We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Energy Company Dispute - am i in the right?
Hi All,
I'm in the middle of a complaint with PFP Energy, and have had a decision from the Ombudsman that I'm not happy with, and have appealed. I wondered if anyone wanted to give your thoughts on if I'm in the right/wrong.
The fundamental complaint seems clear cut to me, and would affect many people. In fact, MSE staff may be interested in it. I'll keep it as brief as possible...
We were on a fixed tariff, dual fuel, until November 2018. It was a paperless billing account, and we always paid on time by direct debit.
In May 2019, I noticed our direct debit had shot up. With some digging, I realised we'd missed the expiry of the fixed tariff, had been switched onto a variable tariff, and they'd let us accumulate a debt without increasing the direct debit in-line with the tariff increase. If they'd have increased the direct debit in Nov 18, we'd have spotted it earlier. As it was, we'd unwittingly accrued a debt. This is an aside.
I was a little annoyed, because we're hot on switching energy, insurance etc for the best deals. I was sure I hadn't had an email about the tariff change. I searched my inbox, and found the email, but here's the thing, the subject line was:
"Don't miss out - our new exclusive fixed tariff ends soon"
I'd seen this as a marketing/sales email at the time, and disregarded it without reading it. It categorically does not refer to our existing tariff ending. The 'Don't miss out' implies it's related to something we don't already have, as does the word 'new'.
If my car or home insurance is ending, I receive a message with an unambiguous subject line along the lines of "Your insurance renewal" or similar.
"Well they sent an email, you didn't read it" you may think, but they have a duty to notify customers at the end of their fixed term, and there are lots of rules they have to follow to do this.
Standard Licensing Conditions
I hadn't heard of these before reading up, but there are standard conditions that suppliers have to follow, for all of our protection. You can find them here (my account can't link yet, remove the space):
https:// epr.ofgem.gov.uk/Content/Documents/Gas%20supply%20standard%20licence%20conditions%20consolidated%20-%20Current%20Version.pdf
To save you reading the whole thing, a couple of key paragraphs:
Paragraph 22C of SLC stipulates the licensee must act in accordance with paragraph 31I at the end of a fixed term contract.
Paragraph 31I in turn gives a whole host of conditions that a licensee must satisfy in their communication in advance of the end of the fixed term contract (dates, options available, financial implications and more, see 31I.2(b) page 247).
In particular, SLC 31I.5(a) on page 248 explicitly states that the contract change notice must be sent separately from any marketing material. This is where PFP's email falls foul of their licensing conditions in my view, as the subject line on the email to me is masquerading as a marketing email.
Ombudsman Decision
Fast forward a couple of months. PFP claim the communications are clear, I disputed it. It went to deadlock and the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman decision arrived yesterday, and they're siding with PFP, saying that our fixed term expiry was on our welcome letter and a couple of bills.
I've appealed on the basis that the Ombudsman should disregard the welcome letter and bills. The crux of the dispute is the 'end of fixed term' communication letter in line with the Standard Licensing Conditions. Namely, that the subject line is confusing the communication with marketing material.
If they disregard the SLC point on this, what is the point of the SLC in the first place? The whole point of SLC 31I.5(a) is to make sure the communication is unambiguous.
If the subject line of the email is irrelevant, what is to stop an energy company sending an 'end of fixed term' communication, with a subject line of 'Terms and Conditions Change' or 'GDPR Changes', neither of which would be read by 99% of customers? Multiple the number of affected customers up, and the increase in tariffs before their customers notice, and it's a nice little earner for an energy company.
I work in the IT industry, and I consider myself to be pretty astute with these kind of things. What hope does someone vulnerable, less IT-literate, less persistent have?
What are your thoughts? If the appeal is declined, is it worth taking further? Any advice gratefully received, I'm starting to feel like I'm going crazy, as it seems pretty clear cut to me.
I'm in the middle of a complaint with PFP Energy, and have had a decision from the Ombudsman that I'm not happy with, and have appealed. I wondered if anyone wanted to give your thoughts on if I'm in the right/wrong.
The fundamental complaint seems clear cut to me, and would affect many people. In fact, MSE staff may be interested in it. I'll keep it as brief as possible...
We were on a fixed tariff, dual fuel, until November 2018. It was a paperless billing account, and we always paid on time by direct debit.
In May 2019, I noticed our direct debit had shot up. With some digging, I realised we'd missed the expiry of the fixed tariff, had been switched onto a variable tariff, and they'd let us accumulate a debt without increasing the direct debit in-line with the tariff increase. If they'd have increased the direct debit in Nov 18, we'd have spotted it earlier. As it was, we'd unwittingly accrued a debt. This is an aside.
I was a little annoyed, because we're hot on switching energy, insurance etc for the best deals. I was sure I hadn't had an email about the tariff change. I searched my inbox, and found the email, but here's the thing, the subject line was:
"Don't miss out - our new exclusive fixed tariff ends soon"
I'd seen this as a marketing/sales email at the time, and disregarded it without reading it. It categorically does not refer to our existing tariff ending. The 'Don't miss out' implies it's related to something we don't already have, as does the word 'new'.
If my car or home insurance is ending, I receive a message with an unambiguous subject line along the lines of "Your insurance renewal" or similar.
"Well they sent an email, you didn't read it" you may think, but they have a duty to notify customers at the end of their fixed term, and there are lots of rules they have to follow to do this.
Standard Licensing Conditions
I hadn't heard of these before reading up, but there are standard conditions that suppliers have to follow, for all of our protection. You can find them here (my account can't link yet, remove the space):
https:// epr.ofgem.gov.uk/Content/Documents/Gas%20supply%20standard%20licence%20conditions%20consolidated%20-%20Current%20Version.pdf
To save you reading the whole thing, a couple of key paragraphs:
Paragraph 22C of SLC stipulates the licensee must act in accordance with paragraph 31I at the end of a fixed term contract.
Paragraph 31I in turn gives a whole host of conditions that a licensee must satisfy in their communication in advance of the end of the fixed term contract (dates, options available, financial implications and more, see 31I.2(b) page 247).
In particular, SLC 31I.5(a) on page 248 explicitly states that the contract change notice must be sent separately from any marketing material. This is where PFP's email falls foul of their licensing conditions in my view, as the subject line on the email to me is masquerading as a marketing email.
Ombudsman Decision
Fast forward a couple of months. PFP claim the communications are clear, I disputed it. It went to deadlock and the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman decision arrived yesterday, and they're siding with PFP, saying that our fixed term expiry was on our welcome letter and a couple of bills.
I've appealed on the basis that the Ombudsman should disregard the welcome letter and bills. The crux of the dispute is the 'end of fixed term' communication letter in line with the Standard Licensing Conditions. Namely, that the subject line is confusing the communication with marketing material.
If they disregard the SLC point on this, what is the point of the SLC in the first place? The whole point of SLC 31I.5(a) is to make sure the communication is unambiguous.
If the subject line of the email is irrelevant, what is to stop an energy company sending an 'end of fixed term' communication, with a subject line of 'Terms and Conditions Change' or 'GDPR Changes', neither of which would be read by 99% of customers? Multiple the number of affected customers up, and the increase in tariffs before their customers notice, and it's a nice little earner for an energy company.
I work in the IT industry, and I consider myself to be pretty astute with these kind of things. What hope does someone vulnerable, less IT-literate, less persistent have?
What are your thoughts? If the appeal is declined, is it worth taking further? Any advice gratefully received, I'm starting to feel like I'm going crazy, as it seems pretty clear cut to me.
0
Comments
-
TL;DR
But if you are unhappy with the response of the supplier, and that subsequent response of the ombudman in your complaint against the supplier, you can always ask a judge to take a view if you think you can persuade him/her otherwise.
(in which case the ombudsman will close your complaint, and the supplier will not be obligated to do anything whether it was their own proposed resolution, or that the ombudsman proposed)
But expect the fact the supplier does not agree with your view, and that the independant ombudsman also found against you, to be disclosed to the court.
It may be that in your view, the decisions made to date are incorrect, but in any dispute, there are always at least 2 differing sides to the same story..0 -
Are you right no .
Your tariff expired Nov 2018 but you did nothing about it .0 -
You did take your eye of the boil - several times - for all that you say you are hot on switching.
Did you ever look at your bills - mine give me the tariff end date ? Was something similar on the Oct 18 bill ?
Did you look at your Dec 18 bill and not note that it had different unit rates ?
Did you not look at your bank statement between Nov 18 and May 19 amd see the different DD rates ?
and what about your own records - my spreadsheet has details of the end date on it.
No sympathy - move onNever pay on an estimated bill. Always read and understand your bill0 -
Are you right no .
Your tariff expired Nov 2018 but you did nothing about it .
I appreciate your response, but may I ask:
1) Do you think the Standard Conditions of License don't apply to them? Or
2) An email subject line is irrelevant, Or
3) An email subject line of "Don't miss out - our new exclusive fixed tariff ends soon" is sufficiently clear that it's about a fixed tariff coming to an end, and could not be confused with marketing material0 -
No sympathy - move on
Not looking for sympathy, just agreement that PFP breached their Standard Licensing Conditions.Did you ever look at your bills
Not really. I pay attention to if we're in credit or debit, but rarely open a bill to read unit rates. Does anyone?Did you not look at your bank statement between Nov 18 and May 19 amd see the different DD rates ?
The DD didn't change until May, when we noticed and looked into the matter and realised we'd been dropped onto a Variable rate.
I thought the MSE contributors would be aghast at an energy company not sticking to their licensing conditions. Apparently not, nothing to see here then...0 -
Not really. I pay attention to if we're in credit or debit, but rarely open a bill to read unit rates. Does anyone?
If you ordered some goods, when they arrived, would you open them to check that all was in order? Would you check that you received what you paid for and were charged correctly?0 -
PennineAcute wrote: »If you ordered some goods, when they arrived, would you open them to check that all was in order? Would you check that you received what you paid for and were charged correctly?
Of course, but you don't expect your tariff to change. Similarly when a Home Insurance renewal letter/email comes through, that's usually the trigger to look for a better deal. I'm confident 99.9% of the population don't check the unit rates on their energy bills, just in case they've been changed.
Why do you think the Standard Licensing Condition, requiring energy companies to notify customers of a tariff change, exists. This puts the onus on the energy company, no?0 -
Of course, but you don't expect your tariff to change. Similarly when a Home Insurance renewal letter/email comes through, that's usually the trigger to look for a better deal. I'm confident 99.9% of the population don't check the unit rates on their energy bills, just in case they've been changed.
Why do you think the Standard Licensing Condition, requiring energy companies to notify customers of a tariff change, exists. This puts the onus on the energy company, no?
That bit is on yout bill. It is nothing to do with emails. (unless they email you the bill as a pdf, in which case it is still in the bill not the email.
Pay more attention is the key here. And do not complain and just put up the price for everyone. And I say that as someone who has missed dates for various things myself.0 -
>Of course, but you don't expect your tariff to change>
Thats plain silly you know full well that its a fixed contract for xx months . Of course your tariff will change .
You made a mistake and both the supplier and Ombudsman agree . 99.97 Of forum member will disagree with you .
We all know what comes next when the forum does not agree with a poster.0 -
I'm genuinely shocked that four posters are siding with the energy company. I'm often wrong (ask my wife), but I'm of the opinion that this is so clear cut, I was going to telephone MSE to see if they wanted to do a story about it.
You have an energy company that has to abide by Standard Licensing Conditions. The conditions are clear that an energy company needs to send a notice that a fixed term tariff is changing. It's also clear that the information must not be confused with marketing material.
The communication they sent to me had a subject line that looks like marketing material.
The onus to send a communication isn't up for debate. Do you think the subject line of "Don't miss out - our new exclusive fixed tariff ends soon" is clear enough?
Please help me out, I'm baffled, it's black and white to me.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards