No Standing Charge Tariff

matt_drummer

MouldyOldDough said:

Here is my usage - why should I pay over 50% of my bill on standing charges ?

You haven't, have you?

7 days at 60p is £4.20.

That's less than 50% of your overall bill?

debitcardmayhem

MouldyOldDough said:

Here is my usage - why should I pay over 50% of my bill on standing charges ?

Compare apples to apples not microsoft…
What was the cost of the week 30/12/24-05/01/25 does that confirm your statement of 50% ?

Swipe

HillStreetBlues said:

Swipe said:

Every now and then I wish the MSE forums had an ignore thread button.

Why would a person need that? It's not compulsory to open and read threads. 

because I'd like the ability to completely hide all threads I'm not interested in from the forum completely.

HillStreetBlues

Swipe said:

HillStreetBlues said:

Swipe said:

Every now and then I wish the MSE forums had an ignore thread button.

Why would a person need that? It's not compulsory to open and read threads. 

because I'd like the ability to completely hide all threads I'm not interested in from the forum completely.

I can see how that would look tidier and make it easier to read, but what I don't understand is bothering to click and open threads that someone isn't interesting in.

Altior

WiserMiser said:

Altior said:

booneruk said:

MouldyOldDough said:

Altior said:

It's absolutely ballooned and the funds don't only go directly to supporting infrastructure.

The ballooning costs of the standing charge mean that low volume users now have a huge chunk of their bill as a fixed amount that they can't influence. So a household of one pays the same as a household of ten. When the standing charge was a smaller portion of the bill, that differential was less material. 

Everyone who uses energy should contribute to maintenance of the system, but it should be aligned with overall usage in my opinion. 

Of course it should - why should someone who uses 1/4 of the average amount - not pay 1/4 of the standing charge - any more is wrong !

It's not wrong, there are costs incurred with supplying energy which aren't smaller because of reduced use.

What would a fair standing charge be for someone who owns a 2nd property as a holiday bolthole and visits 2 weeks a year? Nothing? a few pence? How is that property incurring smaller costs of supply?

I fear this argument has been done to death around here and falls on deaf ears.

Why do single occupied households get a discounted CT? 

Because houses don't need to be taken into care homes.

Because houses don't need to be educated.

Because houses don't need to travel on the roads.

Because houses don't use services (with minor exceptions, e.g. Fire Brigade).  It's people that use services.  The Council Tax tax should be based on the number of occupiers.

Oh, wait...

Your response doesn't explain why a household of one 'enjoys' a CT discount. It's not mathematically 'correct', ie it doesn't ensure that a single person doesn't pay more proportionately than an adult living in a multiply adult occupied household of the equivalent nominal value. They do. 

It's obviously not your decision to implement or provide the discount, but in your view, specifically what is the justification for it?

If you can't think of one, fairy nuff. 

2010

A few years back there were tariffs without SC until Ofgem banned them.

Ogem banned them because they said it was too confusing for people to understand which tariffs were best for them (with or without SC)

wrf12345

"A few years back there were tariffs without SC until Ofgem banned them."
They did not actually ban them but they (or the energy minister of that time) made all companies provide the std tariff  as default  rather than have a singular zero s/c tariff which is pretty much the only way to do zero s/c, ruining the business model of Ebico (who also had flat rates regardless of how you paid or if you had a prepaid meter, and was about the simplest tariff you could conceive). Ebico worked out the margin on buying and selling electricity was so large that they could absorb most of the s/c costs and only needed a slight uplift in unit rates to break even (I think it was a non profit organisation at that time) as long as all their customers were on the same tariff.

Scot_39

And would that "able to hide" still be true now ave SC about 20% of df dd cap.

The simple truth is of course that SC and unit rates both are now far higher as a direct result of govt social and taxation to pay for it policy, govt net zero policy and Ofgem redistribution to match todays grid spending.

So despite my electric dropping 10p - its still pretty much double what it was pre SOLR, as that c£64 wound out on electric SC, then replaced by c£100 fixed network costs under TCR for "fair share" from 22 to 24 cap.

MouldyOldDough

GingerTim said:

MouldyOldDough said:

Here is my usage - why should I pay over 50% of my bill on standing charges ?

Against my better judgement...

Let's put the question another way. Why shouldn't you, like everyone else, pay the cost of 24/7 connection to the grid?

Because I don't make use of the pipework as much as (presumably) you do .......

I don't have to pay for petrol for my car, when I'm not using it either.......

booneruk

MouldyOldDough said:

I don't have to pay for petrol for my car, when I'm not using it either.......

But you drive to the petrol station to fill up, I presume. No gas tanker is calling at your home every day to ask if you want filling up.

I know. Get your gas supply capped off and then drive yourself to get hold of gas canisters. Problem solved!! No more standing charge.

(but you may notice the petrol bill)