Going Well Then.....

molerat

How far does the signal travel though ?

molerat

trickytree1963 wrote: »

Why would they revert to estimated billing. The customer can still read the meter and submit them

Because once you have a smart meter installed you no longer have to submit readings, have you not seen the adverts

System

molerat wrote: »

How far does the signal travel though ?

A lot further than your average wifi as they are using very low transmission frequencies. The object is to establish a mesh - similar to Sky Q and Sonos speaker systems. It follows that the meter that actually sends out all the readings could be miles away from the source of a particular reading. Clearly, a single property in a deep valley is still going to have problems connecting to the DCC.

http://www.smartme.co.uk/technical.html

This was the original target set by the then DECC (which has got suppliers worried):

Some suppliers have raised concerns about the 97.5% or higher wider area communication network (WAN) coverage required by DECC and think that the target is not achievable.

EachPenny

sd99 wrote: »

... Surely there are more important things the government could be doing to investigate reducing bills than force people to spend money for this?

All good points. On the final one, the obvious, simple, rational step the government could take to reducing people's bills would be to call time on this 'forced' smart meter programme.

Reading the Ofgem open letter Hengus kindly linked to is enlightening and should be compulsory... especially the section on 'deemed appointments'. How anyone can defend the way this programme is being managed is totally beyond my comprehension.

House_Martin wrote: »

No one is interested if you can t see a benefit or if you think a smart meter won t save you money(it won t ).
The point is the suppliers, and the DNO want them in, and they are more important than little you.

Sorry HM. I think you've got this completely wrong.

We've all seen the adverts telling us we will save money, and the smart meters are being provided for our benefit by the benevolent energy companies.

The advert made it clear as far as I was concerned that 'little me' was the most important thing.

fredandwilma

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc wrote: »

Having a smart meter won't affect how a switch goes through. This will happen in the same way as any switch whether the meter is smart or the more traditional (dumb) type. As I posted above (#983), though, it's likely the meter will become dumb and need to be read manually. As above, this is only temporary until all suppliers use a centralised database or Data Communications Company (DCC).


The In Home Display will also lose some functions. The display will no longer show usage in pounds and pence although it will continue to give this in kWh.


Malc

brewerdave wrote: »

I was watching TV this morning.....and they are still pushing the "smart meter" message EVEN THO' at the same time there are myriad Govt. messages about switching suppliers - the end result is that the "typical" consumer who already has BG "Smart" meters will switch, not realise that his meters are now "dumb" so will revert back to estimated billing:eek:

trickytree1963 wrote: »

Why would they revert to estimated billing. The customer can still read the meter and submit them

According to Malc the E.on Rep, the IHD will continue to give a reading in kWh. No estimated billing there? In fact, it's easier than having to take a reading from your meter.

It's interesting all the negative comments surrounding smart meters come largely from those who haven't used the system?

It's true you don't hear comments from satisfied customers. As a smart meter user for 6 years, I can honestly say I've not had one problem with the system, for anyone out there thinking of using the smart meter system.

It is, what it is. I accept that. Don't be put off by negative comments. Decide for yourself what suits you?

societys_child

House_Martin wrote: »

"Version 2 "meters have been around for a couple of years now.

Humm see post #18 not sure they have. I was recently offered a version1.
The antiquated IHD looks like something that's fallen off an old Amstrad computer.
I'm in a very poor signal area so probably pointless, I might as well wait.

Of course I don t think anyone who refuses a smart meter is an energy thief but I have seen a headline about 200,000 people growing cannabis in the UK in their homes and every one of them fiddle the meters and every one will refuse a smart meter as a matter of course.

That's a pretty big assumption.

Add to that the huge numbers bypassing prepayment meters who will also automatically refuse a smart meter and its clear that smart meters are badly needed for all of us because we are supporting the thieves and paying for their stolen energy in higher costs
.So the meters must be obligatory, that is vital. And surely the idiotic politicians behind the decision to let an ignorant Joe Public tell the DNO s and suppliers that they do not want their meters is ludicrous.

"ignorant Joe Public"? You sound so smart . . .;)

brewerdave

trickytree1963 wrote: »

Why would they revert to estimated billing. The customer can still read the meter and submit them

The point I was trying to make ,is that the typical customer has probably NEVER read their own meter -always depended on meter reader visits or accepted estd bills. They will have been persuaded to take "smart" meters to allow them to abdicate responsibility. When the meter goes dumb,I think it very unlikely that these types of customer will now change the habits of a lifetime and start submitting their own readings!!

societys_child

The letter I received inviting me to have a smart installed, explains it will save the "inconvenience and struggle" of manually sending monthly readings.

Just submitted my readings on-line as I do every month, took me less than 4 minutes . . . wasn't a struggle and don't really feel particularly inconvenienced at all :rotfl:

brewerdave

fredandwilma wrote: »

According to Malc the E.on Rep, the IHD will continue to give a reading in kWh. No estimated billing there? In fact, it's easier than having to take a reading from your meter.

It's interesting all the negative comments surrounding smart meters come largely from those who haven't used the system?

It's true you don't hear comments from satisfied customers. As a smart meter user for 6 years, I can honestly say I've not had one problem with the system, for anyone out there thinking of using the smart meter system.

It is, what it is. I accept that. Don't be put off by negative comments. Decide for yourself what suits you?

Re Malc's comments - I'm led to believe that some IHDs (if not all) become paperweights when the meters lose smart functionality,displaying nothing at all!
Also, I understand that the IHDs do not display the gas meter readings in m3 as required by Energy Cos. - so no use for manual readings anyway.
I assume that you have switched since the smart meters were installed - are you saying that your IHD still displays "useful" information? And can you say that extracting the meter readings from the meters themselves ,is as easy as via the "old" meters??
The current situation is senseless -why install v1 smart meters that will probably never be adopted into the centralised data collection systems??
I've been involved in enuf IT projects to know that a retrofit solution will be poorly specified, way behind schedule and will ultimately end up abandoned, having wasted £100 millions of consumer's ,money!!:(

mac.d

House_Martin wrote: »

The point is the suppliers, and the DNO want them in.

This is the bottom line and no doubt everyone will end up with a smart meter in future. And, in the long run the vast majority will be happy to have one.

If you remain pig headed

refuseniks ..... I have heard of a £60 a year metering charge for all those intent on being an idiot.

a big mistake in letting Joe Public stick his/her unwanted oar in

ignorant Joe Public

In the meantime, there's really no need for you to be so dispariging of people who would prefer to wait and are a) showing a lot more sense than the government/suppliers are, and b) will probably save the suppliers (and consequently everyone else) some money by not having had out-dated tech installed in the first place.