Smart Gas Meter Readings more than actual usage

brianposter

Ectophile said:

Occasionally, the smart gas meters can go haywire as the battery goes flat.  As mentioned above, if you turn off the main gas valve, and the meter still goes up, then it must be the meter and not a gas leak.

If the meter is tested and found to be working fine, then you pay.  If the meter is faulty, the supplier pays.

"Testing a meter" does not prove very much, so ideally you find a bill which is obviously wrong and point this out to the supplier. It then becomes the suppliers problem to find out why the bill is incorrect.

EssexHebridean

brianposter said:

Ectophile said:

Occasionally, the smart gas meters can go haywire as the battery goes flat.  As mentioned above, if you turn off the main gas valve, and the meter still goes up, then it must be the meter and not a gas leak.

If the meter is tested and found to be working fine, then you pay.  If the meter is faulty, the supplier pays.

"Testing a meter" does not prove very much, so ideally you find a bill which is obviously wrong and point this out to the supplier. It then becomes the suppliers problem to find out why the bill is incorrect.

In reality though what happens is they simply say “no, you must have used that much” because they always default to the meter being fine, it’s a customer problem. If a meter is incrementing without having any flow through it, that should show on a test, and is proof of an issue, then the bills come into pay for direct comparisons to establish what the revised being ought to be. 

brianposter

In that case you pay the bill and take them to court for a refund of that bill plus an estimate of the outstanding erroneous overcharge.

mmmmikey

brianposter said:

In that case you pay the bill and take them to court for a refund of that bill plus an estimate of the outstanding erroneous overcharge.

I think most of us here would choose to do a few simple checks before going to the time, expense and stress of going to court. Also, going to court without first using the ombudsman process is likely to be fruitless. I'm sure your post is well intended but to be blunt I don't think it is founded on either common sense or reality.

EssexHebridean

brianposter said:

In that case you pay the bill and take them to court for a refund of that bill plus an estimate of the outstanding erroneous overcharge.

Sometimes it makes far more sense to take a more reasoned approach than to roll up your sleeves and invite people outside to settle things… 

brianposter

mmmmikey said:

brianposter said:

In that case you pay the bill and take them to court for a refund of that bill plus an estimate of the outstanding erroneous overcharge.

I think most of us here would choose to do a few simple checks before going to the time, expense and stress of going to court. Also, going to court without first using the ombudsman process is likely to be fruitless. I'm sure your post is well intended but to be blunt I don't think it is founded on either common sense or reality.

The OP has already said that they will carry out the basic checks. Going to the ombudsman risks getting into an argument about who should pay for testing the meter so, given that the OP apparently has convincing evidence, it will probably prove simpler to go straight to court.

Remember that a large proportion of court claims are settled without any court appearance.

mmmmikey

brianposter said:

mmmmikey said:

brianposter said:

In that case you pay the bill and take them to court for a refund of that bill plus an estimate of the outstanding erroneous overcharge.

I think most of us here would choose to do a few simple checks before going to the time, expense and stress of going to court. Also, going to court without first using the ombudsman process is likely to be fruitless. I'm sure your post is well intended but to be blunt I don't think it is founded on either common sense or reality.

The OP has already said that they will carry out the basic checks. Going to the ombudsman risks getting into an argument about who should pay for testing the meter so, given that the OP apparently has convincing evidence, it will probably prove simpler to go straight to court.

Remember that a large proportion of court claims are settled without any court appearance.

Hmmmm - I think I'll leave it to someone else to explain

brianposter

Didn"t you just describe dealing with a utility company as "like wading through treacle" ?   Perhaps it is something to be avoided.

Spoonie_Turtle

brianposter said:

mmmmikey said:

brianposter said:

In that case you pay the bill and take them to court for a refund of that bill plus an estimate of the outstanding erroneous overcharge.

I think most of us here would choose to do a few simple checks before going to the time, expense and stress of going to court. Also, going to court without first using the ombudsman process is likely to be fruitless. I'm sure your post is well intended but to be blunt I don't think it is founded on either common sense or reality.

The OP has already said that they will carry out the basic checks. Going to the ombudsman risks getting into an argument about who should pay for testing the meter so, given that the OP apparently has convincing evidence, it will probably prove simpler to go straight to court.

Remember that a large proportion of court claims are settled without any court appearance.

I could be wrong but it's my understanding the court will expect the claimant to have exhausted the complaint and Ombudsman channels provided specifically for dealing with energy problems and suppliers first, before taking it to court.

brianposter

That is what the courts say but it is not what the law says and sometimes we must expect our institutions to get on with their job rather than try to push it on to someone else.