Back billing - can I claim back?

selfscan_queen

Hi,

Between 15 January 2023 and 15 March 2023, I was not charged for gas used from EON as my meter was broken, I contacted them to explain this and a month later an engineer came but no reading could be taken by the engineer off the old meter when he came to replace it.

I hadn't heard anything from EON regarding billing for this period until 22 March 2024, when I received an email from them. They stated that on 13 March 2024, they had billed me £276.73 but credited me £25.01, bringing my account to £0.00 (I pay by direct debit) for gas used between 15 January 2023 and 15 March 2023.

I emailed EON to say this was (apart from 2 days) over a year ago and mentioned the back billing rules. They emailed back apologising and said they would send it to the back billing department to get it rectified, asking me to wait 7 days. After nearly 3 weeks without any update, I emailed again. I was told they'd heard back from the back billing department and they were only able to credit me the negative balance of £25.01 as this was the energy I had used.

 I have two questions: 

1. Am I right in thinking we have a case for back billing and to take it to the ombudsman?

 2. I want to leave EON to go to a different supplier, but would this affect my chances of a refund, if applicable, by doing this?

 Thank you in advance for any responses.

BarelySentientAI

selfscan_queen said:

1. Am I right in thinking we have a case for back billing and to take it to the ombudsman?

You have a case for back billing - although as the back billing rules have already been applied correctly by E.ON going to the Ombudsman is unlikely to provide any additional redress.

selfscan_queen said:

 2. I want to leave EON to go to a different supplier, but would this affect my chances of a refund, if applicable, by doing this?

Given there is no refund applicable, changing supplier would have no impact.

selfscan_queen

Thanks for the response. My understanding of the backbilling rules is that - 

You cannot be charged for energy used more than 12 months ago if: you have not had an accurate bill for it before

I didn't receive any accurate bill and then more than a year later they charged me £276.7. 

They took £251 from the credit in my account due to paying via DD (despite me asking for this money to be returned to me numerous times previously) and the remaining £25.01 from my bank account. When I challenged them, they only returned the £25.01 taken from my bank account at the time, not the full £276.70.

So is it ok for them to take from my credit but not my bank account? Apologies but I can't see anything in the OFGEM rules that suggest that.

BarelySentientAI

selfscan_queen said:

Thanks for the response. My understanding of the backbilling rules is that - 

You cannot be charged for energy used more than 12 months ago if: you have not had an accurate bill for it before

So is it ok for them to take from my credit but not my bank account? Apologies but I can't see anything in the OFGEM rules that suggest that.

Your understanding of the back billing rules is partial - not your fault, that's extremely common, and the OFGEM site doesn't help (they've tried to write it to help non-experts / laypeople understand but they've missed out a lot of the interpretation).

Essentially, yes, they are allowed to use any credit balance to cover the energy and only write off the bit that would put you in debt.

brook_heather

Yes they can use your credit as it has already been paid to your supplier. Back billing rules are there to stop the supplier taking additional money from your bank account. If you did not have a credit balance then they would have had to repay the full amount they took from your bank account.

selfscan_queen

Thank you both for the clarity. And the fact I'd requested the money back numerous times in months previous to it doesn't come into play?

BarelySentientAI

Not specifically - the rules were brought in to stop a sudden large debt, which you don't have.

What you might be able to get, if you are vociferous (or annoying) enough with your complaining, is a "goodwill" payment for them not sorting it out faster.  These are often given as a "we didn't do anything wrong but please go away and shut up" sort of thing - usually about £50.

Sailbad

I think you may have a good case to take to the ombudsman.
Eon Next's t&cs..

4.4.4 We will not try to recover charges for your Energy that are older than 12 months unless we have already tried to recover these charges, or you have behaved obstructively or unreasonably.

They haven't already tried to recover charges and you haven't acted unreasonably.

Good luck.

BarelySentientAI

Sailbad said:

4.4.4 We will not try to recover charges for your Energy that are older than 12 months unless we have already tried to recover these charges, or you have behaved obstructively or unreasonably.

They haven't already tried to recover charges and you haven't acted unreasonably.

They have.  By virtue of the DD being sufficient to build up a credit balance.  It's precisely this restriction that means they could take the credit but had to write off the bit that would have created a debt.

The most misunderstood and poorly explained aspect of back billing in my opinion.

Sailbad

That is a very good reason not to allow credit to build up with so called fixed direct debits.
Much better to pay only what you owe each month with variable direct debit then you can mot be billed for being under-billed from more than 12 months ago. Is that correct, barelysentinentalai?

BarelySentientAI

Sailbad said:

That is a very good reason not to allow credit to build up with so called fixed direct debits.
Much better to pay only what you owe each month with variable direct debit then you can mot be billed for being under-billed from more than 12 months ago. Is that correct, barelysentinentalai?

Variable DD does appear to give better protection against back billing in these circumstances, yes.

I've not seen it tested in a decision, but it would seem a consistent interpretation of the wording in the licence.

I wouldn't say that means that it is "much better" to pay by VDD under all circumstances though.