'Unfair' standing charges need to go: MPs back Martin's and MSE's calls for energy bill overhaul

matt_drummer

Having said all that I say about standing charges I would change some things.

I think that green levies should come from general taxation. Those costs should fall on those people that can most afford them.

I also think that SoLR costs should never have been met by everybody. I think those people that chose to go with `fly by night energy retailers' should have suffered the consequences of their actions, after all, it was those people that benefitted from the cheap prices for their energy.

badmemory

matt_drummer said:

Having said all that I say about standing charges I would change some things.

I think that green levies should come from general taxation. Those costs should fall on those people that can most afford them.

I also think that SoLR costs should never have been met by everybody. I think those people that chose to go with `fly by night energy retailers' should have suffered the consequences of their actions, after all, it was those people that benefitted from the cheap prices for their energy.

I actually agree even though I was one of the many who, not being able to tolerate BG any longer, then went with PE.  Who knew they would throw me back at their incompetence as SoLR.  PE may have undercharged but that was the only way they were incompetent.  If I had known the problem I would have paid more to stay with them.

matt_drummer

badmemory said:

matt_drummer said:

Having said all that I say about standing charges I would change some things.

I think that green levies should come from general taxation. Those costs should fall on those people that can most afford them.

I also think that SoLR costs should never have been met by everybody. I think those people that chose to go with `fly by night energy retailers' should have suffered the consequences of their actions, after all, it was those people that benefitted from the cheap prices for their energy.

I actually agree even though I was one of the many who, not being able to tolerate BG any longer, then went with PE.  Who knew they would throw me back at their incompetence as SoLR.  PE may have undercharged but that was the only way they were incompetent.  If I had known the problem I would have paid more to stay with them.

I was never even aware of the SoLR process until relatively recently which is why I always went with an established supplier. I never thought that everybody else would pick up my tab.

I think it is wrong that the whole country has had to pay for others gains although part of me understands why it happened and why those people had to be supported.

I would say that our regulator should have never let this happen and I blame them more than anybody, they should have known better. After all, it is what they do!

Gerry1

matt_drummer said:

I also think that SoLR costs should never have been met by everybody. I think those people that chose to go with `fly by night energy retailers' should have suffered the consequences of their actions, after all, it was those people that benefitted from the cheap prices for their energy.

Hardly fair, considering that everyone was relentlessly bombarded with advice to switch !   Anyone who hadn't switched to a cheaper provider was regarded as vulnerable and needing help or almost as a social outcast who deserved to be ripped off.

Dozy Ofgem even wanted to write to everyone who hadn't switched in the last three years urging them to compare tariffs.  Not sure whether they got round to doing so, but you can see what the pressures were like.  The consequences should be suffered by dozy Ofgem who failed to make all suppliers offer Variable Direct Debit (preferably as the default) but allowed many suppliers to use Fixed DD payments to run Ponzi-style businesses without investing any funds of their own.

If even dozy Ofgem couldn't see the risks, how on earth could ordinary energy consumers be expected to know better and refuse to heed all the advice to compare and switch?

matt_drummer

Gerry1 said:

matt_drummer said:

I also think that SoLR costs should never have been met by everybody. I think those people that chose to go with `fly by night energy retailers' should have suffered the consequences of their actions, after all, it was those people that benefitted from the cheap prices for their energy.

Hardly fair, considering that everyone was relentlessly bombarded with advice to switch !   Anyone who hadn't switched to a cheaper provider was regarded as vulnerable and needing help or almost as a social outcast who deserved to be ripped off.

Dozy Ofgem even wanted to write to everyone who hadn't switched in the last three years urging them to compare tariffs.  Not sure whether they got round to doing so, but you can see what the pressures were like.  The consequences should be suffered by dozy Ofgem who failed to make all suppliers offer Variable Direct Debit (preferably as the default) but allowed many suppliers to use Fixed DD payments to run Ponzi-style businesses without investing any funds of their own.

If even dozy Ofgem couldn't see the risks, how on earth could ordinary energy consumers be expected to know better and refuse to heed all the advice to compare and switch?

OFGEM are the government and they get their money from us.

If this is your view then there can be no complaint about recovering those costs through the standing charge.

I am not saying that you personally are complaining, it is just a general comment.

We cant have it both ways, if credit balances with underfunded suppliers are protected then somebody has to pay, either those who stood to lose their balances or all of us, it ended up being all of us.

To now say I benefitted but would rather somebody else paid is not fair.

For those of us who never benefitted it seems even less fair.

But that's life!

born_again

matt_drummer said:

Dolor said:

The alternative is that consumers become unsecured creditors of failed suppliers.

Suits me.

But, I suspect a significant number of customers would be quite unhappy when they lost their money!

Not very nice, but if you chose to go with certain suppliers to save money over established companies then I think you deserve to have reaped what you have sown.

Or maybe not, I see no basis for complaint, customers are free to go with any supplier they choose safe in the knowledge that they won't lose their money, it's got to be worth something?

How many of those complaining about the SoLR charges benefited from them when their `cheap' supplier went bust?

One answer to that would be to go back to the old way where you received a bill for your usage & paid that. None of the monthly DD to build up a credit for winter.
I know some suppliers do offer this, but it could be a good deal if it was monthly.
But again the problem is for many of the less well off, as they would not put anything aside to cover the larger winter bills.

End of the day, there is no one size fits all & no matter what the consumer will end up paying.

Netexporter

Paying in arrears is more expensive to administer and costs more than having a pre-payment meter.

matt_drummer

born_again said:

matt_drummer said:

Dolor said:

The alternative is that consumers become unsecured creditors of failed suppliers.

Suits me.

But, I suspect a significant number of customers would be quite unhappy when they lost their money!

Not very nice, but if you chose to go with certain suppliers to save money over established companies then I think you deserve to have reaped what you have sown.

Or maybe not, I see no basis for complaint, customers are free to go with any supplier they choose safe in the knowledge that they won't lose their money, it's got to be worth something?

How many of those complaining about the SoLR charges benefited from them when their `cheap' supplier went bust?

One answer to that would be to go back to the old way where you received a bill for your usage & paid that. None of the monthly DD to build up a credit for winter.
I know some suppliers do offer this, but it could be a good deal if it was monthly.
But again the problem is for many of the less well off, as they would not put anything aside to cover the larger winter bills.

End of the day, there is no one size fits all & no matter what the consumer will end up paying.

It's all a bit of a mess.

And maybe the media is to blame.

If we went back in time everybody would get a bill three months in arrears and then pay it.

But now, there is the condemnation of cruel suppliers who cut off supply or put vulnerable people on prepay meters.

It's what we have all made it.

[Deleted User]

If we went back in time everybody would get a bill three months in arrears and then pay it.

All suppliers pay their suppliers in advance of supply. The industry is also moving quickly towards 30 minute settlements as described here:

https://www.power-technology.com/features/reforming-energy-systems-30-minutes-at-a-time/?cf-view

On a less technical level, a supplier with a million customers with an average monthly bill of £250 would have to have a credit facility of up to £750M to cover the cost of energy supplied. Assuming a supplier could find a bank that would be willing to cover that amount of cashflow, who do you think would end up paying the bank interest?

matt_drummer

Dolor said:

If we went back in time everybody would get a bill three months in arrears and then pay it.

All suppliers pay their suppliers in advance of supply. The industry is also moving quickly towards 30 minute settlements as described here:

https://www.power-technology.com/features/reforming-energy-systems-30-minutes-at-a-time/?cf-view

On a less technical level, a supplier with a million customers with an average monthly bill of £250 would have to have a credit facility of up to £750M to cover the cost of energy supplied. Assuming a supplier could find a bank that would be willing to cover that amount of cashflow, who do you think would end up paying the bank interest?

Us, and that is why I am satisfied with how things are.

I am an accountant and have a pretty good idea of how it works.

I have no problem with my supplier having a large credit balance and I would happily pay more in standing charges
if I was asked to do so.

I feel I get extremely good value for money from my energy arrangement.