Question about backbilling?

[Deleted User]

I know that an energy supplier can’t seek additional payment for unbilled energy used more than 12 months prior to the error being detected and a corrected bill being issued.

But what if the supplier has been using an incorrect meter number and reading for the billing, and still hasn't got a correct meter reading even though the correct meter is now shown on the bill?

The right meter number is now shown but using the reading from the wrong meter.

They have never had the right meter number and reading.

Streaky_Bacon

[quote=[Deleted User];discussion/6097257]
But what if the supplier has been using an incorrect meter number and reading for the billing, and still hasn't got a correct meter reading even though the correct meter is now shown on the bill?

The right meter number is now shown but using the reading from the wrong meter.

They have never had the right meter number and reading.[/QUOTE]

If the error is not the consumer's fault and they haven't acted obstructively or attempted to steal energy, the back billing rules will still apply.

With regards to back billing, the consumer is under no obligation to submit readings or verify the supplier's readings or resolve issue with meter numbering.

tk47

[quote=[Deleted User];discussion/6097257]I know that an energy supplier can’t seek additional payment for unbilled energy used more than 12 months prior to the error being detected and a corrected bill being issued.

But what if the supplier has been using an incorrect meter number and reading for the billing, and still hasn't got a correct meter reading even though the correct meter is now shown on the bill?

The right meter number is now shown but using the reading from the wrong meter.

They have never had the right meter number and reading.[/QUOTE]


Your recent threads concerning your issues over mixed meter readings can be located here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6013909/energy-supplier-billing-wrong-address-how-do-i-stop-them
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6081018/track-and-trace-what-exactly-do-they-do
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6095309/who-is-responsible-for-population-ecoes-for-mpan-and-msn

[Deleted User]

Streaky_Bacon wrote: »

If the error is not the consumer's fault and they haven't acted obstructively or attempted to steal energy, the back billing rules will still apply.

With regards to back billing, the consumer is under no obligation to submit readings or verify the supplier's readings or resolve issue with meter numbering.

So the 12 month backbilling will start from the first correct reading from the correct meter, but since they have no record of any previous reading, how are they going to actually arrive at the correct bill amount?

And it took them 10 months to send an engineer after we requested one.

Streaky_Bacon

[quote=[Deleted User];76784025]So the 12 month backbilling will start from the first correct reading from the correct meter, but since they have no record of any previous reading, how are they going to actually arrive at the correct bill amount?
[/QUOTE]

Well the principle is that you can't be billed for any energy used over 12 months ago.

So they will have to come up with some method calculation which takes that into account.

This could include asking for readings over a period of time and then applying a formula to work backwards for 12 months.

Either you'll agree with that method of calculation and pay it, or you'll challenge it, via the usual route.

Is it possible that a meter reader may have taken readings from the correct meter, either within the last 12 months, or before, but those readings have not been applied to the account? Or has the correct meter definitely never been read before? I ask because the meter readings could be floating around in a database somewhere, and may resurface.

[quote=[Deleted User];76784025]
The right meter number is now shown but using the reading from the wrong meter.
[/QUOTE]

If the meters are in the same location, and you have access, then it may be a good idea to take a picture/video showing the two meters, as evidence for the future that the current reading was taken from the wrong meter. Which may be to your advantage in the future.

[Deleted User]

Streaky_Bacon wrote: »

Well the principle is that you can't be billed for any energy used over 12 months ago.

So they will have to come up with some method calculation which takes that into account.

This could include asking for readings over a period of time and then applying a formula to work backwards for 12 months.

Either you'll agree with that method of calculation and pay it, or you'll challenge it, via the usual route.

Is it possible that a meter reader may have taken readings from the correct meter, either within the last 12 months, or before, but those readings have not been applied to the account? Or has the correct meter definitely never been read before? I ask because the meter readings could be floating around in a database somewhere, and may resurface.



If the meters are in the same location, and you have access, then it may be a good idea to take a picture/video showing the two meters, as evidence for the future that the current reading was taken from the wrong meter. Which may be to your advantage in the future.

This is all down to a long saga over who actually supplies the electricity as a switch was made 10 years ago, but due to a corrupt ECOES database another energy supplier are now saying that the switch never happened and that they are the supplier, but due to the database all of their readings are from a meter that supplies another flat. So no, they definitely have not taken a reading, ever.

There are multiple MPAN's/MSN's all mixed up with the database showing two meters supplying one flat, so the flats have two meters against them, even though there are the same number of meters as flats.

It's a nightmare.

[Deleted User]

OK, so trying to sort this out in my head.

The original supplier did not ensure that ECOES was correct so the property was linked to an incorrect meter back in 2008 when newly built and occupied. (Plot numbers used for ECOES, not updated when the Flat numbers were not the same as the Plot numbers).

A switch to another supplier was made in 2010, the original supplier stopped billing the property, and the new supplier started billing the property. So I thought all was well.

Remember that ECOES is still wrong at this point.

Then 7 years later the original supplier started sending bills in Dec 2017 and were told that they were not the supplier and the meter number quoted did not supply the property. (This was triggered by a "Change of Tenancy" actually for the flat the meter supplied that they have been using on the bills, not mine)

This carried on and on until the Ombudsman was involved from June 2019 to January 2020.

The original supplier whose fault it was that ECOES was corrupt then updated ECOES to show the correct meter in Sept 2019, halfway through the Ombudsman process.

His first decision was in my favour in November, but inexplicably changed it because the original supplier then said after their track and trace in January 2020 the correct meter was now on ECOES and agreed with their track and trace. I don't understand this at all because I'd told everybody from day one what my correct meter number was.

The original supplier was requested nearly a year ago to come look at the meters, but didn't until January 2020. They have never been denied access.

All of the bills from Dec 2017 to Oct 2019 showed the incorrect meter number and readings from the incorrect meter on the bills. Then the bill in Oct 2019 showed that they used the final reading from the wrong meter to use as the starting reading for the right meter.

The total debt is based on those readings from the wrong meter from Dec 2017, which supplies another flat.

They have never sent a bill with readings from the correct meter that supplies my flat.

So how do I stand with regards to back billing?

And how do I stand with stopping the debt collection activity because the amount of alleged debt is in dispute because they have no idea of my actual use, (which is about 50% of the alleged debt and can be proven with bills from whom I consider to be my supplier).

Streaky_Bacon

So

1) The meter number was wrong in the database
2) You started an ombudsman complaint on the basis that the old bills were for the wrong meter
3) The database was updated with the correct number
4) The ombudsman decided that, because the number was correct now, the old bills were somehow valid

Is the above roughly correct?

If the bills are based on readings from the wrong meter, then they obviously haven't billed you correctly.

Was your complaint to the ombudsman specifically about back billing, or just that the bills were unenforceable because they were for the wrong meter?

Either way the decision appears to be obviously wrong and you should follow the appeal process.

Write to the supplier and debt collector, telling them that the debt is denied, and that you are appealing the ombudsman's decision and demand that they stop any collection activity until the appeal is done.

[Deleted User]

The ombudsman complaint was that they were not my supplier, but he decided that they were.

So the complaint was that because they were responsible for the original ECOES being wrong, and that the original switch was accepted by the original supplier the switch should stand, but he didn't agree.

Actual amount of alleged debt was never discussed.

Streaky_Bacon

The important issue is not really one of back billing, or who the supplier is, or whether the switch is valid, it is that you have been sent a bill for the meter of a different property.

You are clearly not liable for energy used at a different property.

If the database is now correct, start a new complaint to the supplier and debt collector saying.

1) They have sent you a bill for the meter of a different property
2) You understand that the database has now been updated to reflect the correct meter
3) That you require them to review the old bills in light of the database change and confirm that you are not liable

With regards to back billing, you could just wait until they sort out the meter reads, and finally send you a bill based upon real readings.

Alternatively, you could include in your complaint a current reading and demand that they base any future billing on that opening read.

[Deleted User]

Streaky_Bacon wrote: »

The important issue is not really one of back billing, or who the supplier is, or whether the switch is valid, it is that you have been sent a bill for the meter of a different property.

You are clearly not liable for energy used at a different property.

If the database is now correct, start a new complaint to the supplier and debt collector saying.

1) They have sent you a bill for the meter of a different property
2) You understand that the database has now been updated to reflect the correct meter
3) That you require them to review the old bills in light of the database change and confirm that you are not liable

With regards to back billing, you could just wait until they sort out the meter reads, and finally send you a bill based upon real readings.

Alternatively, you could include in your complaint a current reading and demand that they base any future billing on that opening read.

Thank you for the advice, I will raise another complaint about using the wrong meter readings.

What would be the benefit of letting them know that I have appealed the Ombudsman's decision? That I could ask for all debt collection to be stopped?

The Ombudsman told them to stop all debt collection activity during the process before the final decision, didn't stop them though, still got one a week. If the Ombudsman can't stop them and has no powers to enforce his decision, what chance have I got?

For them to use actual meter readings as a basis to work out an estimate that means I would actually have to stay with them, which I don't, not for a day longer than I have to.

I know how much I paid my supplier over the same period, so would I be able to use this to tell them what I would agree was the alleged debt?

I'd actually pay this to get them off my back and get that amount refunded from my real supplier, on the condition that no further demands for energy supply were received and that they updated ECOES to show my real supplier as the supplier within 2 days of payment, or something like that.