They’re hoarding my money

JSHarris

My experience over the past couple of years has been that two different suppliers have been generally very poor at estimating future energy use in order to set a sensible DD.  I have data going back a few years, showing energy usage to a granularity of 6 minutes (ten energy bins per hour), so have a pretty accurate understanding of our usage.   Some suppliers seemingly aren't good at looking back at actual usage in order to set sensible DD amounts in order to just cover the likely total for the year.

As an example, our last supplier (Utility Warehouse) tried to increase our DD last April by around £80/month, when we were in credit with them to the tune of £600 (at the end of the heating season).  I had an interesting phone call with them.  They initially refused to adjust the DD to a lower, more sensible, level.  I tried to explain that I knew how much energy we use, and their estimate made no sense.  I eventually got passed to someone higher up the chain, who listened to my point, looked at our usage and agreed that our existing DD was too high.

They adjusted it to a pretty sensible amount (reduced the existing payment).  I asked why the first person I'd spoken with hadn't been able to see this and make the adjustment.  They were open and honest, said that as I was over retirement age their system automatically flagged me as being "vulnerable".  This then caused them to assume that I may not understand the nuances of energy pricing, so their default position was to make sure I overpaid.

I can see some sense in doing this, the last thing they want is for someone that's really vulnerable to be faced with an unexpectedly large shortfall at the end of the year.  However, I think just using age as an identifier for setting a vulnerability flag wasn't a particularly smart way to handle this.

[Deleted User]

They adjusted it to a pretty sensible amount (reduced the existing payment).  I asked why the first person I'd spoken with hadn't been able to see this and make the adjustment.  They were open and honest, said that as I was over retirement age their system automatically flagged me as being "vulnerable".  This then caused them to assume that I may not understand the nuances of energy pricing, so their default position was to make sure I overpaid.

That is the most outrageous statement/assumption that I have ever heard in defence of a policy. I cannot see senior management signing off on a policy that is ageist at best and discriminatory at worst.

sandy700

Do what I did to get my credit back, change to a variable direct debit and just pay monthly for what you use as you use it.

Brie

Eon next tried to increase my DD unreasonably but backed down when challenged.  They had suggested a huge increase - can't quite remember but maybe an extra £100 a month?  I did my own calculations based on the fixed rate I was/am on which suggested I was already overpaying a bit   

I then contacted them to find out why they said I needed to increase the DD.  Apparently they had taken my January's use multiplied it by 14 (?) to give an annual use and then divided that by 10 (??) to get the monthly DD amount to be paid.  The person I talked to agreed this was completely ridiculous and left my DD as it was. 

prowla

Effectively you are paying them in advance for 2-3 months energy.

My supplier (Shell) allows me to set the monthly payment, though they do automatically increase it from time-to-time.

Scot_39

You don't say what your fix unit and SC rates were relative to new rates coming in in July and when it ends.

Or your actual annual usage in kWh per fuel ( or peak off peak electric if e7 etc)

Without that actual specific advice on costings is difficult.

£230 really isn't a huge annualised DD - given a £170 'debt' start point - but is over new cap tdcv.

Could  the £170 be to cover a simple gap like credit refunded before a bill applied to account - as it is suspiciously close to your old DD.  Although most suppliers would reduce the refund to allow for at least one months billing - if not 2 or more at summer levels.

EOn Next for me run a monthly statement.  And it's always worth checking they have used Smart readings.

The WAN billing link can stop and the IHD still look normal etc. - in fact with one meter brand it appears for some posting here it can happen every few months and need a remotecor even physical meter reset.


In the past EOn (not EOn next)  system refunded me  smaller credits - my last just over £200 at the then Jun review - but that was when bills half current levels - so longer period.

EON Next offset my credit into revised DD figures.

Weeks earlier I had an online option to request a refund - didn't take it - so maybe they thought I didnt want it - i looked then didn't action request.

Or maybe it's ust an opt in not an automatic system as old EOn.

Again ahead of July rates change - they again have recalculated annual use, new rates and reduced DD to match new rates and run down the lower remaining credit. 

So kind of asked to pay ( predicted annual cost for next 12m - credit ) / 12.

Possible way forward for you.

Most suppliers - will accept a reasonable challange to an unreasonable DD estimate.

So get your annual usage and the likely unit rates for the coming 12m (use fix until expires and current svt for the respective time periods - even the EOn loyalty fix v2  seems pretty much SVT cap anyway - units and standing charge), add in any debt  (I would interpret the £170 instant demand as described as debt) and then /12.

Edit Just been informed in a response to one of my posts elsewhere there is now a v3 fix on offer from Eon - with small differences to v2 SC - a "smidgen" iirc.

If that's closer to £170 than £230 - challange the raise.

But remember too last winter was mild - my heating went on 6 weeks later, than year before - so they may ask for a little more than a low year.

Scot_39

sandy700 said:

Do what I did to get my credit back, change to a variable direct debit and just pay monthly for what you use as you use it.

Given op just asked for £300 to get car through mot - they may not want the problem of say - and taking say 200 (170+230/2) annualised - paying say 100 in summer - but having to find similar- say £250-350 in winter - for say 4-6 months in a mild to cold month.
 

Scot_39

Brie said:

Eon next tried to increase my DD unreasonably but backed down when challenged.  They had suggested a huge increase - can't quite remember but maybe an extra £100 a month?  I did my own calculations based on the fixed rate I was/am on which suggested I was already overpaying a bit   

I then contacted them to find out why they said I needed to increase the DD.  Apparently they had taken my January's use multiplied it by 14 (?) to give an annual use and then divided that by 10 (??) to get the monthly DD amount to be paid.  The person I talked to agreed this was completely ridiculous and left my DD as it was. 

That seems really awful x14/10 = 40% overshoot and based on a winter month - easily already say  50% higher than average for many to begin with.

Maybe they use different numbers if account in credit or debit etc. At time or length of customer records.

I checked my new DD calc that came as part of price change summary in Mar for new Apr 1st rates -  set lower than annual usage on same statement / 12 to use up credit.

At the time using my calc would take me to within £5 - actual debit - after 12 months. And that based on lower usage than previous year.

They just lowered my DD again - must log in and get credit outstanding and run the numbers again.

sammyjammy

CBN said:

The £300 credit at this point in the year will be building up to meet the costs of the winter months.  No credit = higher payments needed moving forward.

I disagree, this is exactly the time of year (maybe a month ago) that your balance should be around nil.

JSHarris

[Deleted User] said:

They adjusted it to a pretty sensible amount (reduced the existing payment).  I asked why the first person I'd spoken with hadn't been able to see this and make the adjustment.  They were open and honest, said that as I was over retirement age their system automatically flagged me as being "vulnerable".  This then caused them to assume that I may not understand the nuances of energy pricing, so their default position was to make sure I overpaid.

That is the most outrageous statement/assumption that I have ever heard in defence of a policy. I cannot see senior management signing off on a policy that is ageist at best and discriminatory at worst.

I very much agree, and to be fair the helpful person I talked to seemed to be of the same view.  No idea if they've changed this, as I changed supplier a few months later.  I think it was done with the best of intentions, but without thinking through the issue of discrimination.  I believe all suppliers are supposed to have policies in place to protect vulnerable customers, they just slipped up when deciding to use age as an automatic reason to categorise customers.