Eon

SiM99

I switched to E-on when they were the cheapest option in one of the MSE switched just over a month ago. They say that the switch will be completed within 6 weeks. It's now 7 weeks in and I'm still unable to receive my final bill (and credit refund) from Tonik Energy because e-on still haven't sent them the initial meter readings that I submitted as part of the switch.

I should have known straight away that I was going to end up in this kind of situation, considering that the website wouldn't accept meter readings during the sign-up process.

I contacted e-on about it via Twitter;

@EONhelp
Entered readings into a new account and been shown an error after each:

Whoops, something's blown it
Sorry, your account isn't available while we fix it.
Tweet
@eonhelp
or call 0345 052 0000

Will they have been registered correcly?
8:06 PM · Oct 25, 2019·Twitter Web App

(I tried to post a link to the above tweet, but haven't been active enough in the forum to be able to do so yet.)

They contacted me back via DM and the first thing I was told was that the readings had been entered into the system:

Thank you for providing us with your opening meter readings Ian. I've submitted your readings for you now which will be used to start your account on with us. I'll also ensure that these same readings are sent to your previous provider who will then be able to issue you with an accurate final bill, please be aware that it can take up to 42 days after the date you officially join us to receive this, however is usually well within the first few weeks in most cases. Cheers, Jon
Oct 26, 2019, 3:26 PM

followed by

Thanks Ian.

Your meter readings have gone through so there's nothing for you to do now.

As John said we'll sort the rest.

Dan

That's two people who told me that the readings were accepted into the system. Jon informed me that the readings had already been sent to my previous provider and Dan verifying that I don't need to do anything further. I obviously do have to do something, but I shouldn't have to.


Considering e-on haven't satisfied their own terms and conditions, would I be within my rights to switch to another provider and not expect to have to pay them any early exit fees?



Another thing that's worrying me, considering they hold all of my personal details in their databases, is that I'm not sure e-on understand security as well as they think they do.

I contacted them yesterday after not having done so since 2nd December and was asked to re-authorize myself following the gap in contact:

Hi Ian, I'd be happy to have a look into this for you.

As there's been a gap since you last contacted us on here can you you please confirm your full name, account number and date of birth again?

Laura

It seems unnecessary considering that the contact is originating from the same twitter account they've been in contact with previously and the topic of conversation is the same issue that was discussed the previous time(s) I've been in contact with them.

Let's assume that someone may have picked up my phone, managed to bypass the biometric security and for some unknown reason decided to log into my twitter account... why would anyone other than me decide to contact e-on and ask them about my incomplete energy switch?

Putting all that aside, let's say that the person with access to my account (who I'll refer to as Person X) has decided to try and get it sorted out for me, but that's strictly against e-on's rules so they have to cease contact with Person X if they can't be identified as me... The message that Person X has just read informs them that I've already authenticated previously so all they need to do is scroll up and look for my personal details and then copy/paste them. :rotfl:



Thanks in advance for any advice.

Gerry1

SiM99 wrote: »

Hi Ian, I'd be happy to have a look into this for you.

As there's been a gap since you last contacted us on here can you you please confirm your full name, account number and date of birth again?

Laura

D'oh ! How stupid can E.On get?

Using a DoB breaks all the Golden Rules of passwords. It should be something known only to you (obviously no-one's heard of birthday cards in E.On's world), it should be something that's easily changeable, and it should never be shared with any other organisations. It's about time that it was made illegal to ask for DoB when there's no good reason to do so.

SiM99

Gerry1 wrote: »

D'oh ! How stupid can E.On get?

Using a DoB breaks all the Golden Rules of passwords. It should be something known only to you (obviously no-one's heard of birthday cards in E.On's world), it should be something that's easily changeable, and it should never be shared with any other organisations. It's about time that it was made illegal to ask for DoB when there's no good reason to do so.

Glad there's at least one person who shares a similar view :j

Former_E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc

SiM99 wrote: »

I switched to E-on when they were the cheapest option in one of the MSE switched just over a month ago. They say that the switch will be completed within 6 weeks. It's now 7 weeks in and I'm still unable to receive my final bill (and credit refund) from Tonik Energy because e-on still haven't sent them the initial meter readings that I submitted as part of the switch.

I should have known straight away that I was going to end up in this kind of situation, considering that the website wouldn't accept meter readings during the sign-up process.

I contacted e-on about it via Twitter;

(I tried to post a link to the above tweet, but haven't been active enough in the forum to be able to do so yet.)

They contacted me back via DM and the first thing I was told was that the readings had been entered into the system:



followed by



That's two people who told me that the readings were accepted into the system. Jon informed me that the readings had already been sent to my previous provider and Dan verifying that I don't need to do anything further. I obviously do have to do something, but I shouldn't have to.


Considering e-on haven't satisfied their own terms and conditions, would I be within my rights to switch to another provider and not expect to have to pay them any early exit fees?



Another thing that's worrying me, considering they hold all of my personal details in their databases, is that I'm not sure e-on understand security as well as they think they do.

I contacted them yesterday after not having done so since 2nd December and was asked to re-authorize myself following the gap in contact:



It seems unnecessary considering that the contact is originating from the same twitter account they've been in contact with previously and the topic of conversation is the same issue that was discussed the previous time(s) I've been in contact with them.

Let's assume that someone may have picked up my phone, managed to bypass the biometric security and for some unknown reason decided to log into my twitter account... why would anyone other than me decide to contact e-on and ask them about my incomplete energy switch?

Putting all that aside, let's say that the person with access to my account (who I'll refer to as Person X) has decided to try and get it sorted out for me, but that's strictly against e-on's rules so they have to cease contact with Person X if they can't be identified as me... The message that Person X has just read informs them that I've already authenticated previously so all they need to do is scroll up and look for my personal details and then copy/paste them. :rotfl:



Thanks in advance for any advice.

Hello SiM99 and thank you for switching to us.

I'm sorry this is taking longer than usual. It sounds like the switch itself has gone through and we're supplying your energy. It does take longer before accounts are fully up and running as we need to let other industry third parties know you've changed supplier. These include the energy distributors, meter operators/readers and the national databases. This is done via a series of electronic messages. We look to have it all completed within 42 calendar days of the Supply Start Date (SSD). This is what our twitter advisor (Jon) was talking about.

Once all's through and verified by the third parties, your account will go live and be backdated to the SSD. One of the third parties checks the start readings fall in line with past readings held for the property. Sometimes they'll make a change and both suppliers need to use the amended readings to start/close their respective accounts. This makes sure the same energy is only charged once.

As both Jon and Dan have confirmed your readings have been logged, they'll just be waiting for the third party to verify them as above and confirm this to both suppliers.

If this is now beyond 42 days from the SSD please raise a formal complaint with us. We can't start chasing any hold-ups until past this time. As part of the resolution, the Complaint Manager will be able to let you know if it's possible to cancel exit fees if you switch to another supplier.

We're very careful with our customer's details and take all necessary precautions to make sure this information is kept safe. We also need to make sure we comply with the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR). This means we need to check certain details on every interaction whether via a phone call, Live Chat or our Social Media channels. We need to be sure we're talking to the right person before revealing any information.

To do this, we ask customers to confirm certain details. These might include the account number, customer name, address, date of birth, phone number, email address, password (if set up), electricity and gas supply numbers, payment method or payment details. We won't ask for all of this, only enough to make sure we're talking to the right person. Provided enough information is given, customers only need to answer the security questions they're comfortable with.

I'm sorry you think this is unnecessary. As I say, we've a duty of care to look after our customer's details and this is particularly relevant now when there are so many scams going on in so many industries.

Thanks for your patience SiM99 and sorry again it's taking longer than usual for your account to go live.

Malc

Former_E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc

Gerry1 wrote: »

D'oh ! How stupid can E.On get?

Using a DoB breaks all the Golden Rules of passwords. It should be something known only to you (obviously no-one's heard of birthday cards in E.On's world), it should be something that's easily changeable, and it should never be shared with any other organisations. It's about time that it was made illegal to ask for DoB when there's no good reason to do so.

I agree Gerry1. We don't recommend customers use their date of birth for passwords.

The request for SiM99 to confirm their date of birth, as above, was part of something different. It was to help make sure we were talking to the right person before giving out confidential information. As I explained, this is part of the checks we do to help protect our customers.

Dates of birth are one of the pieces of data we ask for. There are others as detailed in my earlier reply and customers can choose which ones they're comfortable with giving. We only need enough to make sure we're talking to the right person.

Totally accept it can be irritating to have to keep verifying who you are. With so many scams on the go, we're conscious of the need to be careful with our customer's details. It's not only the energy industry that's at risk. Fraud is widespread and most companies have stringent policies to look after their customer's details. Dates of birth are often used as part of any verification process.

Hope this explains Gerry1.

Malc

SiM99

Thanks for your response Malc. It's helped me understand some of the more intricate details of an energy switch. This definitely seems to be the place to come with more general (non-account-specific) queries.

I think that I've accepted that I just have to go with it.

Ultimately, e-on will be the ones wanting payment for the electricity. I can't provide meter readings for either energy so everything's going to be estimated. That surely has to result in our direct debit remaining the same as it was estimated during our switch, considering there can't be any justification for changing it.

Having said that, I do have responses to various parts of your message and some points that I'd like to make.

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc wrote: »

I'm sorry this is taking longer than usual.

No problem.

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc wrote: »

It does take longer before accounts are fully up and running as we need to let other industry third parties know you've changed supplier. These include the energy distributors, meter operators/readers and the national databases. This is done via a series of electronic messages. We look to have it all completed within 42 calendar days of the Supply Start Date (SSD). This is what our twitter advisor (Jon) was talking about.

Something I'll probably just have to accept, as explained above... but it's never taken this long any time I've switched previously.

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc wrote: »

Once all's through and verified by the third parties, your account will go live and be backdated to the SSD. One of the third parties checks the start readings fall in line with past readings held for the property. Sometimes they'll make a change and both suppliers need to use the amended readings to start/close their respective accounts. This makes sure the same energy is only charged once.

As both Jon and Dan have confirmed your readings have been logged, they'll just be waiting for the third party to verify them as above and confirm this to both suppliers.

and

Twitter_DM_on_Monday_16th wrote:

It looks like we're missing some information we need to finish processing the switch; we will be in contact with your old supplier to try to get this sorted as soon as possible. If you'd like more detail our gains team can be reached directly on 0345 301 5926

I'm obviously being given conflicting information... I currently have no idea whether w-on think that they still need to contact Tonik with readings or not, but I know that Tonik hadn't received them when I last queried it with them on Friday 13th.

I think this explains the reason behind the frustration. I've been told by e-on that everything's sorted and Tonik have everything they need, then had that confirmed by someone else, then later on someone else told me that e-on do actually need to contact Tonik but made it sound like it was regarding information other than meter readings...

I'd much rather be told "sorry, we forgotten to submit the reading to Tonik" if that's the case. As it is, I'm left guessing what's actually happening and coming to that conclusion anyway. The message I was sent via Twitter is too vague for me to think anything else - it just sounds like the detail was left out because it would conflict with what I'd been told previously.

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc wrote: »

If this is now beyond 42 days from the SSD please raise a formal complaint with us. We can't start chasing any hold-ups until past this time. As part of the resolution, the Complaint Manager will be able to let you know if it's possible to cancel exit fees if you switch to another supplier.

I received the "Welcome to e-on" email on 16/10/2019 so I guess we are outside of that 42 days.

Hmm, 42 days is a very specific but seemingly arbitrary number... any idea if it was inspired by Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy? :rotfl:

If I were to do so then I'm not sure the switch out of e-on would go any better than the switch into e-on, especially considering that e-on don't seem to have all the details they need to get my account up and running and those details would be required for a new supplier to take over.

I will consider this option though, thanks!

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc wrote: »

We're very careful with our customer's details and take all necessary precautions to make sure this information is kept safe. We also need to make sure we comply with the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR). This means we need to check certain details on every interaction whether via a phone call, Live Chat or our Social Media channels. We need to be sure we're talking to the right person before revealing any information.

To do this, we ask customers to confirm certain details. These might include the account number, customer name, address, date of birth, phone number, email address, password (if set up), electricity and gas supply numbers, payment method or payment details. We won't ask for all of this, only enough to make sure we're talking to the right person. Provided enough information is given, customers only need to answer the security questions they're comfortable with.

I'm sorry you think this is unnecessary. As I say, we've a duty of care to look after our customer's details and this is particularly relevant now when there are so many scams going on in so many industries.

Okay, I can understand that customer details have to be kept secure.

I wasn't asked for details on every interaction, as the advisor mentioned in the message I quoted.

Twitter wrote:

As there's been a gap since you last contacted us on here can you you please confirm your full name, account number and date of birth again?

This implies that there's a certain number of days that has to elapse without a message before the customer has to re-authenticate. That makes sense, otherwise it would be impossible to have a conversation.

What I don't understand is what's considered to be different when a conversation takes place over a week with one response a day vs picking up a conversation after a week/month/year gap. If someone's going to impersonate me over Twitter then it wouldn't matter how long it's been since I last contated you. That's why I said it seemed unnecessary.

The biggest reason that I was considering it totally un-necessary in this case was summed up in my last paragraph;

Putting all that aside, let's say that the person with access to my account (who I'll refer to as Person X) has decided to try and get it sorted out for me, but that's strictly against e-on's rules so they have to cease contact with Person X if they can't be identified as me... The message that Person X has just read informs them that I've already authenticated previously so all they need to do is scroll up and look for my personal details and then copy/paste them. :rotfl:

You mentioned that there's a much bigger list of details that can be requested than name, account number and date of birth. Given that's the case, I imagine that policy dictates that I shouldn't have been asked for the exact same details a second time, especially the very next time I was asked to authenticate. This along with the fact that the authentication request also informed the reader (me, in this case) exactly where to find the requested details was the main reason for my comment regarding the understanding of secutiry.

As I mentioned earlier, I had some things to say/points to make and have done so in this post. I'm not sure where I would actually have placed specific questions so just left it open. I would welcome your thoughts though Malc, please don't avoid responding on the basis that I haven't asked anything of you directly.

Former_E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc

SiM99 wrote: »

Thanks for your response Malc. It's helped me understand some of the more intricate details of an energy switch. This definitely seems to be the place to come with more general (non-account-specific) queries.

I think that I've accepted that I just have to go with it.

Ultimately, e-on will be the ones wanting payment for the electricity. I can't provide meter readings for either energy so everything's going to be estimated. That surely has to result in our direct debit remaining the same as it was estimated during our switch, considering there can't be any justification for changing it.

Having said that, I do have responses to various parts of your message and some points that I'd like to make.


No problem.


Something I'll probably just have to accept, as explained above... but it's never taken this long any time I've switched previously.


and

I'm obviously being given conflicting information... I currently have no idea whether w-on think that they still need to contact Tonik with readings or not, but I know that Tonik hadn't received them when I last queried it with them on Friday 13th.

I think this explains the reason behind the frustration. I've been told by e-on that everything's sorted and Tonik have everything they need, then had that confirmed by someone else, then later on someone else told me that e-on do actually need to contact Tonik but made it sound like it was regarding information other than meter readings...

I'd much rather be told "sorry, we forgotten to submit the reading to Tonik" if that's the case. As it is, I'm left guessing what's actually happening and coming to that conclusion anyway. The message I was sent via Twitter is too vague for me to think anything else - it just sounds like the detail was left out because it would conflict with what I'd been told previously.


I received the "Welcome to e-on" email on 16/10/2019 so I guess we are outside of that 42 days.

Hmm, 42 days is a very specific but seemingly arbitrary number... any idea if it was inspired by Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy? :rotfl:

If I were to do so then I'm not sure the switch out of e-on would go any better than the switch into e-on, especially considering that e-on don't seem to have all the details they need to get my account up and running and those details would be required for a new supplier to take over.

I will consider this option though, thanks!


Okay, I can understand that customer details have to be kept secure.

I wasn't asked for details on every interaction, as the advisor mentioned in the message I quoted.


This implies that there's a certain number of days that has to elapse without a message before the customer has to re-authenticate. That makes sense, otherwise it would be impossible to have a conversation.

What I don't understand is what's considered to be different when a conversation takes place over a week with one response a day vs picking up a conversation after a week/month/year gap. If someone's going to impersonate me over Twitter then it wouldn't matter how long it's been since I last contated you. That's why I said it seemed unnecessary.

The biggest reason that I was considering it totally un-necessary in this case was summed up in my last paragraph;


You mentioned that there's a much bigger list of details that can be requested than name, account number and date of birth. Given that's the case, I imagine that policy dictates that I shouldn't have been asked for the exact same details a second time, especially the very next time I was asked to authenticate. This along with the fact that the authentication request also informed the reader (me, in this case) exactly where to find the requested details was the main reason for my comment regarding the understanding of secutiry.

As I mentioned earlier, I had some things to say/points to make and have done so in this post. I'm not sure where I would actually have placed specific questions so just left it open. I would welcome your thoughts though Malc, please don't avoid responding on the basis that I haven't asked anything of you directly.

Hello SiM99 and thanks for coming back to me.

I'll be happy to comment on the points you've raised. I've run out of time for this week so will pick this up when I'm next in on Tuesday.

Thanks for your patience SiM99 and have a good weekend.

Malc

Former_E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc

SiM99 wrote: »

Thanks for your response Malc. It's helped me understand some of the more intricate details of an energy switch. This definitely seems to be the place to come with more general (non-account-specific) queries.

I think that I've accepted that I just have to go with it.

Ultimately, e-on will be the ones wanting payment for the electricity. I can't provide meter readings for either energy so everything's going to be estimated. That surely has to result in our direct debit remaining the same as it was estimated during our switch, considering there can't be any justification for changing it.

Having said that, I do have responses to various parts of your message and some points that I'd like to make.


No problem.


Something I'll probably just have to accept, as explained above... but it's never taken this long any time I've switched previously.


and

I'm obviously being given conflicting information... I currently have no idea whether w-on think that they still need to contact Tonik with readings or not, but I know that Tonik hadn't received them when I last queried it with them on Friday 13th.

I think this explains the reason behind the frustration. I've been told by e-on that everything's sorted and Tonik have everything they need, then had that confirmed by someone else, then later on someone else told me that e-on do actually need to contact Tonik but made it sound like it was regarding information other than meter readings...

I'd much rather be told "sorry, we forgotten to submit the reading to Tonik" if that's the case. As it is, I'm left guessing what's actually happening and coming to that conclusion anyway. The message I was sent via Twitter is too vague for me to think anything else - it just sounds like the detail was left out because it would conflict with what I'd been told previously.


I received the "Welcome to e-on" email on 16/10/2019 so I guess we are outside of that 42 days.

Hmm, 42 days is a very specific but seemingly arbitrary number... any idea if it was inspired by Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy? :rotfl:

If I were to do so then I'm not sure the switch out of e-on would go any better than the switch into e-on, especially considering that e-on don't seem to have all the details they need to get my account up and running and those details would be required for a new supplier to take over.

I will consider this option though, thanks!


Okay, I can understand that customer details have to be kept secure.

I wasn't asked for details on every interaction, as the advisor mentioned in the message I quoted.


This implies that there's a certain number of days that has to elapse without a message before the customer has to re-authenticate. That makes sense, otherwise it would be impossible to have a conversation.

What I don't understand is what's considered to be different when a conversation takes place over a week with one response a day vs picking up a conversation after a week/month/year gap. If someone's going to impersonate me over Twitter then it wouldn't matter how long it's been since I last contated you. That's why I said it seemed unnecessary.

The biggest reason that I was considering it totally un-necessary in this case was summed up in my last paragraph;


You mentioned that there's a much bigger list of details that can be requested than name, account number and date of birth. Given that's the case, I imagine that policy dictates that I shouldn't have been asked for the exact same details a second time, especially the very next time I was asked to authenticate. This along with the fact that the authentication request also informed the reader (me, in this case) exactly where to find the requested details was the main reason for my comment regarding the understanding of secutiry.

As I mentioned earlier, I had some things to say/points to make and have done so in this post. I'm not sure where I would actually have placed specific questions so just left it open. I would welcome your thoughts though Malc, please don't avoid responding on the basis that I haven't asked anything of you directly.

Hello SiM99 and thanks for your patience.

I'm glad I was able to help you understand what happens behind the scenes when you change supplier.

If you let us have meter readings, these will be logged and used once the account goes fully live. Sorry if you've already done this.

We check payment arrangements each quarter to make sure they're on track for as near as possible to a zero balance by the annual review. If not, we'll only make changes at the six month and annual reviews. At the other times, we'll let you know if we think a change is needed and leave it up to you to make any alterations.

There's an online tool to give you more control over the arrangement. This is the Direct Debit Manager and it lets you change your monthly payments to better suit different circumstances. This will be available once your account is live.

I suspect we've been waiting for the third party to verify the readings. Once done, they'll let us know and we'll be in touch with the losing supplier to confirm. The 42 days is the upper time limit all suppliers use before they start chasing readings. It's often earlier.

With our data protection, I should've been more detailed and made it clear that by every interaction I meant where sensitive data is involved. We have a list of details to confirm because some customers aren't comfortable with giving certain details. This gives them an option. Provided enough information is confirmed, they only need to answer those questions they're happy with.

Thanks again for your patience SiM99 and have a good Christmas.

Malc

SiM99

E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc wrote: »

With our data protection, I should've been more detailed and made it clear that by every interaction I meant where sensitive data is involved. We have a list of details to confirm because some customers aren't comfortable with giving certain details. This gives them an option. Provided enough information is confirmed, they only need to answer those questions they're happy with.

I think I was clear, but my point stands that this check is useless over a medium where there's a chat history.

If you would disagree with me then please explain your thoughts?

If you would not disagree with me then we agree that there's an issue that needs to be sorted out so can it be raised with the relevant people?


You had made me thin it wasn't entirely pointless by saying that there's a list of details that can be requested, but if staff are told they only need to request different details if the customer isn't "comfortable with giving certain details" then that's also pointless. No-one who's accessing an account wihtout the owner's knowledge would request to give other details if they obviously have the ones being asked for available in the chat history.

Former_E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc

SiM99 wrote: »

I think I was clear, but my point stands that this check is useless over a medium where there's a chat history.

If you would disagree with me then please explain your thoughts?

If you would not disagree with me then we agree that there's an issue that needs to be sorted out so can it be raised with the relevant people?


You had made me thin it wasn't entirely pointless by saying that there's a list of details that can be requested, but if staff are told they only need to request different details if the customer isn't "comfortable with giving certain details" then that's also pointless. No-one who's accessing an account wihtout the owner's knowledge would request to give other details if they obviously have the ones being asked for available in the chat history.

Hello SiM99 and a Happy New Year.

I've passed this up the food chain as the information I've given previously is consistent with current company policy. Our Data Protection Management people will review your comments to see if any changes to the policy are needed.

Many thanks for the feedback SiM99.

Malc