Do you want to be able to choose your water company?

Ofwat

Hi Cardew,

Thanks for your thoughts.

Cardew wrote: »

Wouldn't the powers Ofwat have been granted be better utilised in sorting out the many anomalies in billing in the various companies. e.g.

Standing charges. These vary tremendously between companies.

Surface Water Drainage - again a complete nonsense; originally supposed to be sorted within 10 years of the introduction of The Water Act

Improving our use of water across the country is increasingly important. It is also central to Ofwat’s analysis of a competitive water market and the potential benefits it could bring.

Competition could also drive improvements and innovation across the industry - compelling companies to tackle the difficult issues head-on.

Cardew wrote: »

If we could switch between various companies(to save up to £6) wouldn't this mean that all 20+ companies would have to have a data base of all the differing charges for metered water and sewerage, RV based charges, standing charges for water and sewerage, Surface Water drainage,

How would this be more efficient?

A central database of charges meanwhile should help customers make the best decision for their own water suppliers as we’re all able to do with other utilities, broadband and financial services, for example.

Ofwat

Thanks for getting involved in the debate Nick_C

Nick_C wrote: »

To save £6 a year? What's the point. Sounds like a lot of money would be wasted on admin and marketing for no significant benefit to the consumer.

Of course we shouldn't be starting from here. A service that cannot be opened up to competition should never have been privatised. But we are where we are.

The benefits to the customer and the country as a whole will form a significant part of Ofwat's role in analysing the effects of a competitive market.


Rather than for any significant cost savings, customers may want to switch to bundle different services together, (such as broadband, tv, gas for example), so they only have to pay one bill instead of several.

Smodlet

Is this thread for real? How on earth will customers benefit from, for example, choosing to pay Welsh Water when they live in the Anglian region? No-one in WW would have any reason to know the first thing about the driest region in the country, they would lack local knowledge, have less experience of reservoirs. The only thing I can see changing if we could choose our water provider is that everyone's prices would increase to pay for the inevitable incompetence which would follow.

Why should someone in the West Midlands pay for the upkeep of beaches around the Cornish and Devon coasts? Different water companies have different charges based in no small measure on the services they have to provide. How would this be dealt with other than by raising everyone's prices?

Thirdly, why on earth would anyone choose to buy their broadband from a water company? Most of them cannot even fix leaks or deal with bad drains. Some cannot even provide water that does not have to be filtered to make it fit to drink so how they could be trusted to deal with recalcitrant routers is beyond me, unless a whole load of money was spent on recruitment and training... paid for by customers.

The only benefit I can see of mixing and mismatching water companies is that Anglian Water could learn a heck of a lot from Severn Trent about customer service. Other than that, I vote to leave well alone.

Cardew

Ofwat wrote: »

Improving our use of water across the country is increasingly important. It is also central to Ofwat’s analysis of a competitive water market and the potential benefits it could bring.

Competition could also drive improvements and innovation across the industry - compelling companies to tackle the difficult issues head-on.


A central database of charges meanwhile should help customers make the best decision for their own water suppliers as we’re all able to do with other utilities, broadband and financial services, for example.

I am sorry but your post is just 'management speak' platitudes!

Please expand on the last paragraph- particularly 'best decision'

For example currently a family of 4 on SW Water metered tariff using the UK average of 220 cubic metres a year pay:

Water 194.84p/m3 and £37.20pa standing charge
waste water 339.54p/m3 and £38.42 standing charge.

Thus an annual charge of £1,251.26

For the same consumption in, say, Thames Water* the same consumption(220m3) will cost £553.62


So if the South West water family decide the 'best decision' is to choose Thames Water - what do you envisage will happen?

* Thames is not the cheapest

Ofwat

Hi Smodlet, thanks for your thoughts. You raise some excellent points.

Smodlet wrote: »

Is this thread for real? How on earth will customers benefit from, for example, choosing to pay Welsh Water when they live in the Anglian region? No-one in WW would have any reason to know the first thing about the driest region in the country, they would lack local knowledge, have less experience of reservoirs. The only thing I can see changing if we could choose our water provider is that everyone's prices would increase to pay for the inevitable incompetence which would follow.

Smodlet wrote: »

Why should someone in the West Midlands pay for the upkeep of beaches around the Cornish and Devon coasts? Different water companies have different charges based in no small measure on the services they have to provide. How would this be dealt with other than by raising everyone's prices?
Thirdly, why on earth would anyone choose to buy their broadband from a water company? Most of them cannot even fix leaks or deal with bad drains. Some cannot even provide water that does not have to be filtered to make it fit to drink so how they could be trusted to deal with recalcitrant routers is beyond me, unless a whole load of money was spent on recruitment and training... paid for by customers.
The only benefit I can see of mixing and mismatching water companies is that Anglian Water could learn a heck of a lot from Severn Trent about customer service. Other than that, I vote to leave well alone.

The introduction of competition and choice is limited to the retail operation - things like billing and meter reading. The infrastructure of the water supply, such as reservoirs, pipes, treatment works and the environment will remain the responsibility of the water companies.

A competitive market would not be limited to water companies but would be open to businesses interested in supplying retail services. The retailers could then choose to bundle water together with other services, which, together with increased customer service levels, could offer a more attractive deal to their customers.

Ofwat

Hi Cardew,

Cardew wrote: »

I am sorry but your post is just 'management speak' platitudes!

Cardew wrote: »

Please expand on the last paragraph- particularly 'best decision'

So if the South West water family decide the 'best decision' is to choose Thames Water - what do you envisage will happen?

Tragic that I came across in ‘management speak’. Far from my intention so I can only apologise for that!

I was referring to the choice that customers would have in a competitive marketplace. The freedom to choose water retailer would allow customers to see the packages on offer from one retailer to the next and thereby choose the deal that works best– whether that is on price or customer service level or a combination of the two.

Smodlet

Ofwat, I fail to see how outsourcing billing/customer services can benefit the customer. I, for one, will take a great deal of convincing that any of what you propose will benefit me in the slightest and I reserve the right to choose providers where I have a choice who can be expected to know something about their industry.

To all intents and purposes from water companies' employees' points of view, their industry might as well be nationalised. They have no competitors, we are stuck with whichever regional provider. Refreshingly, Severn Trent's customer service up to now (four years) has been exemplary. Anglian Water's was atrocious and they got away with it because they know their customers have no choice. Whichever way you slice it, you will still be stuck with whichever regional provider when it comes to issues of water quality, leaks, drains and sewage.

Issues with billing/customer services could be dealt with so much more simply and therefore cheaply, by training existing staff to do their jobs to a standard required by the private sector, rather than allowing them to adopt the attitude some of them do because they know customers have but one choice, to put up with them or dig their own well.

You are not convincing me there is any benefit to customers whatsoever. All I get from your posts is that this is going to happen at some point whether we like it or not and we will have to pay for it, because we have no choice. Is that not just like the water industry? This sounds more and more like a way to force water meters on to those who do not want them, to me.

4$£&*(£$&*(!

An interesting question and I would like to put my views into the consultation.

Firstly I think using this forum is a really innovative and accessible idea. It is the first time I have known a regulator make a consultation this accessible and public. It is a very positive step in accountability and consumer confidence.

Secondly I would like the cost benefit analysis to be reasonable. The idea itself is a sound idea. My water company does not make an app available for example; they almost seem to get annoyed when I try to submit meter readings throughout the year as it does not match their billing cycles even though I want to identify if I am using more water than normal this approach is more consumer friendly.

There is a lack of smart metering technology in the sector. At a previous address I was able to convince my supplier to give me a smart meter so I would not get several requests to read it when I was not at home as the meter was not accessible. At my current home the meter is accessible but no way of getting a smart meter.

There is a lack of in house display units to compliment smart metering and in turn this would help identify leaks on properties and reduce water wastage.

I feel these points need to be considered when deciding if a choice of supplier is the most relevant issue.

When factoring in costs, there will be an inherent cost in new compatible systems to switch customers between suppliers. This will presumably be borne by the consumer, and increase overheads.

The fact is people change gas and electric suppliers for savings. If savings are as low as £6 per year this will not energise the market competition, and unless there is a problem with my supply I rarely have to contact my supplier so customer service is not a factor.

Far more important to me is accurate billing which is smart metering for me, and all suppliers to build accessible smartphone apps to allow wider access to their services.

I hope this response is useful and considered.

Ofwat

Smodlet wrote: »

Ofwat, I fail to see how outsourcing billing/customer services can benefit the customer. I, for one, will take a great deal of convincing that any of what you propose will benefit me in the slightest and I reserve the right to choose providers where I have a choice who can be expected to know something about their industry.

To all intents and purposes from water companies' employees' points of view, their industry might as well be nationalised. They have no competitors, we are stuck with whichever regional provider. Refreshingly, Severn Trent's customer service up to now (four years) has been exemplary. Anglian Water's was atrocious and they got away with it because they know their customers have no choice. Whichever way you slice it, you will still be stuck with whichever regional provider when it comes to issues of water quality, leaks, drains and sewage.

Issues with billing/customer services could be dealt with so much more simply and therefore cheaply, by training existing staff to do their jobs to a standard required by the private sector, rather than allowing them to adopt the attitude some of them do because they know customers have but one choice, to put up with them or dig their own well.

You are not convincing me there is any benefit to customers whatsoever. All I get from your posts is that this is going to happen at some point whether we like it or not and we will have to pay for it, because we have no choice. Is that not just like the water industry? This sounds more and more like a way to force water meters on to those who do not want them, to me.

Hi Smodlet,

You again raise some important points; most notably the disparity in customer service levels between regional providers.

The work that Ofwat are undertaking will look at the potential benefits, the costs involved in setting up the market and present the findings to the government, who will take a decision.

One of the potential benefits of a competitive retail market is to drive companies to lift their standards for all customers - wherever they live in the country and whatever their annual water usage. And of course, better customer engagement will not just benefit the customer but individual businesses too which should hopefully lead to continued improvements across the sector.

Ofwat

CitySlicker wrote: »

An interesting question and I would like to put my views into the consultation.

Firstly I think using this forum is a really innovative and accessible idea. It is the first time I have known a regulator make a consultation this accessible and public. It is a very positive step in accountability and consumer confidence.

Secondly I would like the cost benefit analysis to be reasonable. The idea itself is a sound idea. My water company does not make an app available for example; they almost seem to get annoyed when I try to submit meter readings throughout the year as it does not match their billing cycles even though I want to identify if I am using more water than normal this approach is more consumer friendly.

There is a lack of smart metering technology in the sector. At a previous address I was able to convince my supplier to give me a smart meter so I would not get several requests to read it when I was not at home as the meter was not accessible. At my current home the meter is accessible but no way of getting a smart meter.

There is a lack of in house display units to compliment smart metering and in turn this would help identify leaks on properties and reduce water wastage.

I feel these points need to be considered when deciding if a choice of supplier is the most relevant issue.

When factoring in costs, there will be an inherent cost in new compatible systems to switch customers between suppliers. This will presumably be borne by the consumer, and increase overheads.

The fact is people change gas and electric suppliers for savings. If savings are as low as £6 per year this will not energise the market competition, and unless there is a problem with my supply I rarely have to contact my supplier so customer service is not a factor.

Far more important to me is accurate billing which is smart metering for me, and all suppliers to build accessible smartphone apps to allow wider access to their services.

I hope this response is useful and considered.

Hi CitySlicker, thanks for getting involved and airing your views.

Very interesting and considered thoughts, too. Also thanks for the compliment. We think it is really important that the water sector, including Ofwat, recognises the need to talk to customers in different, better and as you say, accessible ways.

The cost/benefit analysis will be conducted in as open a way as possible, taking in all views and sentiments and a decision made on the back of that.

Though the savings indicated by our initial findings may not be vast – the access to better customer service, bundled services & offers and tailored packages for example may offer a more attractive deal to many customers. And, as you are mentioning, the potential for there to be more technology in the sector to benefit customers. The overarching benefit of retail markets, wherever they may be and whatever industry or sector they may affect, is to give freedom to the customer.

You buy your bottled water from whichever retailer and brand suits you best – the question is do we all, as customers, want that same freedom with our water on tap?