Standing Charges and Prepayment meters

diystarter7

Alnat1 said:

@diystarter7 What do you suggest the energy companies do? Are you suggesting they should let people to run up as much debt as they want without question and not take any action?

You have lots to say on the matter, please explain what you would do if you ran the energy company.

Hi

We have never claimed benefits or been in debt via good planning but as per my post you talk about, I do acknowledge people cann become ill/etc long term and get into debt

They should pay, why should you/I pay for them I agree. However, the way some are put on pre-payments is not right and they are charge more is not right. Why not give them same rates and possibly make a little loss or even draw up even as most on pre-payment for whatever have problems paying

Thanks

diystarter7

MattMattMattUK said:

diystarter7 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Scot_39 said:

There are many people who would also not.

Elderly or poor people without Internet access, people without credit cards etc.

You can top up with a debit card, you do not need to use a credit card.

Scot_39 said:

And why same higher standing charges - understandable for old e.g. to compensare shop keepers, supply top up cards /keys etc - but not new.

With new there is still the additional cost of processing the card payment which does not exist for Direct Debit (or at least in commercial banking terms is much much lower.

diystarter7 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

diystarter7 said:

Ak yourselves this, why are people that are given no option other than a pre-pay meter complain.

In general because people either do not understand (eg. the believe that it is costing the more) or just like to complain.

I could understand it with old pre-payment meters, having to go and put money on a key regardless of weather or convenience, but with smart pre-payment meters people can top up from home. 

Including the media?

Very much including the media, multiple times a week on here it is pointed out that there are news articles in the media complaining about energy costs which are factually wrong. 

Thanks but I will go along with the media and its repscted media not tabloids etc and I think most will look at it like me.

Below is a link to the EDF rate card, if you would like to look at it yourself you would be able to see that electricity is cheaper on PAYG than Direct Debit or other payment/pay on receipt of bills. Would you like to trust a news article designed to generate traffic, or would you like to trust verifiable facts?

https://www.edfenergy.com/sites/default/files/government_energy_price_guarantee_prices._standard_variable_deemed_and_welcome._credit_meters.pdf?

diystarter7 said:

Anyone reading this thread, don't take my and others word for pre-payments meters, just good pre-payments meters and you would be hard pushed to find a good word

I agree with not taking the word of anyone on here or in the media as gospel without verifying it first. However people complaining online is usually best ignored, you are unlikely to get useful information from people ranting online that they are being "ripped off" by their prepayment meter when they do not understand energy billing or costs.

diystarter7 said:

Alnat1 said:

Those mentioned in the news reports who were remotely switched seem to have complained because they thought they should be able to run up energy debt, ignore the energy companies concerns and not agree a repayment plan.

Hi

You are making a massive assumption about this. You have any evidecne to support your assertions please?

If you look at the details the reason that people are switched to pre-payment is because they have refused to engage with the energy suppliers. If people engage with the supplier then between the two of them they can agree a payment plan, but the reason these cases end up with being forced to switch is because the customer has not engaged with the supplier to agree a payment plan so the energy provider uses the only tool they are left with to stop the customer running up further debt, which is pre-payment. They will not switch someone over if they have a debt but are repaying it and are engaged with the supplier, they will switch someone over if they ignore attempts at contact.

diystarter7 said:

ps - I'm a hard working guy and have and come from a hard-working family and pay our debts and dont spend what we cant afford - but I do know for a fact people get into debt at times when they become unwell, lose their job, social problems etc and these people need our help and not be taken advantage of when they are down.

I agree that people can suffer misfortune but I fail to see how letting someone run up further energy debt and letting them refuse to engage with a supplier is taking advantage of them.

Hi
Thank you for taking time to explain in detail

I agree with most of what you have said and people should not be allowed to build up debt on debt.
However, a bit of easy on them ie those in hard times for whatever reason giving them decent rates on electric/gas would not go amisss.

I do get wound up re poeple playing the befits sytems/etc/etc but there are genuine people out there in trouble with debt via long-term illness/etc/etc and they need to be treated with a bit more care.

Thanks

Spoonie_Turtle

diystarter7 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

diystarter7 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Scot_39 said:

There are many people who would also not.

Elderly or poor people without Internet access, people without credit cards etc.

You can top up with a debit card, you do not need to use a credit card.

Scot_39 said:

And why same higher standing charges - understandable for old e.g. to compensare shop keepers, supply top up cards /keys etc - but not new.

With new there is still the additional cost of processing the card payment which does not exist for Direct Debit (or at least in commercial banking terms is much much lower.

diystarter7 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

diystarter7 said:

Ak yourselves this, why are people that are given no option other than a pre-pay meter complain.

In general because people either do not understand (eg. the believe that it is costing the more) or just like to complain.

I could understand it with old pre-payment meters, having to go and put money on a key regardless of weather or convenience, but with smart pre-payment meters people can top up from home. 

Including the media?

Very much including the media, multiple times a week on here it is pointed out that there are news articles in the media complaining about energy costs which are factually wrong. 

Thanks but I will go along with the media and its repscted media not tabloids etc and I think most will look at it like me.

Below is a link to the EDF rate card, if you would like to look at it yourself you would be able to see that electricity is cheaper on PAYG than Direct Debit or other payment/pay on receipt of bills. Would you like to trust a news article designed to generate traffic, or would you like to trust verifiable facts?

https://www.edfenergy.com/sites/default/files/government_energy_price_guarantee_prices._standard_variable_deemed_and_welcome._credit_meters.pdf?

diystarter7 said:

Anyone reading this thread, don't take my and others word for pre-payments meters, just good pre-payments meters and you would be hard pushed to find a good word

I agree with not taking the word of anyone on here or in the media as gospel without verifying it first. However people complaining online is usually best ignored, you are unlikely to get useful information from people ranting online that they are being "ripped off" by their prepayment meter when they do not understand energy billing or costs.

diystarter7 said:

Alnat1 said:

Those mentioned in the news reports who were remotely switched seem to have complained because they thought they should be able to run up energy debt, ignore the energy companies concerns and not agree a repayment plan.

Hi

You are making a massive assumption about this. You have any evidecne to support your assertions please?

If you look at the details the reason that people are switched to pre-payment is because they have refused to engage with the energy suppliers. If people engage with the supplier then between the two of them they can agree a payment plan, but the reason these cases end up with being forced to switch is because the customer has not engaged with the supplier to agree a payment plan so the energy provider uses the only tool they are left with to stop the customer running up further debt, which is pre-payment. They will not switch someone over if they have a debt but are repaying it and are engaged with the supplier, they will switch someone over if they ignore attempts at contact.

diystarter7 said:

ps - I'm a hard working guy and have and come from a hard-working family and pay our debts and dont spend what we cant afford - but I do know for a fact people get into debt at times when they become unwell, lose their job, social problems etc and these people need our help and not be taken advantage of when they are down.

I agree that people can suffer misfortune but I fail to see how letting someone run up further energy debt and letting them refuse to engage with a supplier is taking advantage of them.

I do get wound up re poeple playing the befits sytems/etc/etc but there are genuine people out there in trouble with debt via long-term illness/etc/etc and they need to be treated with a bit more care.

Thanks

Little point here, how many people do you know personally who are 'playing the benefits system' (and tha you know for a fact, because you know which benefits they are claiming and fully understand how those benefits are assessed and see what their life is like behind closed doors) vs how much of that perception is created by social media, dodgy articles, random acquaintances who know someone who knows someone and none of them actually have a knowledge of the benefits system or the person they're complaining about, etc.?  That's a rhetorical question for you to think about, don't really want to derail the thread.

[Incidentally the BBC used to be a credible media source.  It's lacking in due diligence now though, the decline is very noticeable and disappointing.]

EssexHebridean

A very interesting set of exchanges recently on this thread, and others, regarding media and the articles that are being published around the energy crisis. Ultimately “persistent non payer who refused to even discuss the reasons for their debt with their supplier, and wouldn’t agree to the very generous and helpful repayment plan being proposed is switched to a prepayment meter without even needing to break their front door down” doesn’t tell to generate many clicks, or create much excitement. Someone else touched on the background to that earlier - and indeed, there is a very clear process that the suppliers have to go through to make that switch - this is never going to be a situation where someone has missed paying one bill, and bam - next thing they know they wake up one morn8g and so over they need to stick 50p in the meter. 

There has been a succession on these poorly written, poorly researched and usually sensationalist articles appearing recently. Each time someone - in fact usually a number of “someones” post a link here with an attached and suitably “outraged of Tunbridge Wells” toned post attached. Each and every time, many of the regulars on this board take time to patiently explain where the inaccuracies are in the report, the truth behind the story, and frequently even post direct links to factual information - for example the tariff cards that confirm that Prepay isn’t always the hugely expensive option that the likes of the BBC try to make it out to be - particularly not for electricity. Yet still we have people who refuse to look at the actual evidence being presented, or to look into the facts for themselves, because, bluntly, it’s easier to believe that “oh well, the media say it, so it must be right” - even when it is being clearly explained why this is not the case. 

Recent examples:
”I was charged £200 just for running an electric shower and a light next to my cooker” - literally not possible in the timescale being given.
- the case of the person who claimed they had been remotely switched to pre-pay whilst in hospital but was not able to get to the shop to top up - you do not need to go anywhere near a shop to top up a meter which is capable of remote switching.
”vastly more expensive prepayment meters” - they are not, on the whole.

Just today we’ve had an article about E7 - again, patient explanations have been made by many as to where that article is missing information and simply not giving a clear picture of the truth. The worrying thing there is that we have already seen an example of one person who - as a result of that article - is ready to switch to single rate without really understanding whether in fact it will be better for them. You can guarantee that is just one of a huge number across the country who will never make it to places like this for help and support - and THAT is the damage that these sorts of articles, and those who blindly believe them and perpetuate their content, are doing.

Gerry1

If dozy Ofgem were any good, they'd prohibit PAYG rates being more expensive than the DD rates.

Any additional running costs must be negligible with modern meters.  The supplier also benefits by (i) receiving payment before the energy is used, (ii) customers not able to build up debt by submitting low meter readings and (iii) customers not quitting the premises without paying the final bill.

Marvel1

Gerry1 said:

If dozy Ofgem were any good, they'd prohibit PAYG rates being more expensive than the DD rates.

Any additional running costs must be negligible with modern meters.  The supplier also benefits by (i) receiving payment before the energy is used, (ii) customers not able to build up debt by submitting low meter readings and (iii) customers not quitting the premises without paying the final bill.

Also it's the DD customers in credit that get their money back when their energy form busted - the standing charge is included is paying this back - should be DD rates.

The cash/cheque customers are covering this too.

Gerry1

Marvel1 said:

Gerry1 said:

If dozy Ofgem were any good, they'd prohibit PAYG rates being more expensive than the DD rates.

Any additional running costs must be negligible with modern meters.  The supplier also benefits by (i) receiving payment before the energy is used, (ii) customers not able to build up debt by submitting low meter readings and (iii) customers not quitting the premises without paying the final bill.

Also it's the DD customers in credit that get their money back when their energy form busted - the standing charge is included is paying this back - should be DD rates.

The cash/cheque customers are covering this too.

The problem would be much reduced if dozy Ofgem made Monthly Variable DD the default DD method, with Fixed MDD only available on request.

It would significantly reduce failures by deterring Ponzi companies financing their growth via stupidly inflated DDs and mean that if any did still fail then the SoLR costs would be much reduced.

MattMattMattUK

Gerry1 said:

If dozy Ofgem were any good, they'd prohibit PAYG rates being more expensive than the DD rates.

Any additional running costs must be negligible with modern meters.  The supplier also benefits by (i) receiving payment before the energy is used, (ii) customers not able to build up debt by submitting low meter readings and (iii) customers not quitting the premises without paying the final bill.

Rates should reflect costs which is what they currently do on an appropriate basis.

The additional costs generally relate to payment method, the shops get paid for processing the transaction and the online top ups attract differing card fees depending on the card type. The point abut being paid before energy is used is largely irrelevant as most people paying via Direct Debit have a credit balance and it is not really a factor in their cost. The main benefit of prepayment is that it limits the level of bad debt that that can be accrued, although bad debt can still and does occur. 

Gerry1

MattMattMattUK said:

Gerry1 said:

If dozy Ofgem were any good, they'd prohibit PAYG rates being more expensive than the DD rates.

Any additional running costs must be negligible with modern meters.  The supplier also benefits by (i) receiving payment before the energy is used, (ii) customers not able to build up debt by submitting low meter readings and (iii) customers not quitting the premises without paying the final bill.

The point about being paid before energy is used is largely irrelevant as most people paying via Direct Debit have a credit balance and it is not really a factor in their cost.

They wouldn't if Ofgem were any good !

MattMattMattUK

Gerry1 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Gerry1 said:

If dozy Ofgem were any good, they'd prohibit PAYG rates being more expensive than the DD rates.

Any additional running costs must be negligible with modern meters.  The supplier also benefits by (i) receiving payment before the energy is used, (ii) customers not able to build up debt by submitting low meter readings and (iii) customers not quitting the premises without paying the final bill.

The point about being paid before energy is used is largely irrelevant as most people paying via Direct Debit have a credit balance and it is not really a factor in their cost.

They wouldn't if Ofgem were any good !

That is not really the solution, you do not make life more difficult for the majority because a minority cannot use the existing system correctly.