British Gas compensation??

brewerdave

Mstty said:

I stand by it, Ofgem were clear when switching to the SOLR all customers would switch to the SVT price capped rate.

It was very clear.

BG messed up the paperwork and now everyone wants £100

It all just seems a shame

NO -It wasn't !! And BG are a very large organisation who repeatedly made the same "mistake" - and then took something like 10 weeks to correct it but didn't brief their troops properly so that many people including their staff were working on bum information !!

agentcain

It wasn't at all clear. BG messed up, they should pay up and lesson learned.

Otherwise anyone could say "oops my bad, the contract I agreed on had an error on my part. Cancel it" as a get out of jail card. 

MWT

agentcain said:

It wasn't at all clear. BG messed up, they should pay up and lesson learned.

Otherwise anyone could say "oops my bad, the contract I agreed on had an error on my part. Cancel it" as a get out of jail card. 

This is a bit different to that.

All the transferred customers under the SoLR scheme were transferred to a deemed tariff that was pre-approved by Ofgem, so there is no doubt as to the contract terms from that point of view, BG can't just change their minds.

The error was in the poor and conflicting communication to the customers about those tariffs, and customers are entitled to compensation for that to the extent that they relied on that information when making a decision about staying on that tariff or not...

... what they are not entitled to receive is the fixed tariff they thought they were on if they believed the guaranteed date and ignored the 'variable' statement.

Mstty

brewerdave said:

Mstty said:

I stand by it, Ofgem were clear when switching to the SOLR all customers would switch to the SVT price capped rate.

It was very clear.

BG messed up the paperwork and now everyone wants £100

It all just seems a shame

NO -It wasn't !! And BG are a very large organisation who repeatedly made the same "mistake" - and then took something like 10 weeks to correct it but didn't brief their troops properly so that many people including their staff were working on bum information !!

It very much was made clear by Ofgem. I received all the same pro forma emails and links when Symbio went bust that other customer received from other energy suppliers that went bust.

It was made very clear and upfront when you moved to the designated supplier you would be put on the standard variable tariff price capped.protected rate.

Yes BG have made an error but for everyone to claim £100 compensation in my eyes is wrong.

agentcain

MWT said:

agentcain said:

It wasn't at all clear. BG messed up, they should pay up and lesson learned.

Otherwise anyone could say "oops my bad, the contract I agreed on had an error on my part. Cancel it" as a get out of jail card. 

This is a bit different to that.

All the transferred customers under the SoLR scheme were transferred to a deemed tariff that was pre-approved by Ofgem, so there is no doubt as to the contract terms from that point of view, BG can't just change their minds.

The error was in the poor and conflicting communication to the customers about those tariffs, and customers are entitled to compensation for that to the extent that they relied on that information when making a decision about staying on that tariff or not...

... what they are not entitled to receive is the fixed tariff they thought they were on if they believed the guaranteed date and ignored the 'variable' statement.

It is indeed a deemed contract formed between BG and ofgem on behalf of you. However, upon transfer, ofgem shares no responsibility on the contract, otherwise one would argue that ofgem should pay it (?). The only contract the consumer sees is the one they receive upon the SOLR transfer, as they have no exposure to what was agreed upon and preaproved (the consumer didn't pick the supplier nor had any say during the initial SOLR process). Isn't that email part of the contract? How many consumers acted on goodwill and stayed on the promised tariff? 

I, for example, was put on a deemed contract with a price promise ending on 30th of April, not 1st when the cap changes, and BG honoured that. Should it not have been honoured? 

I think people should push back. Companies like BG abuse contract law to their benefit all the time. Its time consumers play the same game. Unfortunately, its an expensive game to play, both money and time-wise. 

MWT

agentcain said:

The only contract the consumer sees is the one they receive upon the SOLR transfer, as they have no exposure to what was agreed upon and preaproved (the consumer didn't pick the supplier nor had any say during the initial SOLR process). Isn't that email part of the contract? How many consumers acted on goodwill and stayed on the promised tariff? 

The information that was incorrect was the tariff label and description contained in the email and displayed on the website, not the contract.

The terms and conditions that were available via a link did not have the error in it as far as I am aware.

The email is not part of the contract, it is information about the contract and to the extent that it was wrong there is a liability for compensation.

The problem in determining appropriate compensation is there really weren't many better choices for fixed contracts around by the time these transfers were going on, but if there was something better, it was also most likely better than staying on the BG welcome tariff even if it really had been fixed until June/July, so even if the customer believed the wrong information they would still have wanted to switch if they were looking at alternatives.

So you are left with a rather weak argument that the error persuaded customers not to bother looking even though the 'fix' would expire only 2-3 months after the cap increase on 1st April.

agentcain

MWT said:

agentcain said:

The only contract the consumer sees is the one they receive upon the SOLR transfer, as they have no exposure to what was agreed upon and preaproved (the consumer didn't pick the supplier nor had any say during the initial SOLR process). Isn't that email part of the contract? How many consumers acted on goodwill and stayed on the promised tariff? 

The information that was incorrect was the tariff label and description contained in the email and displayed on the website, not the contract.

The terms and conditions that were available via a link did not have the error in it as far as I am aware.

The email is not part of the contract, it is information about the contract and to the extent that it was wrong there is a liability for compensation.

The problem in determining appropriate compensation is there really weren't many better choices for fixed contracts around by the time these transfers were going on, but if there was something better, it was also most likely better than staying on the BG welcome tariff even if it really had been fixed until June/July, so even if the customer believed the wrong information they would still have wanted to switch if they were looking at alternatives.

So you are left with a rather weak argument that the error persuaded customers not to bother looking even though the 'fix' would expire only 2-3 months after the cap increase on 1st April.

I beg to disagree. Albeit I don't have access to the email that was sent to e.g. ex Neon Reef customers, I have mine as an ex PfP customer and it clearly states the following:

Title: Thanks for choosing us. Here's your contract.

Body: ③ Your tariff terms and conditions

About your tariff

Price Promise Apr 2022 prices are fixed until 30 April 2022 at rates that are the same as the Ofgem Price Cap.

The rest is nonsense about where electricity comes from, when you can switch and how etc. The only link is that of general T&Cs.  I've looked for attachments too, there are none.  So, unless others got a massively different email, I would say that indeed that email with the tariff is the contract, otherwise its false advertising and misselling.

As for the compensation, I agree it has to be against a better deal at the time but I disagree there was none. I received notification of the change on September 11 and on that day I could have switched to a fixed deal with another supplier, so my approach would be to see which deal would have suited me and calculate against that. Is it safe to assume that the customers in question switched around that time? A bit later? Doesn't matter. If anything, ofgem and BG should compensate everyone; ofgem for advising against switching until the SOLR process finishes and everyone gets their credit back and BG for delaying the process so much to the point of finishing the process at a time when you can't switch.

However, I would like to see the compensation against the promised tariff, because we are talking about a major energy supplier with lots of room to absorb any mistakes. For years they have been paying dividends. Its time to claim some back. 

But then again Im not in the position to chase this. Yet, I would happily support anyone who does. 

StartledJesus

@brewerdave True. It was misleading in the first place (deliberately?), and then (some) of BGs own staff exacerbated the situation by giving false information, albeit probably in good faith. Whatever the reason, they were definitely not all singing from the same hymn sheet, and the fault there lies with BGs training regime.

Of course, much of this bad/incorrect advice was just given verbally, so an easy get out for BG as it cannot be proved. Even though many corporations make great play of the ‘fact’ that all calls are recorded. That is always going to be a one way tool. However, I am pretty certain that some people will have the bad advice in writing, by email. Or does email not constitute ‘in writing’? Surely BG can not just wriggle out of that by saying ‘customer agents A, B, C, and D were wrong, and had no right to say that?

Meanwhile, I seem to recall that some BG staff were playing silly games with some ‘secret’ cheaper tariffs that some customers managed to gain access to on a pretty random basis. That turned out that, strictly speaking, should only have been offered to employees in some niche industries or sectors.

Finally, in reality, Ofgem does not accept any responsibility for anything, and makes Teflon products look sticky in comparison. 

mrsmac59

mrsmac59 said:

Has anyone else been affected by the price guarantee on their Welcome to British gas contract.Where as an ex neon reef orPeoples energy were lead to believe the tariff although was a variable they were on a fixed price till end of July /June   I've just read a story on Your money.com where some one has challenged BG regarding this,they did receive compensation for the short period between the price cap rise on 1st April to the end of June. Better than nothing. I am hoping someone can guide us through what to do?? 

I've had a response from British Gas and have settled with them initially goodwill gesture was £50 I Declined offer and it was increased to £75 it's to my benefit and I can't cope with hassle complaing  to Ofgem. mrsmac59 said:

Has anyone else been affected by the price guarantee on their Welcome to British gas contract.Where as an ex neon reef orPeoples energy were lead to believe the tariff although was a variable they were on a fixed price till end of July /June   I've just read a story on Your money.com where some one has challenged BG regarding this,they did receive compensation for the short period between the price cap rise on 1st April to the end of June. Better than nothing. I am hoping someone can guide us through what to do??