Energy standing Charges - OFGEM's inability to address unfair standing charges on consumers

justbedecent

I am writing to express my deep concern regarding OFGEM's inability to address unfair standing charges on consumers energy bills. The disproportionate standing charges applied to my and energy bill is a typical example. As a low energy user, I take every measure to reduce my energy consumption, not out of choice but out of necessity. I go to great lengths to keep my energy usage low, including using blankets instead of turning on the heating during cold weather, just to make ends meet.

Despite my efforts to minimise energy use, I find that an alarming 40% of my annual energy bill consists of standing charges. These charges are not based on my actual energy consumption but are imposed regardless of how much or how little energy I use. This situation feels deeply unjust, as I am essentially being penalised for trying to conserve energy and manage my finances responsibly.

It is disheartening to realise that even though I am making sacrifices to reduce my energy usage, a significant portion of my bill is unavoidable due to these standing charges. How is it fair that I am unable to afford to switch on my heating and lead a normal life in my own home, when such a large proportion of my bill is attributed to charges unrelated to my energy usage?

I urge OFGEM to reconsider the structure of these standing charges and take into account the financial strain they place on low energy users like myself. The current system disproportionately affects those who are already struggling to make ends meet, forcing us to choose between basic comforts and financial stability.

I respectfully request that OFGEM review this matter and consider implementing changes that would provide fairer billing practices for low-energy consumers.

Brie

Quite agree.

I know people say the standing charge is to pay for the infrastructure on delivering gas and electricity but I don't buy that.  There's absolutely no reason those charges couldn't be included in the unit prices.  That way there would be a fairer cost allocation between low and high users.  And it would be much simpler to compare tariffs.

I don't pay a separate charge for each item I buy at Tesco.  I can buy steak if I want or I can buy beans - depending on what I can afford and wish to pay.  The cost for getting the steak and beans on to the shelves is built into the prices of the individual items.  

dunstonh

Here we go again....

 The disproportionate standing charges applied to my and energy bill is a typical example.

How is it disproportionate to you and say the neighbour on your right, or your left or across the road from you? 
Does the infrastructure to supply energy cost less to your house than your neighbours?

 I go to great lengths to keep my energy usage low, including using blankets instead of turning on the heating during cold weather, just to make ends meet.

And through your choices, you pay less.

Despite my efforts to minimise energy use, I find that an alarming 40% of my annual energy bill consists of standing charges. These charges are not based on my actual energy consumption but are imposed regardless of how much or how little energy I use. This situation feels deeply unjust, as I am essentially being penalised for trying to conserve energy and manage my finances responsibly.

You are not being penalised as if you chose to use more energy, you would pay more.

How is it fair that I am unable to afford to switch on my heating and lead a normal life in my own home, when such a large proportion of my bill is attributed to charges unrelated to my energy usage?

How would it be fair for you to pay less than a neighbour for the infrastructure?

Why should wealthy people who have installed solar or other generation pay less through your proposal despite the cost to facilitate local generation?

I urge OFGEM to reconsider the structure of these standing charges and take into account the financial strain they place on low energy users like myself. The current system disproportionately affects those who are already struggling to make ends meet, forcing us to choose between basic comforts and financial stability.

Why should electricity supply be a replacement for benefits?

I respectfully request that OFGEM review this matter and consider implementing changes that would provide fairer billing practices for low-energy consumers.

You are urging them to make it better for you.  That doesn't make it fairer.

BarelySentientAI

How much do you think you should pay for on demand electricity and gas, any moment, day or night, at precisely the right voltage and frequency?  Don't try the nonsense about shopping at Tesco, because that is a long way from a sensible analogy.

Or is it just that you think someone else should pay for it?

OFGEM have run several consultancies (including one earlier this year whose initial results have been recently published) and the existing system has been found, every time, to be the fairest method of addressing the need.

There is a very strong argument not to include it in unit charges, because those who are forced to stay at home, those who need additional heating, or those with larger families (none of these factors would scale based on income) would be forced to pay significantly more, whereas those who can afford to buy solar panels, batteries and electric cars (things which do tend to scale with income) would get a large benefit.

If what you want is to make pensioners subsidise middle class homeowners, then ok, but I'm pretty sure that's not what you want to ask for.

born_again

I suggest you follow the link this this post & contact them direct with the options.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80953097/#Comment_80953097

As to the rest, this has been done to the death many times. Posting here will not help, only going direct to the horses mouth stands any chance.

wrf12345

ITV interview with Ofgem boss on YouTube, the guy was given a good going over and seemed to admit that they did want to lower the unfair s/c and get the money back by raised unit cost but said the govn would have to help poor, high users in return - given that they put it up in the first place, Ofgem need to do a lot more than put it down by a relatively small amount (not to mention that they just put it up again). One of the comments said the Ofgem boss was on 300k a year so no sense of reality, the industry bosses are on millions a year so he possibly thinks he is hard done by.

electriccactus

Brie said:

Quite agree.

I know people say the standing charge is to pay for the infrastructure on delivering gas and electricity but I don't buy that.  There's absolutely no reason those charges couldn't be included in the unit prices.  That way there would be a fairer cost allocation between low and high users.  And it would be much simpler to compare tariffs.

I don't pay a separate charge for each item I buy at Tesco.  I can buy steak if I want or I can buy beans - depending on what I can afford and wish to pay.  The cost for getting the steak and beans on to the shelves is built into the prices of the individual items.  

Of course they COULD lump standard charges in with the unit prices, but it would then create an actual unfair situation where higher users are subsiding low users.

The current situation is completely fair. There are fixed costs for providing the infrastructure that are independent of your usage. Those costs are borne equally by everyone who wants to be connected to the grid.

The Tesco analogy is completely flawed. The cost of getting two (identical) items onto the shelf is 2x what one item costs to get onto the shelf. The cost of getting 2kwh of electricity to one house is exactly the same as getting 1wkh to it.

BarelySentientAI

electriccactus said:

Brie said:

Quite agree.

I know people say the standing charge is to pay for the infrastructure on delivering gas and electricity but I don't buy that.  There's absolutely no reason those charges couldn't be included in the unit prices.  That way there would be a fairer cost allocation between low and high users.  And it would be much simpler to compare tariffs.

I don't pay a separate charge for each item I buy at Tesco.  I can buy steak if I want or I can buy beans - depending on what I can afford and wish to pay.  The cost for getting the steak and beans on to the shelves is built into the prices of the individual items.  

Of course they COULD lump standard charges in with the unit prices, but it would then create an actual unfair situation where higher users are subsiding low users.

The current situation is completely fair. There are fixed costs for providing the infrastructure that are independent of your usage. Those costs are borne equally by everyone who wants to be connected to the grid.

The Tesco analogy is completely flawed. The cost of getting two (identical) items onto the shelf is 2x what one item costs to get onto the shelf. The cost of getting 2kwh of electricity to one house is exactly the same as getting 1wkh to it.

Not quite, but generally valid.

MP1995

It's always fun to watch these threads from a distance.

But as much as I like to defend the standing charge as it approaches £1 a day £365 a year for dual fuel customers it has become quite a burden for many households.

What the solution is I am not sure and it now equates to 20% of the so called average household.

Ildhund

If you want to make your opinion known to those responsible for setting standing charges, this isn't the right place. This is: Standing charges: domestic retail options | Ofgem

Baldeagle095

Thank goodness Income Tax is not charged in the same way as standing charges.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.