unit price against each of the two types of unit, albeit transposed one to the other. THEY chose to charge me these prices for each type. I paid the bills as charged.
Contract complete under UK law.

When we take gas/electricity from a Utility firm we have a contract. The terms and conditions of that contract include the price of a kWh, DSC if applicable, and any discount.


That contract determines the price they charge and we agree to pay. In the case of Economy 7, say 5p/kWh off-peak and 12p/kWh


In your case Npower quite clearly made a mistake in billing. For you to claim that mistake in the price charged is binding under contract law has no merit IMO.


If they had made a mistake and charged you on a bill 50p/kWh and £1/kWh; it would appear that you consider those(stupid) prices would be binding as they take precedence over the contract.


What would be your view if Npower took your position and demanded that you pay the 50p/kWh and £1/kWh as the bill charges take precedence over the prices in the contract?


I suspect you just might challenge Npower's assertion and quote the prices given in the contract. Or how else would you challenge the bill?


As I said above, plenty of people have had their meter readings transposed to their detriment. Do you feel that they would have no redress if they?(to quote you)

paid the bills as charged. Contract complete under UK law

Surely the contract is only complete under UK law when you have been charged in accordance with that contract.

As we all have said, well done for getting the better of NPower.

Prothet_of_Doom

anotheruser wrote: »

You should take round a couple of big guys and pretend to be one of those people who start pricing stuff up to take away if the company doesn't pay.
I love that programme, yet I don't even know the name... usually on Dave I think.

A mate of mine took a utility company to court for damages sustained to his car. Obviously they didn't turn up, he won, and the company failed to pay him £1500. He paid the court to send baliffs, they went to head office to the CEO's office and started pricing up 'equipment'. He had to send a minion to find some cash as they refused to take a cheque.

Bluebirdman_of_Alcathays

DJMC wrote: »

But what IS the price agreed in the contract? Surely it is the price which appears on each bill? Npower sent me bills showing an amount of electricity used with a unit price against each of the two types of unit, albeit transposed one to the other. THEY chose to charge me these prices for each type. I paid the bills as charged.
Contract complete under UK law.

The price agreed in the contract is the x p/KWh peak and y p/KWh off-peak that you agreed to pay in exchange for npower supplying you electricity.

The tesco analogy was a poor one, and I shouldn't have expanded on it (although note I did write promise to pay). In a store, the contract is indeed formed when you pay at the till.

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2012/sep/10/does-shop-honour-price-shelf

However, you are not buying energy "off the shelf". You are taking it in advance, signing a contract on what you will pay later.

If you had a PPM, you are indeed paying "off the shelf", and if they charge you too little with a PPM, the money is yours. Similarly, those on a prepayment often load their meter in the time between a price rise announcement being made, and the new prices going live. This is perfectly legitimate.

You, however, don't have a Pre-Payment Meter. You entered into an agreement to pay npower a certain amount per unit of energy, and the court has allowed to you pay less than this.

You write that "npower chose to charge you this [different] price". Nonsense. Every bill from them will clearly state the price you were to be charged, and it won't have changed. There was an invoicing error, nothing more and nothing less. If businesses supplying products on credit weren't allowed to correct a false invoice there would be chaos.

I try not to hold opinions on companies with whom I've never been a customer; but suffice to say npower are hardly the most popular of the Big 6 (see gas sculpting, billing system failure ad nauseum). I congratulate you on getting your money back from them, but in my opinion the method by which you won is legally flawed.

DJMC

Cardew wrote: »

When we take gas/electricity from a Utility firm we have a contract. The terms and conditions of that contract include the price of a kWh, DSC if applicable, and any discount.


That contract determines the price they charge and we agree to pay. In the case of Economy 7, say 5p/kWh off-peak and 12p/kWh


In your case Npower quite clearly made a mistake in billing. For you to claim that mistake in the price charged is binding under contract law has no merit IMO.


If they had made a mistake and charged you on a bill 50p/kWh and £1/kWh; it would appear that you consider those(stupid) prices would be binding as they take precedence over the contract.


What would be your view if Npower took your position and demanded that you pay the 50p/kWh and £1/kWh as the bill charges take precedence over the prices in the contract?


I suspect you just might challenge Npower's assertion and quote the prices given in the contract. Or how else would you challenge the bill?


As I said above, plenty of people have had their meter readings transposed to their detriment. Do you feel that they would have no redress if they?(to quote you)


Surely the contract is only complete under UK law when you have been charged in accordance with that contract.

As we all have said, well done for getting the better of NPower.

To make it clear, I did not argue in court that Npower had increased its tariff price. Npower had been transposing the night and day units when reading my meter. They had previously billed me for a low number of expensive day units, and a high number of cheap night units. They then wanted to change this retrospectively to a high number of day units and a low number of night units. In doing so they effectively increased the price of around 7500 units and reduced the price of around 700 units. This resulted in the extra charge.

To my mind the "law" always favours what is reasonable. In a judge's mind I'm sure he too would assume he finds the unit price on his bill, as I did, and that the price printed is the price paid, as I have. To reiterate, the price for day units and for night units has always been correct on all bills, just the unit numbers transposed.

DJMC

As an aside, I also took a well known retail chain to court when my wife stood on a kitchen chair, the leg broke, she fell and broke her leg.

The retailer argued the chair is not designed to be stood on.

I argued: 1/ Mr judge, have you ever stood on a chair? "yes".
2/ If I sit on a chair and lift my legs off the ground, is their any weight difference to me standing on it? "no".
Summary: A reasonable secondary use of a chair is that it is to be stood on and this usage should be built in by the manufacturer.

Yes, I won that one too - £1500 damages.

Judge's are human too, and if you explain what you, as a layman, have done they often agree as they can see themselves in the same situation.

I do sound terribly litigious don't I? Well, why not, that's what the courts are for if you feel wronged.

samsmoot

DJMC wrote: »

It remains to be seen if Npower take me to court for the further period. That bill is around £400 as charged, perhaps £200 if amended along the lines of the judge's order following my submissions relating to contract law and their own T&Cs.
I'm happy to pay the amended charge, once calculated.

Having represented myself in the High Court in another matter, in front of an expert company law QC judge, against a high profile lawyer who acts in multi-hundred million pound law suits (seemingly a "white knight") and who had applied to set aside a winding up order I obtained against his limited company...
I won that case also.

Nice. And even more inspiring.


Too few people realise the power they can wield with a court application. County Court works well for all sorts of consumer and authority issues and more of us should be aware of how efficient it is to enforce your rights this way. It's easy enough to start a Money Claim Online via HMCS, and if it's not answered you can apply for Default Judgement. So that's the first bite at the cherry you get. If the Claim is defended there will be a Hearing, which is also quite simple, and mainly involves turning up and telling the truth. No solicitor required - and theirs will probably be useless - if they show.


The one thing usually in your favour is that you will have in-depth knowledge about every aspect of the Claim, whereas their representative will rarely have a clue about the facts or the applicable law or possibly both. Be it solicitor or barrister you can almost guarantee that the judge will ask them a question which leaves them blank faced and/or fumbling. You sometimes wonder if they're even in the right courtroom.

DJMC wrote: »

I know that judges don't like the rulings of their fellow judges to be questioned and understandably so.

I believe you are spot on - said it myself only the other day.

Cardew

DJMC wrote: »

To my mind the "law" always favours what is reasonable. In a judge's mind I'm sure he too would assume he finds the unit price on his bill, as I did, and that the price printed is the price paid, as I have. To reiterate, the price for day units and for night units has always been correct on all bills, just the unit numbers transposed.

It clearly is not 'reasonable' that you should pay the amount on a bill with an error. To my mind, the law should favour what is contracted between two parties.


Don't forget you were the person stressing 'contract law'.

You should have been charged Xp/kWh for off-peak electricity and you were not. i.e. the bill was incorrect.


You haven't answered the point about a bill wrongly charging a person to their detriment. i.e. the bill was also incorrect.


If an incorrect bill(that undercharges) takes precedence over the contract - as you assert. Then an incorrect bill that overcharges also must take precedence over the contract.


Even if you noticed the overcharging error straight away, on what grounds would you dispute the bill? other than refer to the contract?

samsmoot

DJMC wrote: »

To my mind the "law" always favours what is reasonable.

Spot on again - you really have a good understanding of how Civil Procedure actually works.

samsmoot

DJMC wrote: »

I do sound terribly litigious don't I? Well, why not, that's what the courts are for if you feel wronged.

Being litigious is something to be recommended. The more you do it the better you get. And the more able you are to assert your rights in a variety of situations.