Energy Company Dispute - am i in the right?

FelineFunk

Gerry1 wrote: »

PFP are a very dodgy company: they give fake quotations for Economy 7. In my case they quote £436.80 but I would be charged a whopping £506.82 ! This disadvantages their honest competitors who tell the truth.

Although they promise a 'quotation' (which by definition has to be for an exact amount, NOT a mere estimate), they admit that they will assume you use 55% at night. WHY??

So if you use less than 55% at night, their so-called 'quotation' will just turn out to be a pack of lies.

Ofgem has known about this scam for three years and admit it's wrong but, sadly and predictably, has done absolutely nothing about it.

Some may consider some MSE posters are 'dodgy' too

The quick quote on their website clearly states that it is based on a 55% low rate usage, but that the bill will actually be based upon your actual usage, so by definition it sounds like it is not a fixed, exact amount )
And they do provide details of the unit charges and daily standing charges I often read many here like so much to study (perhaps to allow them to add to their own spreadsheet?)

Is there anyone still offering a tariff where the price they quote is the exact price you will pay? (there used to be the odd supplier with such a tariff, but it wasn't cheap from what I remember)

Anyway, presumably you would have chosen this supplier as they were fisrt indicated to you by a comparison site, or indeed the MSE Cheap Energy Club that I know you are a fan of, Gerry1, and they would have calculated the cost based on the assumed split of day/night usage you would have provided.

But never allow the facts to get in the way of a good ol' rant, eh? :cool:

Gerry1

Obviously the bill will vary if the usage does not match the quoted consumption, I've never disputed that

But there is no point in giving a misleading 'detailed quotation' if the price charged for that amount would be far higher in reality. Why should they assume I use more at night than I do?

It's exactly the same as a shelf edge label in a supermarket quoting one price and the checkout charging you a higher price, it's Illegal and misleading.

Other suppliers ask for day and night readings and do give exact and accurate annual costs.

btr30

A lot of products offer cheaper locked in rate until the agreed contract periods have expired (mobile phones, broadband, TV Services, energy e.g.) and the companies rely on inertia from the consumer thereafter to then charge an increased rate.
I have always considered it to be the consumers responsibility to be aware when their contract period ends, and then make whatever arrangements they want to continue service or move provider.

tk47

JJ_Egan wrote: »

We all know what comes next when the forum does not agree with a poster.

Fotunately the OP has already been quoted in full in post#15

dusty123

tk47 wrote: »

Fotunately the OP has already been quoted in full in post#15

What relevance does that have to the original post, or indeed JJ Egan's post?

This place is madness. From memory, these forums were super-helpful. People who knew their stuff, championing the cause of the consumer.

My experience today has been disappointing - people (with a couple of exceptions) trying to patronise and belittle, or get 'one-up' on previous posters.

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing, saying "you know what, I'd always read every email. They're supposed to adhere to their licensing conditions, but don't, and don't get pulled up about it etc etc. best to just accept the decision". Instead the atmosphere is really critical - "you're not that hot or astute" or "this is what's coming when you disagree with the forum".

Perhaps the helpful people haven't posted, and I'm doing you all a disservice, who knows.

I'll leave my account and posts live in case someone else has the same experience, but I won't be posting again. All the best.

rb10

dusty123 wrote: »

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.

To me, this seems like a clear breach of the license conditions.

Whilst it is true that you'll have known the expiry date in advance, that's somewhat missing the point. The rules say that energy companies have to provide a clear and separate notification of the expiry of a fixed term, and so they have to comply. Whilst the rule is arguably unnecessary (and definitely very consumer-friendly) it is part of the rulebook.

From what you have posted, the Ombudsman don't seem to have fully understood - putting it solely on a welcome letter and bills isn't enough to meet the requirement, so I would be challenging their decision there. You shouldn't be disadvantaged where an energy supplier has failed to meet their requirements (even if you could have avoided it).

Gerry1

btr30 wrote: »

A lot of products offer cheaper locked in rate until the agreed contract periods have expired (mobile phones, broadband, TV Services, energy e.g.) and the companies rely on inertia from the consumer thereafter to then charge an increased rate.
I have always considered it to be the consumers responsibility to be aware when their contract period ends, and then make whatever arrangements they want to continue service or move provider.

Ofcom certainly doesn't agree with you ! See Section 6.

"Broadband, pay-TV, mobile phone and landline customers must be told when their contracts are about to end and be informed of their providers' best alternative deals, under new rules."

Takmon

dusty123 wrote: »

@Takmon humour me, let's take it a question at a time

Do you acknowledge that a licensing condition exists, stating Energy Providers must notify customers that a fixed tariff is coming to an end?

Yes and they did tell you but you chose not to read the email. Which is similar to seeing a letter from your energy company but not opening it because from how the envelope looks it probably is just marketing. Personally i think that's silly but then i have been in peoples houses and they have piles of paperwork and unopened letters in random places such as on shelves and on the coffee table, so i assume your one of those kinds of people.

I do completely understand why you want to take the conversation down that line of thinking but personally i prefer to tell people simple ways they can improve their admin skills and avoid these situations completely.

There are so many situations in life where companies and people are supposed to behave in a particular way but don't so it's always best to protect yourself from this and not rely 100% on them when you don't have too.

Let's say your driving a car on a main road and your coming up to a junction that joins this road. You see a car coming along the side road and from their speed they look like they won't be stopping at the junction.
So do you just carry on and ignore the car because the law says they have to give way to you so they must stop and if they crash into you then they will be at fault.
or do you prepare to brake because even though you shouldn't have too it's better to avoid a crash even if it won't be your fault?

I know what most people would do, but just have a think about it.

Joyful

I agree with others. The company has met their legal obligation. They gave you all the information on your tariff when you signed up. I do not expect a reminder when mine ends as I check my bills online. Seeing what credit you are in is not checking that you are correctly billed, or what tariff you are on. Like others, I often add a note in my diary for things but for my energy, I don't need to as I check it monthly.

mac.d

Putting the points about dates in your welcome emails and dates showing on bills aside.

You haven't disclosed what the email they sent you actually stated. I presume that since you belatedly realised this was their email about your fixed tariff ending, despite the slightly ambiguous title, it did actually state in the body of the email that your fixed tariff was ending and you had to act now?

So your only argument is that the subject of the email wasn't clear. Which is a fair point, but not something that is a clear breach of them failing to notify you. I get your point that they could label these emails more generically and even more people would fail to read them, but you are signing up for an online, paper-free account, so don't you think there has to be some onus on you to accept some responsibility to read any emails they send you?