Eon - Poor_Payment_Processing - Premature issue of "Overdue Bill" reminder?

PennineAcute

So as I thought. No loss, no damage. Moaning for the sake of moaning. If that's your style, carry on.

Unless_And_Until

What ?
You would prefer your Utility accounts to be updated on a 5 -day rather than a three-hour cycle ? - which would enable synchronisation with the current on-line banking practice ?

That sort of smacks of the laissez-faire attitude of the "Dinosaurs".

Who are you trolling for ?

Surely modern life is about taking action to avoid nugatory work and maintain convenience i.e. reducing the junk from your E-mail box, minimising your contact list. Only by doing this does modern-life become feasible. Having to double-check whether a bill has been paid is nugatory work, or worse still, actually paying it twice because an accounts system isn't properly synchronised with the bill paying system, in my book is something to be avoided.

But, whatever takes your fancy at under - investment HQ

Unless_And_Until

Isn't "Making customers lives easier" the declared object of Smart Meters - of course, we all know its not, but that's what a laissez-faire monopolist would say, isn't it ?

(Just in case some reading this don't know, "Laissez-faire" is French for "Let 'em get on with it" i.e. we don't give a stuff).

brewerdave

Unless_And_Until wrote: »

(Just in case some reading this don't know, "Laissez-faire" is French for "Let 'em get on with it" i.e. we don't give a stuff).

Ahh - BoJo's motto makes an appearance!

Unless_And_Until

Is this part of the marketeer troll anti-bolshy customer weaponary ? Try to infer an unpopular political association ? Unfortunately, your interlocutore is a confirmed "None-of-the-above" merchant. Nil point there.

Trouble is, I'm just too long-in the tooth. I remember the 1980s, when some of these service providers, in their pre-amalgamation, grossed-up for City exploitation format, were still nationalised and where you could telephone a local electricity board customer accounts department, speak to a real person who was motivated to do their job by having been given some authority and responsibility and who, as a consequence, knew the company systems inside out, and could answer your query satisfactorily within 5 minutes.
Nowadays, if you've got a problem, you go on-line search the pre-assembled list of answered customer questions in the vain hope that the solution to your problem matches one of the pre-assembled answers and, if it doesn't, as is usually the case, then you're into at least another half-an hour to get resolution by speaking to someone in a remote, and possibly siloed, call-centre or on "Chat-service", who hasn't got anything but a surface knowledge of what's going-on and with, if you catch 'em on a bad day, hasn't interest in your problem/motivation to solve it to match and who is probably working for a commercial third party contractor to your supplier.

Trouble is , its all too reminiscent of the Hitler youth situation. Once a system with these lesser standards of Customer Service has been operating for 30 years, none of those new to customership will detect any problem - because that's the norm i.e. Nazism.

So the difference between the two systems is one minimises your total life-time time expenditure on domestic related niff-naff and trivia (Time that you will never get back) and the other maximises the service providers profit.

Classic example the other day. I had a problem with British Gas. Checked the pre-assembled on-line answers (Customer Service tokenism) and, of course, nothing fitted my issue. Opted to contact using the "Free" Chat-line as I didn't fancy the prospect of spending half-an hour at local rates on the phone. The "Chat-Line" didn't offer an agent up for 5 minutes, and then, because of his inexpertise the matter had to be referred to another for an answer. Total time lost 30 minutes for something which could have been resolved 40 years ago over the phone in 5 minutes or could have been undertaken for free when you were out shopping and passed a local electricity board shop in the high street.

And today, because people don't know any different i..e the difference between sh*t and shinola, they think and are encouraged to think (By some marketing trolls on this forum ?) that the sh*t service of the last 40 years is the norm -
In the fashion of the traditional pantomine repost, "Oh, no its not".

Former_E.ON_Company_Representative:_Malc

Unless_And_Until wrote: »

Eon issued me with an "Overdue bill" E-mail on 30/07/2019, 6 days after I'd requested payment on-line through my bank account at 19:11, 25/07/2019 (Thursday).

The bill was dated 11/07/2019. 14 day grace period advertised by EON in their T's & C's.

I queried why it had taken so long to update my account.

Eon claim they didn't receive my payment until 27/07/2019 (Saturday) and that they have a five-day payment processing/account update standard.

On my request, my bankers carried out a payment trace on this Faster Payment and advised me that Eon received the payment @ 07:42 on 26/07/2019 (Friday).

So why the "Overdue bill" reminder ?

They had 5 clear days to do the payment processing and if my bankers had complied with the Faster Payments Standard to which they're signed-up (Any payment request made 3 hours before 23:55 each day, gets paid the same day) then it would be 5 and a bit days.

To me, the concept of a five-day account updating delay is out-of-date as a reasonable performance standard, given that Eon will be interfacing with banking systems and the like operating at daily/3-hour delivery standard.

There seems to be a disconnect in these organisations between the standards that they expect customers to conform to with regard to submission of meter readings and bill payment and the standards of the service they provide the customer with on the accounts.

I suspect that they just can't be arsed to invest in modern data processing equipment and software - too busy paying record remuneration to CEOs and shareholders.

So much for the "Regulator" !

I'm contacting EON CEO and the Regulator.

Hello Unless_And_Until and welcome to the Forums.

As you say, unless customers have a specific plan like a Direct Debit, payment of a quarterly account is due within 14 days of us sending the bill.

Many thanks for your payment. As this was made on 26 July and the bill was dated 11 July, it was one day after our expected payment date. This will have automatically triggered the email you received. These emails are meant as a reminder and they include a note to ignore the message if payment has been made in the last seven days.

As above, reminder emails are automatically triggered by our system once a set date is passed. There's no advisor input at this point. This comes later if accounts remain outstanding.

The advice you were given is right. Payments show on accounts within 5 working days. We've a team looking at ways of improving this and other working practices to better suit the needs of our customers. I'm sending your comments to the manager of this team and thank you for this feedback.

Have you thought about setting up a Variable Direct Debit? This will take payment in full directly from your bank 14 days after the bill date. The actual collection date will be shown on the bill. This will take away the need for reminders and customers paying this way also benefit from lower prices.

Thanks again for the payment and your feedback Unless_And_Until.

Malc

PennineAcute

Unless_And_Until wrote: »

Trouble is , its all too reminiscent of the Hitler youth situation. Once a system with these lesser standards of Customer Service has been operating for 30 years, none of those new to customership will detect any problem - because that's the norm i.e. Nazism.

At last, Godwin's law. First time I have seen it on here.