I SUED Npower... and I WON.

Cardew

DJMC wrote: »

To make it clear, I did not argue in court that Npower had increased its tariff price.

Just a further point on this as you now appear to be contradicting yourself.


In your initial post you stated:

The judge agreed with me on my two points

1/ Npower had submitted no grounds as to why they should be able to increase the charge retrospectively, and 2/ Npower's own T&Cs state. Part A, 6a, "If we increase our prices or make any other change to the terms of this agreement which significantly disadvantages you (for example we increase your prices...) we will tell you about the changes at least 30 days before they begin to apply."

Indeed as I read it, the whole thrust of your case was that Npower had increased the price without giving you notice.

The irony is that you are quoting the T&Cs from the contract to support your contention that they had increased prices; but seemingly ignoring the contract which lays down you will be charged Xp/kWh for 7 hours off-peak supply of electricity.

Cardew

samsmoot wrote: »

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

Well something we can agree on for once;)

Indeed I was in court last month(for a complicated case for a few hundred pounds - nothing to do with energy) when the opposing solicitor did not make an appearance.

There were 3 judges sitting(in separate courts) and the case notes are passed to one of the judges literally minutes before the hearing. The judge could only skim the paperwork and ask a couple of questions. We were then awarded most of the sum claimed and costs - somewhat to my surprise.

samsmoot

Cardew wrote: »

Well something we can agree on for once;)

Yes - what a nice change!

Cardew wrote: »

Indeed I was in court last month(for a complicated case for a few hundred pounds - nothing to do with energy) when the opposing solicitor did not make an appearance.

There were 3 judges sitting(in separate courts) and the case notes are passed to one of the judges literally minutes before the hearing. The judge could only skim the paperwork and ask a couple of questions. We were then awarded most of the sum claimed and costs - somewhat to my surprise.

Yes - usually the most clued up and prepared participant is yourself. Well done on the victory.

DJMC

Cardew wrote: »

Just a further point on this as you now appear to be contradicting yourself.


In your initial post you stated:





Indeed as I read it, the whole thrust of your case was that Npower had increased the price without giving you notice.

The irony is that you are quoting the T&Cs from the contract to support your contention that they had increased prices; but seemingly ignoring the contract which lays down you will be charged Xp/kWh for 7 hours off-peak supply of electricity.

They increased the overall price of my electricity by switching the higher number of day units, previously charged at the low night rate, with the lower number of night units previously charged at the high day rate.

If the overall number of units has not changed, and my bill goes up by £3,200 or £500, I would say that is an increase in price overall, wouldn't you?

Seems simple maths to me. There's a constant, the total number of units. There's a result, the increased charge. How has the increase happened? The average unit price has therefore increased.

Look back, the tariff price for each type of unit has NOT increased. It's the transposition that has increased the charge for day units and decreased it for night units. You may say a "charge" is not a "price" in Npower's T&Cs but turn up as Npower's counsel and start arguing this with any judge and I'm 99% certain he'd agree my increased charge is the same as an increased price.

Again, what is reasonable to the man in the street, the consumer? Why would Npower offer to give 30 days notice "if we disadvantage you"? Does it matter if I am disadvantaged through an increased (tariff) price or an increase in the overall PRICE of my electricity as it appears on an increased bill? Charge... price... whatever! I see the judge whipping off his glasses and saying to Npower's counsel "Well this is hopeless!" as he throws out their hair-splitting argument over words.

[Deleted User]

In a way , I am happy that you stung Npower and got a great result, perhaps this may get middle management at Npower sending out an email to train the meter readers for an hour or two about the various eco 7 meters. I see that Npower are no better than us at G4S and we read a lot more meters, Brit Gas, EDF, and Scot Power. I gave up years ago moaning to our managers about this problem when I could see how common transposing readings is, and still is. Our meter readers routinely load any rate 1 on any meter they see into the night rate and rate 2 into the day rate. It would only take an hour or so of training to at least get the basics right, but we have never had any advice or training whatsover in all the time I ve been at ( formerly Accuread) and now G4S. With the digital meters there are mostly some way of seeing the active rate , blinking cursers,or readings , or default to show only the active rate, so I can get the day rate correct, and this wont work if its an anologue timer switch with its cheap 7 hours skewed into the middle of the day as they so often are. but even today I ve had one which gave no indication at all. Its a shambles really. BBC Watchdog a few years ago ran a prog about meter readers not knowing day from night and its no better now. Well done mate, maybe your victory gets the management doing something about it as you have humiliated Npower into not even turning up and facing the Judge.

captainhindsignt

So you used energy and you don't want to pay for it....

Hopefully your attempt at bragging won't lead to thousands of other consumers to copy what you have done and drive up the costs of energy even more to cover the costs of petty law suits from people who don't want to pay for something they have used.

samsmoot

Oops! Looks like you'd better pay up and shut up then, DJMC!

Cardew

DJMC wrote: »

They increased the overall price of my electricity by switching the higher number of day units, previously charged at the low night rate, with the lower number of night units previously charged at the high day rate.

If the overall number of units has not changed, and my bill goes up by £3,200 or £500, I would say that is an increase in price overall, wouldn't you?

Seems simple maths to me. There's a constant, the total number of units. There's a result, the increased charge. How has the increase happened? The average unit price has therefore increased.

Look back, the tariff price for each type of unit has NOT increased. It's the transposition that has increased the charge for day units and decreased it for night units. You may say a "charge" is not a "price" in Npower's T&Cs but turn up as Npower's counsel and start arguing this with any judge and I'm 99% certain he'd agree my increased charge is the same as an increased price.

Again, what is reasonable to the man in the street, the consumer? Why would Npower offer to give 30 days notice "if we disadvantage you"? Does it matter if I am disadvantaged through an increased (tariff) price or an increase in the overall PRICE of my electricity as it appears on an increased bill? Charge... price... whatever! I see the judge whipping off his glasses and saying to Npower's counsel "Well this is hopeless!" he throws out their hair-splitting argument over words.

To be quite honest, you have changed your stance from this rather aggressive quote:

The judge fully understood this and fully agreed Npower's 30 day rule applied. Use the Tesco analogy in my first post and you'll understand this is simple contract law too.

I guess you are an Npower mole here? please don't try to take their imaginary side when the law has already been applied by a real judge.

Your post above is really nonsense, as I think you appreciate. Whilst all of us are happy that you have tweaked Npower's nose, there is not a single poster in this thread who believes your argument has merit in contract law.

You still haven't answered the point about a customer having readings transposed to his detriment. According to your version of contract law, if a customer is wrongly billed he has no entitlement to a rebate.

As said by someone else in this thread, there was a mistake on your bill and you contend that bill overrides the content of the contract.

samsmoot

Cardew wrote: »

there is not a single poster in this thread who believes your argument has merit in contract law.

I firmly believe that you may or may not be correct. It's giving me a headache.

samsmoot

DJMC wrote: »

You may say a "charge" is not a "price" in Npower's T&Cs

I think that a charge can be a price. If so, then technically you are correct IMO. The spirit and intention of that part of the contract may well have been to cover other eventualities, but if the words say what they say then that's the meaning to be put on them, especially in the absence of a contrary view.


For Npower to have stood a chance I believe they would have had to show that a reference to increased prices excluded reference to recovery of underpayments. Charge or price - it's the same thing unless the footnotes tell you different. Or they possibly may have found a part of the agreement which trumped that part you quote.


So after having a think about it and now needing some pills I conclude that your legal arguments were solid. I'd have had a good go if I were taking you on but wouldn't bet on myself in that one.