MSE News: Martin Lewis: Why your energy bill might be going up by MORE than 54%

Thrugelmir

MattMattMattUK said:

 if we had followed the French example and built a large number of nuclear power stations we would not be reliant on global energy supplies in the same way (the French had their electricity bills increase by 4% since this started and gas is rarely used in homes). 

EDF is being bailed out by the French Government. There's no simplistic answer to an extremely complex issue. As an aside the output from the nuclear reactors has fallen 28% since 2015. 

Ultrasonic

k_man said:

Sorry, I need to include 😉 more 

I meant maybe @RUBLAST was gob smacked by the low % rise of only 50%...

I missed it wasn't the person I asked who replied!

polymaff

Ultrasonic said:

OK, the 54% is an average. Some are seeing increases of much more the than 54%, and some will see less.

I'm afraid that it isn't.  The figure of 54% is notional - based upon a model.  The figure is then gamed by the energy suppliers to set the parameters for each tariff.

MWT

polymaff said:

Ultrasonic said:

OK, the 54% is an average. Some are seeing increases of much more the than 54%, and some will see less.

I'm afraid that it isn't.  The figure of 54% is notional - based upon a model.  The figure is then gamed by the energy suppliers to set the parameters for each tariff.

The only scope for 'gaming' is with the E7 tariffs, for the rest it is pretty much universally standing charge to the max and kWh charge maxed out after that.

A couple of 'loyalty' exceptions maybe but that is it.

Ultrasonic

polymaff said:

Ultrasonic said:

OK, the 54% is an average. Some are seeing increases of much more the than 54%, and some will see less.

I'm afraid that it isn't.  The figure of 54% is notional - based upon a model.  The figure is then gamed by the energy suppliers to set the parameters for each tariff.

What I wrote is correct but what you're getting into is what the average I referred to is of.

There is no 'gaming' going on here as far as I'm concerned.

polymaff

MWT:  You still haven't got it.  All parameters can be gamed by the energy suppliers - and have been.

Ultras: So what is "the average I referred to is of."?

QrizB

polymaff said:

MWT:  You still haven't got it.  All parameters can be gamed by the energy suppliers - and have been.

Specific examples, please, of how suppliers can game the Ofgem cap. Otherwise you're just spreading FUD.

polymaff

1. kWh charges:  The assumed ratio in the OFGEM model is four of gas to one of electricity.  The retailers don't have to conform to that model's ratio and so can get more money out of those with a different ratio by differential rises.

2. Standing charges: Higher standing charges are a good way of bolstering cash flow during the months April to October.

etc., etc..

QrizB

polymaff said:

1. kWh charges:  The assumed ratio in the OFGEM model is four of gas to one of electricity.  The retailers don't have to conform to that model's ratio and so can get more money out of those with a different ratio by differential rises.

The caps apply to gas and electricity independently.

2. Standing charges: Higher standing charges are a good way of bolstering cash flow during the months April to October.

The standing charge is capped separately from the total bill.

etc., etc..

Go on?

polymaff

"suppliers can charge less SC and then bump their kWh rates up proportionately"

Who wrote that?

Enough.