MSE News: Surge in energy firms switching people onto prepay meters remotely – your rights

grn99

From the Ombudsman website...

How much will it cost? Because Ombudsman Services is a not-for-profit organisation, we set subscription and case fees to cover the expected costs of providing the service As we establish the brokers scheme, we’ll review our costings to ensure that fees are fair.

Based on our current understanding of what’s required, the first year’s fees are:

• Annual membership subscription: £300 per member.
• Case fees will be charged at £340 per case (in line with energy supplier charges)
• A reduced case fee of £170 will be charged for Facilitated Case Resolution (FCR)

and importantly...

We can ask companies to carry out a number of things:

• Take practical action e.g. credit your account, cancel an account, change your tariff.
• Make an apology.
• Offer a financial award.
• Make recommendations to prevent this happening again.
• A combination of these actions.

What we can’t do:

• We’re not here to punish anyone. We can’t dictate how companies operate and we don’t issue fines. Actions like these are the responsibility of the company’s trade body or regulator.

deano2099

It's about making people more comfortable. The argument won't be won by shouting at people that it'll be fine. It really helps if the answer to "but what if the energy company make a mistake?" is "well, you'll end up with free electric for the entire period the mistake was made". 
The resistance we see to smart metering here is that currently switching to pre-payment or disconnection requires access to the property and thus a court order. This gives people comfort. Maybe not for you or I, but it certainly seems to work. So the idea is to recreate that comfort with regulations that penalise the provider if they get it wrong to the point that those people feel convinced they won't get it wrong.

EssexHebridean

deano2099 said:

It's about making people more comfortable. The argument won't be won by shouting at people that it'll be fine. It really helps if the answer to "but what if the energy company make a mistake?" is "well, you'll end up with free electric for the entire period the mistake was made". 
The resistance we see to smart metering here is that currently switching to pre-payment or disconnection requires access to the property and thus a court order. This gives people comfort. Maybe not for you or I, but it certainly seems to work. So the idea is to recreate that comfort with regulations that penalise the provider if they get it wrong to the point that those people feel convinced they won't get it wrong.

But instead, it is "you won't be any worse off, and you might get a bit of compensation." For anyone bar those most bought into the compensation culture that sadly seems to be creeping from across the pond - that in itself would be reassuring. In fact, I'd hazard a guess most of us would probably say "Oh, that's alright then" after the first 6 words of that answer.  The problem with compensation culture is that it has financial impact to those of us who don't make use of it, too. 

Spoonie_Turtle

EssexHebridean said:

deano2099 said:

It's about making people more comfortable. The argument won't be won by shouting at people that it'll be fine. It really helps if the answer to "but what if the energy company make a mistake?" is "well, you'll end up with free electric for the entire period the mistake was made". 
The resistance we see to smart metering here is that currently switching to pre-payment or disconnection requires access to the property and thus a court order. This gives people comfort. Maybe not for you or I, but it certainly seems to work. So the idea is to recreate that comfort with regulations that penalise the provider if they get it wrong to the point that those people feel convinced they won't get it wrong.

But instead, it is "you won't be any worse off, and you might get a bit of compensation." For anyone bar those most bought into the compensation culture that sadly seems to be creeping from across the pond - that in itself would be reassuring. In fact, I'd hazard a guess most of us would probably say "Oh, that's alright then" after the first 6 words of that answer.  The problem with compensation culture is that it has financial impact to those of us who don't make use of it, too. 

Trouble is, people may very well be worse off if they're already in a precarious financial situation and end up having to borrow money to keep the meter topped up.  Would recompense account for paying off the borrowed money plus interest (which would be sky-high if they took out something like a payday loan)?

I'm not one to think the energy companies are out to rip us off, but equally I know human error happens (seen it often enough with the DWP and the devastation that can cause) - rarely, yes, but rarity is of no comfort to the people it actually affects.  So I can certainly see both sides of this, why it shouldn't actually be a problem but also why people prone to worrying might understandably worry about it.

ariarnia

Spoonie_Turtle said:

EssexHebridean said:

deano2099 said:

It's about making people more comfortable. The argument won't be won by shouting at people that it'll be fine. It really helps if the answer to "but what if the energy company make a mistake?" is "well, you'll end up with free electric for the entire period the mistake was made". 
The resistance we see to smart metering here is that currently switching to pre-payment or disconnection requires access to the property and thus a court order. This gives people comfort. Maybe not for you or I, but it certainly seems to work. So the idea is to recreate that comfort with regulations that penalise the provider if they get it wrong to the point that those people feel convinced they won't get it wrong.

But instead, it is "you won't be any worse off, and you might get a bit of compensation." For anyone bar those most bought into the compensation culture that sadly seems to be creeping from across the pond - that in itself would be reassuring. In fact, I'd hazard a guess most of us would probably say "Oh, that's alright then" after the first 6 words of that answer.  The problem with compensation culture is that it has financial impact to those of us who don't make use of it, too. 

Trouble is, people may very well be worse off if they're already in a precarious financial situation and end up having to borrow money to keep the meter topped up.  Would recompense account for paying off the borrowed money plus interest (which would be sky-high if they took out something like a payday loan)?

I'm not one to think the energy companies are out to rip us off, but equally I know human error happens (seen it often enough with the DWP and the devastation that can cause) - rarely, yes, but rarity is of no comfort to the people it actually affects.  So I can certainly see both sides of this, why it shouldn't actually be a problem but also why people prone to worrying might understandably worry about it.

 i know the ombudsman will include overdraft charges if a company make you go overdrawn. I think they will consider any claim for costs if you can quantify and prove it (though they might not accept it if you haven’t tried to mitigate or did something like move into a hotel because you didn’t have money for heating )

EssexHebridean

Fair point Spoonie - although in a lot of case, for electricity certainly - we know that in fact prepay can often be cheaper than DD would have been - so in some cases people might actually save money on what they would have spent otherwise. And no - I wouldn't think it's reasonable in those cases for them to be asked to pay that back to the supplier, and compensation for the stress and inconvenience should still be granted IMO.

[Deleted User]

Spoonie_Turtle said:

EssexHebridean said:

deano2099 said:

It's about making people more comfortable. The argument won't be won by shouting at people that it'll be fine. It really helps if the answer to "but what if the energy company make a mistake?" is "well, you'll end up with free electric for the entire period the mistake was made". 
The resistance we see to smart metering here is that currently switching to pre-payment or disconnection requires access to the property and thus a court order. This gives people comfort. Maybe not for you or I, but it certainly seems to work. So the idea is to recreate that comfort with regulations that penalise the provider if they get it wrong to the point that those people feel convinced they won't get it wrong.

But instead, it is "you won't be any worse off, and you might get a bit of compensation." For anyone bar those most bought into the compensation culture that sadly seems to be creeping from across the pond - that in itself would be reassuring. In fact, I'd hazard a guess most of us would probably say "Oh, that's alright then" after the first 6 words of that answer.  The problem with compensation culture is that it has financial impact to those of us who don't make use of it, too. 

Trouble is, people may very well be worse off if they're already in a precarious financial situation and end up having to borrow money to keep the meter topped up.  Would recompense account for paying off the borrowed money plus interest (which would be sky-high if they took out something like a payday loan)?

Yes.  That's not punitive, it's pecuniary.  It should cover any interest, any overdraft charges, or more generally any reasonable, specific and quantifiable additional costs (this would include time spent on a more expensive tariff).

I do (to some extent) support there being some fixed penalty to account for "moral suffering" or however else you want to term it.

I don't support the overaggressive "where's my compo" approach that we unfortunately often see, nor any scheme that would have the effect of leading people towards that approach.

Chrysalis

[Deleted User] said:

Mrs_Gardener said:

I have not got a smart meter due to a clause I saw in the EON contract from 2019 "If you’ve got a smart meter, we can disconnect the energy without visiting your property. For any other kind of meter, you’d have to give us access to it. If you don’t, we might have to get a warrant and we’ll charge you for that." I didn't want to take a chance of someone making an error and cutting me off - it was just the worry about human error that bothered me as I have always managed to pay my gas and electricity bills, but I feel so sorry for the people struggling to pay and now the energy companies can change their meters to pre-pay without the need to go to court and get a warrant. No system is infallible so there is always a risk that the change to pre-pay or disconnection could happen to a customer who owed nothing.

The following is from the latest annual Consumer Protection Report written by Ofgem. Apart from the fact that Ofgem now sees energy companies as being more akin to debt counsellors than energy suppliers, the Report does not contain some interesting information. Not least, the following:

Disconnection for debt

3.25. The number of disconnections for debt declined in 2020. The number of disconnections for debt dropped to 1 disconnection for gas. For the first time since we started recording SOR data, there have been no disconnections for debt of a customers’ electricity supply, continuing a declining trend since 2016.

Yes, smart meters have remote disconnection built into them to enable suppliers to offer power-limited tariffs as is the case in many other countries. For example, the consumer agrees to a power limit of, say, 5kW at certain times of very high demand. By agreeing to this power limit, the consumer gets a cheaper tariff than his/her next door neighbour who agrees to a 10kW power limit.

If the agreed power limit is exceeded, then the consumer gets warnings via the In House Display; texts; emails  etc. If power is not reduced, then the supply will be cut off. Power is reconnected by contacting a dedicated National phone line. Frequent power limit breaches will result in the consumer being moved to a more expensive higher power limit tariff.

Please bring those power capped tariffs over here.

[Deleted User]

Chrysalis said:

[Deleted User] said:

Mrs_Gardener said:

I have not got a smart meter due to a clause I saw in the EON contract from 2019 "If you’ve got a smart meter, we can disconnect the energy without visiting your property. For any other kind of meter, you’d have to give us access to it. If you don’t, we might have to get a warrant and we’ll charge you for that." I didn't want to take a chance of someone making an error and cutting me off - it was just the worry about human error that bothered me as I have always managed to pay my gas and electricity bills, but I feel so sorry for the people struggling to pay and now the energy companies can change their meters to pre-pay without the need to go to court and get a warrant. No system is infallible so there is always a risk that the change to pre-pay or disconnection could happen to a customer who owed nothing.

The following is from the latest annual Consumer Protection Report written by Ofgem. Apart from the fact that Ofgem now sees energy companies as being more akin to debt counsellors than energy suppliers, the Report does not contain some interesting information. Not least, the following:

Disconnection for debt

3.25. The number of disconnections for debt declined in 2020. The number of disconnections for debt dropped to 1 disconnection for gas. For the first time since we started recording SOR data, there have been no disconnections for debt of a customers’ electricity supply, continuing a declining trend since 2016.

Yes, smart meters have remote disconnection built into them to enable suppliers to offer power-limited tariffs as is the case in many other countries. For example, the consumer agrees to a power limit of, say, 5kW at certain times of very high demand. By agreeing to this power limit, the consumer gets a cheaper tariff than his/her next door neighbour who agrees to a 10kW power limit.

If the agreed power limit is exceeded, then the consumer gets warnings via the In House Display; texts; emails  etc. If power is not reduced, then the supply will be cut off. Power is reconnected by contacting a dedicated National phone line. Frequent power limit breaches will result in the consumer being moved to a more expensive higher power limit tariff.

Please bring those power capped tariffs over here.

People don't want them - at least that's the prevailing theory.

I can imagine the media stories - "how dare these evil energy companies put a limit on how many items I can use at the same time"

Chrysalis

Deleted_User said:

Chrysalis said:

[Deleted User] said:

Mrs_Gardener said:

I have not got a smart meter due to a clause I saw in the EON contract from 2019 "If you’ve got a smart meter, we can disconnect the energy without visiting your property. For any other kind of meter, you’d have to give us access to it. If you don’t, we might have to get a warrant and we’ll charge you for that." I didn't want to take a chance of someone making an error and cutting me off - it was just the worry about human error that bothered me as I have always managed to pay my gas and electricity bills, but I feel so sorry for the people struggling to pay and now the energy companies can change their meters to pre-pay without the need to go to court and get a warrant. No system is infallible so there is always a risk that the change to pre-pay or disconnection could happen to a customer who owed nothing.

The following is from the latest annual Consumer Protection Report written by Ofgem. Apart from the fact that Ofgem now sees energy companies as being more akin to debt counsellors than energy suppliers, the Report does not contain some interesting information. Not least, the following:

Disconnection for debt

3.25. The number of disconnections for debt declined in 2020. The number of disconnections for debt dropped to 1 disconnection for gas. For the first time since we started recording SOR data, there have been no disconnections for debt of a customers’ electricity supply, continuing a declining trend since 2016.

Yes, smart meters have remote disconnection built into them to enable suppliers to offer power-limited tariffs as is the case in many other countries. For example, the consumer agrees to a power limit of, say, 5kW at certain times of very high demand. By agreeing to this power limit, the consumer gets a cheaper tariff than his/her next door neighbour who agrees to a 10kW power limit.

If the agreed power limit is exceeded, then the consumer gets warnings via the In House Display; texts; emails  etc. If power is not reduced, then the supply will be cut off. Power is reconnected by contacting a dedicated National phone line. Frequent power limit breaches will result in the consumer being moved to a more expensive higher power limit tariff.

Please bring those power capped tariffs over here.

People don't want them - at least that's the prevailing theory.

I can imagine the media stories - "how dare these evil energy companies put a limit on how many items I can use at the same time"

Sadly we are very much a behind the times country where people prefer to pay more in return for cost certainty,   However I think there would be at least "some" demand as is for trackers, the highest cost variant would just be equal to what we have now so we can tell people if you want "all you can eat during peak" no problem you just pay a premium for it.