Octopus hikes estimated annual usage way above actual usage

Ultrasonic

bristolleedsfan said:

Ultrasonic said:

rhedyn said:

Ultrasonic said:

rhedyn said:

They are, however, preventing me from modifying the amount without their intervention and approval, and I don't want them to be able to do that in future, even accidentally.

I think that's unreasonable personally. Any direct debit amount needs to ultimately be agreed by both parties, and I wouldn't expect any supplier to allow customers to just pick any number they fancy.

I would agree with you *if* Octopus were offering a discount, but they are not.  They have presented DD as simply an optional convenience to the customer, not as a condition of tariff.  Since it is optional and has no bearing on pricing, what is there to agree to?  If I am completely free to set the amount to zero, why should I not be free to set it to anything I want?

As far as I'm concerned DD payments are the industry standard not something Octopus needs to somehow pitch to customers. I don't think it would be reasonable to expect to be able to unilaterally set the payment to zero with any supplier.

I set my Octopus Energy direct debit to £1 a month years ago, is that ok with you ???????

Obviously. You're misinterpreting what I've written. There is a distinction between reasonable expectations (what I said) and concessions that companies may offer to attract or keep customers (where they can choose to do whatever they wish).

rhedyn

Octopus responded, direct debit cancelled (they did offer variable direct debit but I declined), all is well and I will pay manually going forward.  I told them that I felt they had gone back on their promise that I would always be in control of my direct debit amount and that left me with a bad feeling about it, so I would rather pay manually.  They did not argue, and did not comment or explain, just removed the direct debit as I asked.  So fair enough.

MattMattMattUK

rhedyn said:

Octopus responded, direct debit cancelled (they did offer variable direct debit but I declined), all is well and I will pay manually going forward.  I told them that I felt they had gone back on their promise that I would always be in control of my direct debit amount and that left me with a bad feeling about it, so I would rather pay manually.  They did not argue, and did not comment or explain, just removed the direct debit as I asked.  So fair enough.

Just be aware that you will pay more because of this, rates are higher for non-Direct Debit tariffs. 

MWT

MattMattMattUK said:

rhedyn said:

Octopus responded, direct debit cancelled (they did offer variable direct debit but I declined), all is well and I will pay manually going forward.  I told them that I felt they had gone back on their promise that I would always be in control of my direct debit amount and that left me with a bad feeling about it, so I would rather pay manually.  They did not argue, and did not comment or explain, just removed the direct debit as I asked.  So fair enough.

Just be aware that you will pay more because of this, rates are higher for non-Direct Debit tariffs. 

Not with Octopus...

rhedyn

MattMattMattUK said:

rhedyn said:

Octopus responded, direct debit cancelled (they did offer variable direct debit but I declined), all is well and I will pay manually going forward.  I told them that I felt they had gone back on their promise that I would always be in control of my direct debit amount and that left me with a bad feeling about it, so I would rather pay manually.  They did not argue, and did not comment or explain, just removed the direct debit as I asked.  So fair enough.

Just be aware that you will pay more because of this, rates are higher for non-Direct Debit tariffs. 

This is not true for Octopus.

Chrysalis

Dolor said:

NINJA59 said:

Surely just more of a reason why energy providers should have client accounts and funds held separately to save such nonsense.

If you genuinely believe that suppliers should hold consumer credits in some form of escrow then expect to pay even higher prices than is the case today. Suppliers are required to pay their wholesalers in advance of supply. If this money doesn’t come out of existing cashflow - which includes consumer credit balances - then the supplier would have to borrow. Given the current rate of inflation, and the state of the domestic energy market, then I doubt that risk averse bankers are going to offer a cheap loan - particularly, to smaller/newer suppliers. 

Rather than paying in arrears, arguably suppliers should be estimating a monthly cost going forward and then requiring this variable monthly payment in advance of supply. You don’t pay for the fuel for your car after you have used it, so why should suppliers continue to allow consumers to pay in arrears?

Fuel is paid in arrears

You pay for it after you take it out of the pump.

In advance would be paying before you can use the pump.

As has been pointed out in at least two posts, historically on all credit accounts the energy providers took payments in arrears, not only in arrears but also quarterly.  They manged then so they can manage now.

Nearly all big bulk b2b is conducted in arrears as well.

The energy industry is just odd, its billing is very non standard, I cannot think of any other sector where a metered service on credit accounts is billed in fixed amounts ahead of time, also if b2b really is in advance thats odd as well.  You might get backdated billing, but for metered billing its billed after consumption.  Of course non credit accounts such as PAYG phones yes you pay ahead of time, the equivalent in the energy industry is prepay meters.

MWT

Chrysalis said:

As has been pointed out in at least two posts, historically on all credit accounts the energy providers took payments in arrears, not only in arrears but also quarterly.  They manged then so they can manage now.

Of course they could do it again, but only if you are prepared to forget fixed tariffs, and accept even higher prices...

Personally I'm happy to pay by DD in advance in exchange for the fixed price tariffs...

Chrysalis

Spies said:

I moved to Octopus when my provider went SoLR, my billing is that my account goes negative and they take the exact amount to bring it back to zero each month, I'm on a smart meter. 

Is that not an option for you? 

Thats variable Anyone with a credit account should qualify, they just dont openly advertise it.

Chrysalis

Dolor said:

Chrysalis said:

I have seen a crap ton of reports of Octopus updating direct debits to way above annual usage for previous year.  They seem to be deliberately trying to raise cashflow by having as many people as possible with credit balances.

If you catch them doing, I would consider switching to variable direct debit which is paid in arrears not up front.

(To clarify above as I know some will think I am been confused, I mean they are increasing the direct debits much more than the actual cost rise, so e.g. if previously using 1000 units year, and billed at 10p unit, then increase to 20p unit (plus extra standing fees), instead of just increasing based on tariff they also act as if you using double electric.  An example is one guy who had £85 month increased to £415 month, and that account is in credit with actual not estimated readings).

Complete rubbish. Octopus, based on my 4 years as a customer, goes out of its way to ensure that when things go wrong the customer is not disadvantaged. For example, when my smart meter stopped recording usage for 3 months after a firmware update, I wasn’t charged for any gas used during the period of the failure. Octopus has no reason to inflate consumer direct debits as it is probably one of best funded new suppliers in the sector. Indeed, it now makes more money from the sale and lease of its billing platform than it does from domestic energy sales. FWiW, because I built up 3 month’s worth of credit for the stopped meter, my DD payment was set at a £1 for 6 months. I was able to do this via the Octopus App.

For reference in October I had a credit balance of £930, it went over a grand at one point, and I think its been at least 3 years or so since I had a negative balance even in middle of winter.  After searching social media I found I am not the only one, so not rubbish, I never said they do it on every account, so please try to not think in black and white extremities only.

Also note how the standing fees have shot up under the cap, what do you think that is covering?  Its to cover credit balances that were lost when suppliers went bust.  As new suppliers had to eat it up and honour the balances, the higher standing fees are to recover that money.

Chrysalis

MWT said:

Chrysalis said:

As has been pointed out in at least two posts, historically on all credit accounts the energy providers took payments in arrears, not only in arrears but also quarterly.  They manged then so they can manage now.

Of course they could do it again, but only if you are prepared to forget fixed tariffs, and accept even higher prices...

Personally I'm happy to pay by DD in advance in exchange for the fixed price tariffs...

We already know the margin the reseller takes isnt the problem, so if they need an extra couple of % its fine and wouldnt make a big dent, the issue is the VAT, the green levies and the wholesale costs.  We also wouldnt have had the big rise in standing fees if all those credit balances were not lost so arguably prices would be lower right now not higher.