Campaign to ban Standing Charges

[Deleted User]

BikingBud said:

In that I am forced to cover the cost of those apparently competitive but ultimately unsustainable business models where cowboy outfits have run off with the consumers money🤦‍♂️

I would suggest that most suppliers went bust because Ofgem stopped them from setting a realistic tariff for the energy that they were supplying: a consequence of a Cap that was set by looking in the rear view mirror. You may recall that at the time the Government was saying that it was protecting customers from high energy costs!

One supplier that was fully hedged failed because its wholesaler went under. Not all the failed suppliers were ‘cowboys’.

busybee100

I'm starting to think the people who think comparisons are easy don't go into the detail. 🤔

ariarnia

Because you are now saying LCD was referring to the simplest or smallest thing, it wasn't, it referred to the consumer. 

again you are telling me what i meant. i said "doesn't that mean we should advocate for the best arrangement for all consumers not the lowest common denominator?" i meant the best arrangement not the simplest.  you can believe me or not believe me but frankly i don't care. i know what i meant. 

Simplifying tariffs is giving people one less thing to think about. It doesn't take away anyone's ability to compare. When a SC is involved there are more things to take into consideration when comparing tariffs. 

i disagree. i think most of the people who look at the standing charge or the unit rates are people who are comfortable comparing tariffs. in my experience anyone who isnt interested or doesn't understand looks at the quote they receive (which is normally in pounds and for a whole year) and doesn't look at the detail. the people who have the most problems are the ones who look at the suggested dd amount and think thats there bill then are upset when it goes up because they used more than the forecast. 

those people will not be helped by the lack of detail they don't look at anyway. all that will happen is that there will be less choice for the users who do look. 

ariarnia

busybee100 said:

I'm starting to think the people who think comparisons are easy don't go into the detail. 🤔

i'm basing what i'm saying on my experience and the many threads on here with people have a problem with there bill. many (probably most) don't understand because they havent gone into the detail and when someone on here explains unit rates and how dds are calculated that helps them. thats why i'm confident saying for lots of users who dont understand its not that they can't understand or that the standing charge has anything to do with it. they just need an explination in a way that makes sense to them. 

400ixl

busybee100 said:

I'm starting to think the people who think comparisons are easy don't go into the detail. 🤔

I would say the complete opposite. Those who understand them, probably do so in detail.

You do keep on avoiding the topic of do you believe that some should be advantaged and some disadvantaged as they will be by removing the standing charge, just to, in your view make it simpler for a minority, rather than educating?

busybee100

400ixl said:

busybee100 said:

I'm starting to think the people who think comparisons are easy don't go into the detail. 🤔

I would say the complete opposite. Those who understand them, probably do so in detail.

You do keep on avoiding the topic of do you believe that some should be advantaged and some disadvantaged as they will be by removing the standing charge, just to, in your view make it simpler for a minority, rather than educating?

I didn't say they didn't understand comparisons. I said they think they're easy because they don't go in to detail.

Do you mean advantaged and disadvantaged as in financially?

If yes then I've not avoided the topic, I've said there will be winners and losers just as there is now.

Who says it's a minority?

[Deleted User]

busybee100 said:

400ixl said:

busybee100 said:

I'm starting to think the people who think comparisons are easy don't go into the detail. 🤔

I would say the complete opposite. Those who understand them, probably do so in detail.

You do keep on avoiding the topic of do you believe that some should be advantaged and some disadvantaged as they will be by removing the standing charge, just to, in your view make it simpler for a minority, rather than educating?

I didn't say they didn't understand comparisons. I said they think they're easy because they don't go in to detail.

Do you mean advantaged and disadvantaged as in financially?

If yes then I've not avoided the topic, I've said there will be winners and losers just as there is now.

Who says it's a minority?

People that at the moment don't get involved with comparisons or switching, and are financially disadvantaged by this fact, whom, solely by removing the standing charge component of tariffs, would become involved and switch to a financially advantageous tariff (should one actually be possible when you remove many tariff possibilities)?

How could that be anything other than a minority?

And on the converse, forcing anyone who, at the moment, compares and switches between the wider range of tariffs potentially available, into a restricted and likely poorer choice.

400ixl

busybee100 said:

I didn't say they didn't understand comparisons. I said they think they're easy because they don't go in to detail.

Do you mean advantaged and disadvantaged as in financially?

If yes then I've not avoided the topic, I've said there will be winners and losers just as there is now.

Who says it's a minority?

You aren't making sense to me. If someone says they think comparisons are easy, it is most likely because they do understand them. Personally I have no issues understanding the comparisons, are you saying i didn't go into the detail. Its because I understand the detail, I know exactly what I use each month, by the month and can use that to look at all of the different tariffs and work out what that means from both a standing order and the unit cost.

So the complete opposite to what you seem to think. Of the people I know probably 70% of them know their position to enough detail to do clear comparisons. Probably 15% couldn't but don't really care and the other 15% would need quite a bit of hand holding to do it. So in my circle you are addressing a minority.

So who are the losers in the current way the SVT is done? Everyone pays an equal share of the fixed costs and then they pay for what they use. The only way they are winners or losers are their own habits or their environment, neither are to do with the way the rates are structured.

ariarnia

busybee100 said:

400ixl said:

busybee100 said:

I'm starting to think the people who think comparisons are easy don't go into the detail. 🤔

I would say the complete opposite. Those who understand them, probably do so in detail.

You do keep on avoiding the topic of do you believe that some should be advantaged and some disadvantaged as they will be by removing the standing charge, just to, in your view make it simpler for a minority, rather than educating?

I didn't say they didn't understand comparisons. I said they think they're easy because they don't go in to detail.

Do you mean advantaged and disadvantaged as in financially?

If yes then I've not avoided the topic, I've said there will be winners and losers just as there is now.

Who says it's a minority?

who says it isn't?

busybee100

Lol Were you all waiting to ambush me?

Give me a minute.