Outfox The Market Direct Debit changes

N6Highgate

Anthorn wrote: »

Personally, I think everyone is going off on a tangent and speculating a result which may not be true. It could be that OFTM has identified a better business model and is progressing with that. Admittedly all the evidence points to cash flow but that might be masking the reality.

As I posted earlier in this thread, there are little differences between OFTM's new model and Powershop's model: Both require prepayment of energy and so energy costs more in winter than in summer. It's not by any means a budget scheme where annual cost is split into equal monthly payments as with for example EDF but it could turn out to be beneficial in the spring and summer when lower payments start.

Probably the only thing missing in a comparison between OFTM and Powershop is the discount Powershop customers get but that could easily be equalled by OFTM by paying interest on credit balances along the lines of OVO.

I agree with you, looking around those that are charging lower rates seem to be using the same model for prepaying higher Winter and lower Summer months.


For me, with regards to to OFtM it all boils down to the way they went about it, and the fact that I've had 4 increases in the last 6 months, 3 of which were back to back. Add to that (the final proverbial straw) the fact that they've jacked up the amount Winter vs Summer whilst I am in credit and have been pointing out to them that my usage numbers for the last year is lower than what they've predicted.


Feels like a shambles. Ironically the one I've decided to move to (Igloo) is charging about the same amount with a Winter/ Summer load. The cheaper one (Utility Point) I am now disinclined to use as I've had such massive problems with this small operator.

paters

editor1, I've already explained a single company can have multiple trading names and multiple bank accounts. So how do you know that these direct debits are being reinstated by different "business entities" and not just by Foxglove Energy Ltd?
It's perfectly normal to have lots of different companies registered at the same address. In many cases these will just be companies set up for tax purposes or simply to hold onto the name.
I'm not defending OTM / Foxglove Energy's practices, but I can understand that they probably don't have much choice.
Direct debit and card payments aren't the same.
I've never accused you of not worrying enough, just talking nonsense.

alittleowl

wavelets wrote: »

:rotfl: .

I don't understand your response. What are you laughing at?

editor1

@paters,

As per your input:
It's perfectly normal to have lots of different companies registered at the same address. In many cases these will just be companies set up for tax purposes or simply to hold onto the name.
I'm not defending OTM / Foxglove Energy's practices, but I can understand that they probably don't have much choice.

So, given DD authorisation was given to OFTM and bank statements clearly show Foxglove as the beneficiary of said DD authorisation, which means they and they alone have been sanctioned to remove funds from a customers bank account, allegedly we customers must just smile and accept the fact that 28+ business entities operating from the Bastian empire can all freely share Customers Bank Account details and access funds, despite not being authorised to do so, for if the initial payment was deducted via Foxglove, then all subsequent payments should follow suit, not any other of the the multiple businesses entities that belong to this Empire.

Let me be blunter, PlusNet are owned by BT, so by your logic both PlusNet and BT can access the bank account of a customer of Plusnet, despite the fact no DD authorisation has been given to BT. I mean, BT owns both companies, but the fact remains this does not happen. In the case of OFTM such a real example is happening and the businesses showing up on Customers accounts are not the two or three previously mentioned, which in no way resembles Best Business Practice to me. Indeed, a few banks are now becoming alarmed, particularly given some Customers have had to name every single business entity registered at Frog Island in order to stop monies being accessed from their accounts.

For the record, if I land in dispute with OFTM I'm not looking forward to having to instruct Lloyds Bank to Block 28 businesses from accessing accounts, when only a single entity was authorised to do so via the DD authorisation process.

Still, as i say, i learn something new every day.

antrobus

paters wrote: »

What alternative do they have? Close-up shop and leave all the customers in limbo with a SoLR, leave Ofgem to pay back all the customers in credit, make their staff redundant just before Xmas...

On a point of order.

Ofgem does not pay back all the customers in credit, the SoLR does, who then recovers the cost from the surviving suppliers. Who then (I'd guess) recover it from their customers.

wild666

I have had an email from Bulb saying they want my meter readings I think I will send them 4 photo's 3 from the electric and one from the gas and do it either tomorrow or Wednesday morning. So far they haven't reinstated the DD so here's hoping my credit covers the usage until I move on Friday

[Deleted User]

And then there is the shell companies, and the holding companies and the foreign based tax avoidance companies...and getting the government grants and limiting the risk, so that they can all become big fat capitalists...It's all about entrepreneurship at the end of the day and limiting risk, so that the state and therefore the tax payer, the ordinary joe, on his pension or his Universal Benefit, front dated by a couple of months,, pays in advance for the screw ups that these guys make, whilst they disappear with the money to pastures new and tell all their friends how clever they are, as they sit and enjoy their tax free adventures, drinkies and all the perks. Still...we got Brexit to keep us all on the go...It's a terrible world.
Just a few thoughts,
ATB
Dougie.

[Deleted User]

alittleowl wrote: »

I don't understand your response. What are you laughing at?

Probably because you are posting nonsense. I bank with First Direct too and have not had anything like the message you claim. Still, if it makes you happy to think that HSBC are busy reporting OFTM for fraud, knock yourself out.

Barneybear1

@littleowl some people oh here prefer to massage their egos by posting with the benefit of hindsight, apparently they know more now concerning direct debit mandates than your bank.

paters

editor1, when you signed up to OTM you agreed to their T&C and privacy policy, which authorises Bastian Plc Group to use your information. Do you have any actual evidence that anyone other than Foxglove Energy Ltd are using your bank details or they are sharing this information with all these other "28+ business entities"? Or is that just something you heard from the angry cranks on Facebook?

While you are still a customer, it is likely Foxglove have every right to reinstate cancelled direct debits under whatever name / reference they like. Do you know for certain they not allowed to do this?

Your Plusnet / BT analogy doesn't work as they are still separate companies. Whereas OTM, Fisher, Eco 7 etc. are just different trading names of the same company.

If you're that paranoid OTM are up to no good, then I suggest you switch...