Add your feedback on energy supplier Iresa

JStewer

Hengus wrote: »

...
Given the number of people alleging blocked switches on Trustpilot, Facebook and this forum, I am not sure that I would see the issue as being a !!!8216;mole hill!!!8217;.

The poster agrees they owed the supplier money, which is a breach of the terms of supply they agreed to abide by.

Anyone can post anything on the internet. Trustpilot? Don't make me laugh. They should be investigated themselves. Plenty of reports about them elsewhere if you care to look.
And don't you just love facebook? No #fakenews on there is there? Ask Mr Trump.

Anyway, back to Iresas. Yes Ofgem are investigating them but as MSE point out

Ofgem points out that the opening of this investigation does not imply that it has made any findings about Iresa not complying with its rules.

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/energy/2018/02/energy-regulator-launches-investigation-into-iresa

You seem to be putting the cart before the horse with a presumption of guilt until proven innocent ... but even then I suspect you you wouldn't accept it, and call it a whitewash or something similar.

darren72

I honestly don't think Iresa is going to be around for much longer. Their service has got worse over the last few months and now they are going through this Ofcom investigation.

I think it is only a matter of days or weeks before we hear another company has been asked to take over their customers...

System

JStewer wrote: »

The poster agrees they owed the supplier money, which is a breach of the terms of supply they agreed to abide by.

Anyone can post anything on the internet. Trustpilot? Don't make me laugh. They should be investigated themselves. Plenty of reports about them elsewhere if you care to look.
And don't you just love facebook? No #fakenews on there is there? Ask Mr Trump.

Anyway, back to Iresas. Yes Ofgem are investigating them but as MSE point out


https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/energy/2018/02/energy-regulator-launches-investigation-into-iresa

You seem to be putting the cart before the horse with a presumption of guilt until proven innocent ... but even then I suspect you you wouldn't accept it, and call it a whitewash or something similar.

It is not a debt and the switch should not have been blocked by the supplier.

This might help (from Ofgem’s website):

These ‘debt objections’ may occur only where a supplier has notified the customer in writing about an outstanding charge on the account and the charge has then remained unpaid for at least 28 days by the time of the attempted switch.

JStewer

Attempting to change the subject now, Hengus? :cool:

I see you've been constantlly moaning about Iresa since the first page of this thread, almost 100 pages / over 12 months ago.

But you are still with them, I gather, and have even renewed your contract with them.

For all your bluster about contacting Ofgem, it took them over 12 months to even begin an investigation.

But as Ofgem said

the opening of this investigation does not imply that it has made any findings about Iresa not complying with its rules.

Indeed, Ofgem regularly investigates many different energy suppliers, which has included in the past some of the big suppliers such as Scottish Power, nPower and Eon. They have even investigated National Grid!

Hengus wrote: »

It is not a debt ...

Correct (in the legal sense), but it was a £70 debit on the account, a debit that the poster appears to have acknowledged by paying this additional sum to the supplier.
As the poster allowed the account to fall into debit, this was a breach of contract; a contract consisting of terms agrred by the poster they would abide by.

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)

System

If I was in the same position, I would probably have done the same thing just to get the switch moving. For the record, I switched away from Iresa in May 2017 after The EO upheld my complaint against them for inaccurate billing and the use of an incorrect calorific value conversion figure.

Rather than continue to post opposing views, I suggest that we leave it to Ofgem to determine whether the supplier has been operating in breach of its Supply Licence Conditions. In respect of blocking switches, they will no doubt take note of the detailed policy letter that was sent out to suppliers in 2016:

Quote: Debt objection letters must comply with SLC 14.9, including:

!!!61623; stating the ground for objection at the time of the switching request and, where this is because the customer is in debt, stating that the debt had been outstanding for 28 days or more since the customer was first informed about it in writing;

!!!61623; informing the customer of the amount of the outstanding debt as part of stating clearly how to resolve or dispute the objection;

!!!61623; providing energy efficiency and debt management advice and clear information about third party sources of help and advice including relevant contact details for those organisations; and

!!!61623; specifying an alternative, preferable tariff or payment method which would be available to that customer. In providing this information, it should be appropriate for, and bespoke to, the customer in question. Providing a link to generic tariff information on a website homepage, or an automated phone line, would not be sufficient.

Suppliers are obliged by SLC 27 to offer domestic customers options to agree an affordable payment plan to repay outstanding debt. As part of their approach to complying with SLC 27 we would encourage suppliers to offer affordable repayment options in sufficient detail within the debt objections letter. Unquote

FWIW, I think that you may be confusing a debit balance with a debt. They are not the same. It is often the case that consumers who pay by monthly DD accrue a debit balance. I have never seen it used before by any supplier to stop a consumer switching away. The amount due just becomes payable immediately once the Final Bill has been issued.

Interestingly, in its guidance to suppliers, Ofgem states:

In 2015, a typical customer with a debt of £300-350 was more likely than not to be permitted to switch. The great majority of customers attempting to switch with debts of up to £200 have been allowed to do so. We believe that this should continue. With this in mind, suppliers should continue to take into account their obligations under the Standards of Conduct when exercising their discretion to object to a transfer and consider whether it is fair to object to a low level of debt in the particular circumstances of the customer.

JStewer

Hengus wrote: »

If I was in the same position, I would probably have done the same thing just to get the switch moving. For the record, I switched away from Iresa in May 2017 after The EO upheld my complaint against them for inaccurate billing and the use of an incorrect calorific value conversion figure.

Rather than continue to post opposing views, I suggest that we leave it to Ofgem to determine whether the supplier has been operating in breach of its Supply Licence Conditions. In respect of blocking switches, they will no doubt take note of the detailed policy letter that was sent out to suppliers in 2016:

Quote: Debt objection letters must comply with SLC 14.9, including:

!!!61623; stating the ground for objection at the time of the switching request and, where this is because the customer is in debt, stating that the debt had been outstanding for 28 days or more since the customer was first informed about it in writing;

!!!61623; informing the customer of the amount of the outstanding debt as part of stating clearly how to resolve or dispute the objection;

!!!61623; providing energy efficiency and debt management advice and clear information about third party sources of help and advice including relevant contact details for those organisations; and

!!!61623; specifying an alternative, preferable tariff or payment method which would be available to that customer. In providing this information, it should be appropriate for, and bespoke to, the customer in question. Providing a link to generic tariff information on a website homepage, or an automated phone line, would not be sufficient.

Suppliers are obliged by SLC 27 to offer domestic customers options to agree an affordable payment plan to repay outstanding debt. As part of their approach to complying with SLC 27 we would encourage suppliers to offer affordable repayment options in sufficient detail within the debt objections letter. Unquote

FWIW, I think that you may be confusing a debit balance with a debt. They are not the same. It is often the case that consumers who pay by monthly DD accrue a debit balance. I have never seen it used before by any supplier to stop a consumer switching away. The amount due just becomes payable immediately once the Final Bill has been issued.

Interestingly, in its guidance to suppliers, Ofgem states:

In 2015, a typical customer with a debt of £300-350 was more likely than not to be permitted to switch. The great majority of customers attempting to switch with debts of up to £200 have been allowed to do so. We believe that this should continue. With this in mind, suppliers should continue to take into account their obligations under the Standards of Conduct when exercising their discretion to object to a transfer and consider whether it is fair to object to a low level of debt in the particular circumstances of the customer.

Wow, what a post! :eek:

But what has that got to do with your suggestion to JHamill67 that he should contact Ofgem directly regarding his complaint???

Ill be happy to agree with your mammoth post if you simply agree you were wrong to advise that, because Ofgem do not consider customer's individual complaints

Ofgem’s role in gas and electricity complaints


We don't have a direct role in dealing with individual disputes between customers and energy suppliers.

We collect information from a range of sources as part of our market monitoring activity, and keep the energy markets under review to ensure that all energy licensees comply with the law and their licence obligations. Where suppliers fail, we will act. We publish data to help you see who the best and worst performers are.

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/consumers/household-gas-and-electricity-guide/complain-about-your-gas-or-electricity-bill-or-supplier

Meanwhile you can amuse yourself reading all about the other recent Ofgem investigations here:
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/investigations

Suppliers investigated include:
Ovo
SSE
British Gas

...and that's just those opened within the last 12 months

You can read for yourself all 73 investigations undertaken since 2009

Don;t worry, if the example of E is anything to go by, you'll be able to keep your vitreol against Iresa going for a long time yet.
The E investigation was started Sept 2016, and only concluded last month.

System

@JStewer. Ofgem does, at its discretion, ask for further information from consumers in support of an alleged breach of a specific Standard Licence Condition (SLC). I agree that Ofgem will not investigate an individual complaint against a supplier or award compensation - that is a matter for the supplier and The EO. If I complain to the Regulator, I am expressing dis-satisfaction about a supplier's non-compliance with Regulations. If I raise a formal complaint, then there is a prescribed procedure to follow.

I know that we will continue to disagree but, in my view, the more consumers that bring breaches of SLCs to the Regulator's attention then the sooner something will get done. It will also remind Ofgem that it has an ongoing responsibility for ensuring full regulatory compliance by the suppliers that it licences. Consumers deserve nothing less.

Let's leave it there.

Boxman

As previously posted it is now about 20 weeks since the switch date from Iresa to my current supplier and there is still no sign of a final bill or refund of my credit balance. Have just had an e-mail from Iresa (first communication since 9th January):

I apologise for the delay in responding there is an error with our system that means that when a ticket is updated by one person multiple times it is only shown on the latest date it was updated, this means that it is forced to the back of the queue. We are working to rectify this issue and I am truly sorry this has caused you distress.

I have sent all the information you have given us to the finance department as an urgent refund request they will be in touch with you shortly regarding your refund.

Kindest regards,

So apparently it's all my fault for nagging them to get it sorted! Bet the next delaying tactic is to say that they cannot return MY MONEY because I had the temerity to cancel their direct debit mandate when they tried to take a payment after the switch and despite my account being significantly in credit.

Pathetic.

c_smith

Don't EVER deal with this company! They've objected to my energy transfer because of a £10 debit balance on the electricity side of my services, even though there's a £47 credit balance on the gas, so they actually owe me money. I emailed them last week, but they've not replied. Tried calling them today, but I was "Caller number 134" in the queue! :mad:

macman

JStewer wrote: »

Where can you find Iresa's bank account details???

I was assuming that they were on the DD mandate that you can download from your online account: but they're not.
Post them a cheque maybe?