Changing to non Economy 7 meter

spiro

Biscuit_Tin wrote: »

So what are you suggesting? The OP moves to E10 instead? :huh:
They will need new metering for E10 anyway, so if they are wanting a single rate, probably best to get a single rate meter rather than complicate matters further.

That way, they will have the choice of all the market too. If they get E10, they will be stuck with that supplier.

Of course not, the point is all large (50k+) suppliers are required to be able to bill a customer who has a 2-rate meter on a single rate tariff without the need to swap the meter so the poster has no need of a meter swap.

Pagett

spiro wrote: »

Of course not, the point is all large (50k+) suppliers are required to be able to bill a customer who has a 2-rate meter on a single rate tariff without the need to swap the meter so the poster has no need of a meter swap.

I'm not sure where you get this idea from, but the fact is most suppliers do not do this.

The 2 notable exceptions of the big 6 have already been mentioned.

EachPenny

spiro wrote: »

Of course not, the point is all large (50k+) suppliers are required to be able to bill a customer who has a 2-rate meter on a single rate tariff without the need to swap the meter...

This was the bit I was trying to understand - it sounds like they are saying that because E7 tariffs have much wider choice of supplier and competition is more effective so people with E7 were not disadvantaged as much as people on complex tariffs or E10, and E7 was therefore excluded from the proposal.

This would imply that someone with an E10 tariff could ask for readings to be combined onto a single tariff, but someone on E7 would not have the same right (although may be able to if the supplier agrees).

That's why I wondered whether it had actually been implemented, and if so, how. As the implementation may vary from the original proposal.

molerat

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/energy-market-investigation-restricted-meters-order-2016

Full implementation pushed back to Sep 17.

It does not apply to E7, smart meters or pre payment meters but does apply to E10 (or such where there is an afternoon boost).

EachPenny

molerat wrote: »

Full implementation pushed back to Sep 17.

Thanks molerat, I thought I was being a bit dense when I couldn't find anything confirming spiro's comments that this was already in place.

I can understand the theory of excluding E7 meters, but don't understand why they excluded them from a practical point of view - it would be much easier all round if the rules were the same for all multi-rate meters.

molerat

Since when has anything dreamed up by the CMA and OFGEM made any sense ? Find things that are working and change them, find things that need changing and make them worse

EachPenny

molerat wrote: »

Since when has anything dreamed up by the CMA and OFGEM made any sense ? Find things that are working and change them, find things that need changing and make them worse

Of course! Me being a bit dense again thinking anything could be logical in CMA/OFGEM world

footyguy

EachPenny wrote: »

Thanks molerat, I thought I was being a bit dense when I couldn't find anything confirming spiro's comments that this was already in place.

I can understand the theory of excluding E7 meters, but don't understand why they excluded them from a practical point of view - it would be much easier all round if the rules were the same for all multi-rate meters.

E10 and similar are what are known as legacy tariffs.

The issue arose because those on legacy tariffs are unable to switch supplier (without first having new metering)
Therefore, it was proposed that those on legacy tariffs, where there usually is no choice of tariff either, are now given a choice - the supplier's single rate tariff.
But such customers will still not be able to switch supplier.

E7 meters cost more than single rate meters. Why should suppliers be generally expected to fund the higher cost of these dual rate meters simply because the customer has now changed their mind and want a single rate tariff?
As we know, it's not the suppliers that fund matters anyway, it's their customers
If everyone on E7 meters could have single rate, then everyone would have an E7 meter - thereby adding unnecessary cost to everyones bill.

Actually, depending on where you live, it is often cheaper (or at worst the same price) to be on E7 for most users.
We use about 24-25% low rate electricity, and have not lost out by being on E7 for the last 20 years.
We don't really try and maximise the low rate usage as much as we could as the numbers suggest. We use 24-25% yet 7/24 is about 29%.

I would advise people to consult a comparison site to find the best deal for them rather than reading internt myths on the alleged cost

EachPenny

footyguy wrote: »

E7 meters cost more than single rate meters.
...
If everyone on E7 meters could have single rate, then everyone would have an E7 meter - thereby adding unnecessary cost to everyones bill.

Do you have any figures on the cost of E7 meters vs standard meters, it would be interesting to see a comparison.

Earlier in the thread I speculated -

EachPenny wrote: »

In the early days there was a real additional cost to the electricity boards of installing and maintaining E7 meters/clocks. These costs must now be marginal, and with the roll out of smart meters you have to wonder if there is any increased cost of managing an E7 supply vs a single rate.

I said that on the basis there will be a pool of mechanical meters and timeclocks the suppliers originally paid for however many years ago - the cost of these is likely to have been recovered already. The roll out of smart meters will also result in spare mechanical equipment being available for reuse where the option of a smart meter is refused, or inappropriate. Therefore suppliers shouldn't need to spend money obtaining new E7 meters.

I don't have a great deal of knowledge of smart meters, but would guess that the cost difference between manufacturing a multi-rate vs single-rate smart meter is marginal. In fact I'd go further and suggest that some single-rate meters are identical physically to a multi-rate meter, the only difference being the loaded firmware or its configuration. In much the same way as some low-end consumer electronics have exactly the same circuit boards as premium products but just have certain features 'crippled'.

It is of course possible that the contracts the suppliers have entered into with leasing companies mean they are paying more for an E7 meter than a standard meter. I hope not, since doing something about the UK energy crisis will require people to cut back on usage at peak times, and that means having the capability to charge at least two different rates. If OFGEM and the suppliers have put themselves in a position where multi-rate metering is going to cost significantly more than single-rate then they really have been short-sighted.

So whether legacy or smart, I don't see why an E7 supply should cost any more to meter than a single-rate supply. What exactly does a supply company lose by leaving an E7 meter in-situ and just billing at one rate combining the two readings?

Cardew

EachPenny wrote: »

So whether legacy or smart, I don't see why an E7 supply should cost any more to meter than a single-rate supply. What exactly does a supply company lose by leaving an E7 meter in-situ and just billing at one rate combining the two readings?

I suspect the cost of changing the accounting software is the reason.