Another Example of Spurious Eon Final Bill

[Deleted User]

ColinD1 said:

The industry standard is plus or minus 5 days. Perhaps you would know what exact time the transfer occurs, so I can avoid problems in the future? Some people do have lives to lead!
"Correct" in this context mean an answer hat
 No sensible estimate would give an answer that is nearly 1000 greater than the customers reading (which would be difficult to falsify as it can be checked against the Smart meter), which I am afraid I believed would do all this automatically without any customer intervention. I did wait for the second generation meter on the hope of better functionality.
I presume you are not responsible for this estimation process or customer service at Eon?
You seem very keen to have your questions answered, but you have not said how much you would loan to Eon? More than £5000?

Suppliers have to complete a transfer in 35 days from receipt of the application to switch ( this includes the 14 day cooling off period); however, most suppliers are signed up to 17 day switching AND the industry is moving towards one day switching (with the cooling off period taking place after the transfer).

The ‘problem’ with smart meter transfers is that the losing supplier loses access to smart data when the transfer is actioned, and the going supplier only gains access when it has applied verified security certificates to both meters. For security reasons, only one supplier has access at any given time.

I am not sure that attacking other posters helps when they are just trying to help. 

Reed_Richards

1000 kWh out in the reading, say 20p per kWh = £200.  Would I loan even £200 to Eon?  Not if I could help it; I would follow the very sensible advice given by @[Deleted User].  

ColinD1

I have tried to be accurate and truthful in my responses. As far as I can tell I have done nothing to precipitate this problem. I have contacted both parties, I have provided photographic evidence. I like to think of myself as inquisitive. There is a concept known as ground truth used in some fields. Here the truth is what the meter says. If someone says it was more than it reads now it is wrong, not an inaccurate estimate. If it is close it may be good enough, but not if the error is enormous (I believe the Industry number for close enough is 250 units). 
In very recent conversation with Green they said the problematic "reading" was provided from the data collector who they say is someone who performs routine meter checks and provide reads.
I am waiting an answer to whether they perform a sanity check and if the number is processed manually.

Does actioned mean the day of the transfer?
Green say because I have Smart2 meters, Eon should have billed me accurately according to the last confirmed smart read they received.

So who is this mysterious data collector, who at the moment appears to be the villain providing Green with incorrect information that Green appear to have sent on to Eon without performing a sanity check. 
It still leaves me with an inaccurate bill from  Eon which is too excessive to pay. I will check when the DD is due and see if there is any chance it will be resolved by then. Cancelling the DD and putting a payment in seems a fair solution if Eon remain intransigent.
I am not convinced whether I will ever discover if it is a fat finger or a process error but "the system" does not believe the customer caught in the foibles of their system.

Reed_Richards

Trouble is that if the customer is moving from one tariff to a different one then it is in their financial interest to lie about their meter reading.  If the new tariff is lower then the dishonest customer will give a reading that is lower than the true reading.  If the new tariff is higher then the dishonest customer will give a reading that is higher than the true one.  I'm sure @ColinD1 and the vast majority of switching customers are perfectly honest but manifestly "the system" is there to eliminate dishonesty.  Forumite @Gerry1 likes to refer to "The mysterious third party" and links to this web page that gives an explanation of "the system": https://help.so.energy/support/solutions/articles/7000046241 .  Presumably this is your "mysterious data collector".  I wonder if your own reading, although within the 5 day time frame, didn't reach this data.collector in time.

@ColinD1 now that you know that Eon and Green are using the same  (incorrect) information then you know that anything you pay in excess to Eon is money you won't have to pay to Green.  You'll lose out a bit if the Green tariff is better but it will be £10 or £20 presumably.  Green are misleading you or you have misinterpreted what they said;  Eon have absolutely no option but to remain "intransigent",  they have to use the final reading determined by "the system".  It's up to you to dispute the reading {via Green} if you wish to do so and I think @[Deleted User] outlined how to do this.

Edit:  I looked it up and it seems either Eon or Green could potentially raise an Agreed Read Dispute but it's more in the interest of Green than of Eon to do so and Green seem to be giving you better customer service also.            

Reed_Richards

Reading this might help: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5762891/final-electricity-meter-reading-dispute/p1

It's about a similar situation - not as bad- with different people giving the advice.

[Deleted User]

There is no mysterious third-party. All suppliers use a data collector and have done, I believe, for over 70 years. Companies that provide this service include TMA; SMS; Morrisons Data; AES; Lowri Beck; National Grid Metering etc. In addition, to data collection many are meter installers/operators and providers of third-party smart metering support services.

These guys are necessary because all industry billing is done on half hour settlements. Your problem could be solved if Green took ownership of the problem as it is required to do. That said, I think that you may be expecting more of a supplier than they can give. Any ‘sanity check’ has to be done by a data collector which will have received the opening reading that you provided. Green will not able to access your meter until the the various processes are completed. This doesn’t happen immediately. If it did, then suppliers wouldn’t take weeks to set up a new electricity account.

If both suppliers have agreed on an opening reading, then overpaying your old supplier may work to your advantage if your new unit price is higher than your old one.

Reed_Richards

[Deleted User] said:

If both suppliers have agreed on an opening reading, then overpaying your old supplier may work to your advantage if your new unit price is higher than your old one.

By "agreed on" you mean not spontaneously raised an Agreed Reading Dispute?  Since the handover reading is provided by one of the independent companies you listed it, it's more a case of acquiescing to than agreeing upon, surely?

So now the OP has two options:

1. Overpay the old supplier and keep schtum if that offers a financial advantage.
2.  Ask Green to raise an ARD on the basis that now they can read the smart meter they can see the handover reading has not yet been reached.

[Deleted User]

Reed_Richards said:

Dolor said:

If both suppliers have agreed on an opening reading, then overpaying your old supplier may work to your advantage if your new unit price is higher than your old one.

By "agreed on" you mean not spontaneously raised an Agreed Reading Dispute?  Since the handover reading is provided by one of the independent companies you listed it, it's more a case of acquiescing to than agreeing upon, surely?

So now the OP has two options:

1. Overpay the old supplier and keep schtum if that offers a financial advantage.
2.  Ask Green to raise an ARD on the basis that now they can read the smart meter they can see the handover reading has not yet been reached.

Accept or agree: we are playing with words. The losing supplier has to accept the validated industry reading from the new supplier’s data collector or raise an Agreed Readings Dispute (hence my use of the word Agreed). It cannot just make up a closing reading.

In this situation, the only thing that Green has to do is make sure that E.oN has used the validated reading. If E.oN disagrees with it, then E.oN raises an ARD.

ColinD1

Thanks for the references and explanation.
Green are raising the dispute as required, this started a few days ago.
I became very confused trying to understand the explanation from Green as to how the data collector worked. 
I am on Smets2 meters so I would be unable to game the reading without being found out, even if I wanted to.
If the process ran as described, I know I would be better off to make an investment in paying for Units with Eon as the price is increasing with Green. But as the discrepancy is so large it would potentially cause problems in the future as someone said they found out to their cost earlier in this thread.

The process is flawed. But no company can be considered blameless if they seek to take money for more than is shown in the meter (when they are made aware of this). The data collector provides a service to the supplier, when they are providing erroneous data to the supplier this is the supplier 's problem not the customer .
From other threads I have seen intransigence seems the norm. A supplier chooses to enforce a  disputed bill, there is no one forcing them to do so. 
For me this is not a life-changing cost, but for others it could be and the amount could be even larger.

[Deleted User]

ColinD1 said:

Thanks for the references and explanation.
Green are raising the dispute as required, this started a few days ago.
I became very confused trying to understand the explanation from Green as to how the data collector worked. 
I am on Smets2 meters so I would be unable to game the reading without being found out, even if I wanted to.
If the process ran as described, I know I would be better off to make an investment in paying for Units with Eon as the price is increasing with Green. But as the discrepancy is so large it would potentially cause problems in the future as someone said they found out to their cost earlier in this thread.

The process is flawed. But no company can be considered blameless if they seek to take money for more than is shown in the meter (when they are made aware of this). The data collector provides a service to the supplier, when they are providing erroneous data to the supplier this is the supplier 's problem not the customer .
From other threads I have seen intransigence seems the norm. A supplier chooses to enforce a  disputed bill, there is no one forcing them to do so. 
For me this is not a life-changing cost, but for others it could be and the amount could be even larger.

You are a bit close to all of this. A supplier may ask you to pay the bill that has been issued pending the resolution of a dispute. Technically, there was no need for Green to raise an ARD as they are not disputing the opening reading: particularly, if it matches the reading that you provided.  Green will have a copy of the industry opening/closing reading notification that was sent to E.oN . The bad news is that ARDs can take up to 12 weeks to resolve (according to many supplier websites). Most suppliers will try to avoid an ARD; particularly, when a couple of phone calls will resolve the situation easily.