Tomato Energy (Electric Only Supplier) - Too Good To Be True ?

Ildhund

lohr500 said:
But surely in the days of multi carrier auto switching SIM cards and with high rates of domestic internet access, there must be other secure options to establish a connection in areas where the current systems are failing.    

The first of those worked for SMETS1 meters, and is being trialled for the Northern CSP region (remember the Glasgow doctor who kicked up such a fuss that Octopus broke the rules and installed one of the trial dual-mode CHs?). The second is also being examined, with the main hurdle being the need to secure WAN traffic over the Internet.

The details of this scheme may well vary significantly from the current proposal, because:

• The smart meter network is the responsibility of the DCC, not the supplier. It would be unfair to penalize a supplier for a DCC failing;
• DCC and both its WAN sub-contractors have allegedly met their contractual requirements with respect to coverage. 

DCC are apparently busy developing solutions for customers in no-WAN areas. Until they're ready for deployment, I can't see any supplier accepting penalties for situations beyond their control. It might be possible to devise a reduction to, say, the standing charge for affected customers to be paid by all customers until communications are established. Meanwhile, Ofgem may well compel suppliers and DCC to try harder with the mitigations that are already available, like flying leads and (in the Central and Southern CSP) mesh and T3 aerials. 

I'm still waiting for a entrepreneurial type to come along with an inexpensive dipole repeater antenna package to boost the LRR signal at the CH in the Northern CSP. There are undoubtedly many no-WAN EV owners who would happily pay £100s to be able to take advantage now of preferential tariffs that require a communicating smart meter.

QrizB

Ildhund said:

I'm still waiting for a entrepreneurial type to come along with an inexpensive dipole repeater antenna package to boost the LRR signal at the CH in the Northern CSP. There are undoubtedly many no-WAN EV owners who would happily pay £100s to be able to take advantage now of preferential tariffs that require a communicating smart meter.

As a bit of RF engineering, it's trivial. Even an active repeater should cost under £30 to build at scale, although that's ignoring licensing/compliance costs.

Ildhund

QrizB said:

As a bit of RF engineering, it's trivial. Even an active repeater ...

Yes - I suppose 'it's easy if you know how'. I see a bright young aerial technician with a van and some long ladders scooting around the glens sticking things on people's walls and making a neat job of a length of coax. He'd only need the first installation to go well for word of mouth to keep him busy for the rest of the year. And the beauty of a passive repeater is that there's no need to involve anyone else at all. 

wrf12345

knowing the lovely people at Ofgem they will probably let the companies get the money back by inflating the absurdly high s/c's a bit more...

masonic

It's not looking good so far for the clock change, albeit only 4 random HH slots populated for me so far. I have usage at a non-existent timeslot:

Telegraph_Sam

I used to follow the Tomato correspondence closely (without actually switching) but now only spadmosically. Judging by the sheer volume of technical posts on this forum I have concluded that Tomato is not the home for those looking for an easy hassle-free life. You gets what you pays for?

HillStreetBlues

Telegraph_Sam said:

I used to follow the Tomato correspondence closely (without actually switching) but now only spadmosically. Judging by the sheer volume of technical posts on this forum I have concluded that Tomato is not the home for those looking for an easy hassle-free life. You gets what you pays for?

Some haven't even paid yet.

tlcgrantham

masonic said:

It's not looking good so far for the clock change, albeit only 4 random HH slots populated for me so far. I have usage at a non-existent timeslot:

Mine is similar. We won’t have to wait long to find out whether they have got it right or not as the bill is due in a couple of days. In the past they haven’t charged for the slots they haven’t retrieved and I still have quite a few missing.

masonic

tlcgrantham said:

masonic said:

It's not looking good so far for the clock change, albeit only 4 random HH slots populated for me so far. I have usage at a non-existent timeslot:

Mine is similar. We won’t have to wait long to find out whether they have got it right or not as the bill is due in a couple of days. In the past they haven’t charged for the slots they haven’t retrieved and I still have quite a few missing.

Comparing those few slots to data from Bright, the graph is definitely showing times in GMT. Whether the pricing is locked to GMT too we shall see. I won't complain if it is, it means I'll have the 5p rate until an hour later in the morning.

lohr500

For what it's worth, about the only thing TE got right with my a/c back in October last year was the transition from BST to GMT!!

I can't remember the exact detail, but MyWatts was a bit flakey on the day.

The billing was definitely based on local clock time and the CSV billing download from MyWatts confirmed that the tou rates were being applied based on local time.

The 5p off-peak rate ended at 06:00 local time before and after the clock change.

I raised the question about timings re GMT/BST very early on when signing up with them in August and got a written reply that the times were aways based on local clock time.

Of course, with all the turmoil in the Tomato greenhouse, it is perhaps unwise to assume that the switch back from GMT to BST will follow the same logic