My Letting Agents illegally switched my Gas Supplier, now I am dealing with Mafia SSE

Mstty

pochase said:

Mstty said:

Or the perfect storm of the customer not really paying attention to the news and energy price rises, the DD staying the same so they were thinking they were doing ok on energy use.

Easily done from the visitors here wince the price increases started not knowing how much energy was or their usage.

Going to cut the OP some slack here but agree they need to pay for the last two years gas and the £200 compensation from the lettingagents is not too bad. They could have saved a bit with tracker over two years so that could be the baseline for any savings they could have made.

Why should a cheaper possible tariff be the baseline?

OP clearly never had the thought to use tracker, otherwise he would have realised he is no longer with Octopus.

In my thoughts they would have had that possibility if still with Octopus. Being moved to SSE robbed them of that possibility.

We all see things differently and some will see this as completely the OP fault and others may not.

It's interesting to me to see which side people fall on the forum to these and other posts.

Just putting a different point of view across and one the OP may want to use in their argument or not.

HLeung

Mstty said:

Or the perfect storm of the customer not really paying attention to the news and energy price rises, the DD staying the same so they were thinking they were doing ok on energy use.

Easily done from the visitors here wince the price increases started not knowing how much energy was or their usage.

Going to cut the OP some slack here but agree they need to pay for the last two years gas and the £200 compensation from the lettingagents is not too bad. They could have saved a bit with tracker over two years so that could be the baseline for any savings they could have made.

I agree with Mstty, I might not have paid enough attention to my own personal matters but I have been dealing with a long term illness. A lot of personal circumstances are not explained and disclosed in this post, plus the fact that I just came out from a major surgery in January and having to deal with and being in and out of the hospital as well.
I am not asking for sympathy. 

HLeung

[Deleted User] said:

tightauldgit said:

[Deleted User] said:

Unless your name is on the energy account, then you owe SSE nothing. 

It would appear that his name IS on the energy account now after SSE have sorted out the error. I would imagine that his tenancy says that he is responsible for paying utilities so trying to push it onto the agent is a non-starter. 

That isn’t what the OP has implied in his original post:

Upon the first phone call with SSE, as I discovered that SSE did not even know who I was when I called, as they did not have my details on their system. They did not even have my full name, email address, nor phone numbers.

that's correct, SSE didn't have my details on their system before I called them first time after I received the first bill in the post. The bill was under my surname, but SSE didn't have my first name, my email address nor my phone number on their system. They also claimed they had been sending out previous bills electronically, but I told them certainly not to me. And it's only recently after I raised a formal complaint with SSE that one their email response, they admitted that they had been sending the previous bills to the Letting Agent and since they now have my correct details, I am responsible to the bills. 

pochase

Mstty said:

pochase said:

Mstty said:

Or the perfect storm of the customer not really paying attention to the news and energy price rises, the DD staying the same so they were thinking they were doing ok on energy use.

Easily done from the visitors here wince the price increases started not knowing how much energy was or their usage.

Going to cut the OP some slack here but agree they need to pay for the last two years gas and the £200 compensation from the lettingagents is not too bad. They could have saved a bit with tracker over two years so that could be the baseline for any savings they could have made.

Why should a cheaper possible tariff be the baseline?

OP clearly never had the thought to use tracker, otherwise he would have realised he is no longer with Octopus.

In my thoughts they would have had that possibility if still with Octopus. Being moved to SSE robbed them of that possibility.

We all see things differently and some will see this as completely the OP fault and others may not.

It's interesting to me to see which side people fall on the forum to these and other posts.

Just putting a different point of view across and one the OP may want to use in their argument or not.

I can't really follow your logic. It is clear that he was not interested in this.

The OP believed he was still with Octopus, so he could have asked Octopus for example for tracker. If he would have tried to do this he would immediately been told that he is not with Octopus any longer. He became only aware when SSE contacted him in July 2022, so he clearly never contacted Octopus.

So why did SSE rob him of this possibility when he clearly never was trying? Or better why did SSE anything wrong, when they did everything by the book? 



The part that is still unclear for me is about the different transfer readings,

I can understand why there would be a different meter reading from the real when if the agent was trying to switch a different flat, with a different reading.

The meter reading might have been wrong, but the wrong reading should have been applied by both suppliers. 

If Octopus really thought it is wrong and did not apply it and refunded based on the meter reading they received they are at fault here. If they queried the meter reading it should have been reviewed, A meter reading might be wrong, and the acceptable difference is quite high, but no matter if to high or to low, both suppliers have to use the same reading as final and opening read.

@Hleung
You need to find the Octopus bill where they closed your gas account. What is the meter reading they used?

Compare this to the opening reading SSE is using. Have they send you copied of the bills they send to your agent so you have access to the bill with the opening reading?

If there is a difference as you are saying, than you have reason for a complaint. As Octopus will have been told what reading to use for the final bill, they are more likely to be at fault here, but either Octopus or SSE will have to adjust their bill based on the reading .

ariarnia

Mstty said:

pochase said:

Mstty said:

Or the perfect storm of the customer not really paying attention to the news and energy price rises, the DD staying the same so they were thinking they were doing ok on energy use.

Easily done from the visitors here wince the price increases started not knowing how much energy was or their usage.

Going to cut the OP some slack here but agree they need to pay for the last two years gas and the £200 compensation from the lettingagents is not too bad. They could have saved a bit with tracker over two years so that could be the baseline for any savings they could have made.

Why should a cheaper possible tariff be the baseline?

OP clearly never had the thought to use tracker, otherwise he would have realised he is no longer with Octopus.

In my thoughts they would have had that possibility if still with Octopus. Being moved to SSE robbed them of that possibility.

We all see things differently and some will see this as completely the OP fault and others may not.

It's interesting to me to see which side people fall on the forum to these and other posts.

Just putting a different point of view across and one the OP may want to use in their argument or not.

i'm agreeing with pochase but i'm not thinking about fault.

actual loss is important to quantify in a claim (ombudsman or small claim). and a 'possibility' isnt a loss if the possibility was never going to be taken. 

after being moved to sse was there anything actually stopping them moving back to octopus and onto the tracker (if they had noticed they had been moved)?

if they had researched the tracker or tried to move to the tracker and been told they couldnt then they would obviously be justified saying they lost out 

but if they didn't notice they had been moved to sse for 2 years then i think its reasonable to think that they werent paying attention to there tarrif and wouldn't have moved to the tracker even if they had never been moved. 

im not saying it would be impossible for the op to argue otherwise but for the ombudsman to rule on that basis they would probably have to show some reason why if they had stayed with octopus they would have moved to the tracker when as far as they were concerned they were still with octopus and they didn't try. 

Mstty

I don't mind if both of you don't follow my thoughts, this is how I may present this case to the ombudsman on potential loss in this instance and that is right to share with the OP having had three successful cases. It really is current situation versus what could have been the best and then the moderator(Ombudsman) rules.

Happy for you both above not to agree as it's not my place to convince you or for you to change my opinion either. Either way I am sure all opinions are helpful to the OP👍 

[Deleted User]

pochase said:

Mstty said:

pochase said:

Mstty said:

Or the perfect storm of the customer not really paying attention to the news and energy price rises, the DD staying the same so they were thinking they were doing ok on energy use.

Easily done from the visitors here wince the price increases started not knowing how much energy was or their usage.

Going to cut the OP some slack here but agree they need to pay for the last two years gas and the £200 compensation from the lettingagents is not too bad. They could have saved a bit with tracker over two years so that could be the baseline for any savings they could have made.

Why should a cheaper possible tariff be the baseline?

OP clearly never had the thought to use tracker, otherwise he would have realised he is no longer with Octopus.

In my thoughts they would have had that possibility if still with Octopus. Being moved to SSE robbed them of that possibility.

We all see things differently and some will see this as completely the OP fault and others may not.

It's interesting to me to see which side people fall on the forum to these and other posts.

Just putting a different point of view across and one the OP may want to use in their argument or not.

I can't really follow your logic. It is clear that he was not interested in this.

The OP believed he was still with Octopus, so he could have asked Octopus for example for tracker. If he would have tried to do this he would immediately been told that he is not with Octopus any longer. He became only aware when SSE contacted him in July 2022, so he clearly never contacted Octopus.

So why did SSE rob him of this possibility when he clearly never was trying? Or better why did SSE anything wrong, when they did everything by the book? 



The part that is still unclear for me is about the different transfer readings,

I can understand why there would be a different meter reading from the real when if the agent was trying to switch a different flat, with a different reading.

The meter reading might have been wrong, but the wrong reading should have been applied by both suppliers. 

If Octopus really thought it is wrong and did not apply it and refunded based on the meter reading they received they are at fault here. If they queried the meter reading it should have been reviewed, A meter reading might be wrong, and the acceptable difference is quite high, but no matter if to high or to low, both suppliers have to use the same reading as final and opening read.

@Hleung
You need to find the Octopus bill where they closed your gas account. What is the meter reading they used?

Compare this to the opening reading SSE is using. Have they send you copied of the bills they send to your agent so you have access to the bill with the opening reading?

If there is a difference as you are saying, then e us you have reason for a complaint. As Octopus will have been told what reading to use for the final bill, they are more likely to be at fault here, but either Octopus or SSE will have to adjust their bill based on the reading .

Let us assume that the agent gave an incorrect meter reading - or none at all. It doesn’t matter. The new supplier’s metering agent will produce a switch reading using an industry-agreed algorithm. It will then pass the validated reading via a data flow to both suppliers to open and close accounts. Yes, the important thing is to check that both suppliers have used the same reading to open and close accounts. In sum, on a switch, customer/agent readings are only advisory. For a change of ownership, the supplier will use the provided reading and bill the new owner/tenant from that reading onwards but not on a switch.

I struggle to see how the OP could have thought that he still had a gas supply with Octopus when his statements would have clearly shown a Closing Reading for gas and from then onwards he would have been billed for electricity only. 

Octopus’ billing could not be clearer:

Neither SP nor Octopus are at fault here. If the OP has failed to look at his Octopus account in 2 years, then I guess he may well have missed the ‘I am sorry you are leaving’ email which is sent out to prevent unwanted transfers.  Any issue that OP has is with his letting agent. From the calculations carried out by others, a goodwill payment of £200 looks to be a fair offer. Sadly, the complaint has now become more complicated because Ombudsman are involved. Their Decisions do not always the way that the complainant expects/wants.

EssexHebridean

I think the OP's biggest issue when presenting the case is going to be not having looked at the bills for 2 years to realise that they weren't paying for any gas - IMO they would do better to work out a plausible argument on that rather than being tempted into lying about tariffs that they "might have been interested in" - when as Pochase says that is easily dealt with by pointing out that had they had any interest in other tariffs sooner they would have discovered the transfer sooner, also!  Personally I'd suggest that when dealing with the Ombudsman being truthful is probably the best way to go - as getting caught out in a lie is unlikely to help one's case much! 

Mstty

There is no lie in the fact if they were not transferred from Octopus without their consent they could have taken advantage of any of the cheaper tariffs Octopus offered during the two year period. Tracker is just one example of that. One that people are flocking to in great numbers it appears to save even now.

The OP has gone some way to explain why things may have been missed so I believe them and don't need them to divulge further issues, reasons and medical history. 

I wish the OP the best of luck with their case

[Deleted User]

Mstty said:

There is no lie in the fact if they were not transferred from Octopus without their consent they could have taken advantage of any of the cheaper tariffs Octopus offered during the two year period. Tracker is just one example of that. One that people are flocking to in great numbers it appears to save even now.

The OP has gone some way to explain why things may have been missed so I believe them and don't need them to divulge further issues, reasons and medical history. 

I wish the OP the best of luck with their case

But that was not any supplier’s fault: it was the fault of the letting agent. No Court in land would ever consider a claim based on ‘I could have switched to Tracker’ and saved £00s. Indeed, if he had tried to do so, Octopus would have told him a lot earlier that it was no longer his gas supplier.