Are EV and ToU tariffs unfair to other electricity customers?

mmmmikey

MWT said:

JKenH said:

Chrysalis said:

This question could be applied to all sorts of services.

Is it unfair some people get a good retentions deal and others dont?
Is it fair supermarkets cater their best prices to larger households?

Ultimately though TOU is available to everyone, its a choice of whether to use the tariffs, and a choice of to get a smart meter for access to the best tariffs.

I think the only people who could feel hard done by, are those who have no access due to smart meter communication issues out of their control.

While ToU tariffs may theoretically be available to everyone many elderly people just don’t have the savvy or a computer to get on them. 

There is then that cohort of families who need to feed their children when they get home from school. Can they take advantage of ToU tariffs?

The comments on here will inevitably be skewed towards those who are already enjoying ToU and EV tariffs because they work for them and assume other people’s circumstances are the same. 

The older I get the more I wonder who these 'elderly people' are...? The reality is they are not a group defined by age, there are people of all ages who in your words 'don’t have the savvy or a computer to get on them.'

Also it would be a mistake to view ToU as equating to 'avoid 16:00-19:00', E7 is also a ToU tariff, probably still the most adopted ToU tariff. Yet still people do not fully understand if they really should be using it or not.

Even if the 'best' tariffs do put a premium on hours that are unavoidable it doesn't mean that the tariff should be completely avoided, it is just a balance between limiting the use in those periods where practical and shifting what you can to low-rate periods.

... and for now at least, there is no compulsion, nobody has to use any of the ToU tariffs if they do not want to or do not have the facilities or capability. 

Yes, there is an awful lot of stereotyping that goes on in respect to old people, which in reality is a group as diverse as pretty much any other groups. Lots of pensioners own their own homes, travel extensively, are wealthier than their children will ever be and very capable of understanding how to make good use of cheap electricity overnight.

I suspect the real issue is not the small group of pensioners in their 80's and 90's who would struggle and/or have limited access to help, but rather the fears and worries of pensioners in their 60's and 70's who are fearful of getting to that stage. That's not to say it isn't an issue deserving of sympathy and support, but we shouldn't fall into the trap of slowing progress because there is a minority who are fearful of old age. We need to tackle the real issues.

JKenH

Enthusiasm for smart tariffs is, perhaps, less than we might think.  Ofgem’s 2025 State of the Market report states that smart tariffs account for less than 2.3% of the market. Excluding EV owners the % of domestic customers on smart tariffs is less than 0.6%. In the last 12 months the number of smart tariffs users, excluding EV owners grew by just 5000 out of a total of over 28m, that’s new take up of less than 0.02% and that includes heat pump owners, 95% of whom are not on specific heat pump tariffs. The tariffs are apparently available so why is the take up rate so low?


https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-04/OFG2296_State%20of%20the%20Market%20Report.pdf

GingerTim

Lack of enthusiasm or lack of knowledge/awareness?

stripling

@JKenH
I take your point that that’s just life and some people end up subsidising others which I think is what is happening with smart tariffs. Those who can take advantage do. 

No one is 'subsidising' anyone. You'd pay the same whether there are TOU tariffs or not. It's called 'price signalling' designed to 'incentivise' people to use electricity when there is less demand (this way of thinking comes from behavioural economics - but that's a rabbit hole we'll ignore for now). This became necessary because of years of lack of investment by the private companies that owned our grid. This is why the Conservative government quietly took back some of the grid into state ownership. Decarbonisation or not, it was on its last legs and needed investment. 

If you catch an Uber at 4am are you being 'subsidised' by those who catch an Uber in the 8.30am rush hour, when surge pricing puts prices up? 

I agree, the unfairness lies with those who can't play. Who can't afford batteries or solar, or who live in a bad smart meter communication area or have personal or family reasons for being unable to load shift. It's unfair, but it's not 'subsidising' anyone.  

There's some funny ideas about state ownership in this forum. State owned companies are run just the same as any other company - often fairly ruthlessly - although they can sometimes lower prices for their own citizens at home. The difference is any profits are either invested in the company or returned to state coffers. Half our infrastructure is owned by other country's state owned companies. EDF anyone? EDF was about 15% privately owned for a wee while but the French state took back that last bit quite a few years ago.  Just an FYI. 

Meanwhile, Net Zero, it's a fairly contorted way of thinking for an urgent problem, we must decarbonise. We must stop burning fossil fuels.  As for the North Sea, here's a good explainer

stripling

@MWT
The older I get the more I wonder who these 'elderly people' are...? The reality is they are not a group defined by age, there are people of all ages who in your words 'don’t have the savvy or a computer to get on them.'

Lol yes, you are right.....
in my area my 93 year old neighbour had batteries and solar years ago and was the first to come round and investigate my heat pump when it went in and up the road is another 'old man' who invented something that runs half our computer tech right now... he turns his phone off because he gets everyone asking for IT help.

Ageism is alive and well, unfortunately. 

stripling

@GingerTim
Lack of enthusiasm or lack of knowledge/awareness?

Or lack of any benefit from them? A TOU tariff offers me nothing because I don't have anything that's going to be a reason to use them. I have no batteries etc, and nothing to load shift that uses much energy.  I imagine there's plenty of people in a similar situation. 

MattMattMattUK

JKenH said:

Chrysalis said:

This question could be applied to all sorts of services.

Is it unfair some people get a good retentions deal and others dont?
Is it fair supermarkets cater their best prices to larger households?

Ultimately though TOU is available to everyone, its a choice of whether to use the tariffs, and a choice of to get a smart meter for access to the best tariffs.

I think the only people who could feel hard done by, are those who have no access due to smart meter communication issues out of their control.

While ToU tariffs may theoretically be available to everyone many elderly people just don’t have the savvy or a computer to get on them.  

Nothing to do with being elderly, many elderly people are just as or more capable than some quite a lot of those in their 30s, 40s or 50s. We need to drop the idea that elderly = incompetent. 

JKenH said:

There is then that cohort of families who need to feed their children when they get home from school. Can they take advantage of ToU tariffs?

Yes they can, because cooking uses a very small proportion of household energy usage, water and space heating are the primary uses (with EV charging being another for those who have them), dwarfing most other usage. 

JKenH said:

The comments on here will inevitably be skewed towards those who are already enjoying ToU and EV tariffs because they work for them and assume other people’s circumstances are the same. 

They will not be skewed because of that, but because that is the end position if one follows things through rationally. 

JKenH said:

Chrysalis said:

This question could be applied to all sorts of services.

Is it unfair some people get a good retentions deal and others dont?
Is it fair supermarkets cater their best prices to larger households?

Ultimately though TOU is available to everyone, its a choice of whether to use the tariffs, and a choice of to get a smart meter for access to the best tariffs.

I think the only people who could feel hard done by, are those who have no access due to smart meter communication issues out of their control.

For most of the year we are a two person household but if there are multi-buy offers on we take advantage of them as we have a large house with tons of storage room and freezers that enable us to buy large packs of meat etc. But does it cost a supermarket less to do multi-buy deals or does the single person household subsidise them?

Larger packs are cheaper because packaging (materials, but time as well) is proportionally less for a larger quantity. Multi-buy is somewhat more marginal, but yes slightly cheaper for the supermarket to operate and also has the benefit of doubling revenue and profit, even if some of the latter is lost due to multi-buy discount.

JKenH said:

I take your point that that’s just life and some people end up subsidising others

Generally those earning average income or above are subsiding others. When it comes to energy higher users are subsidising lower users, when it comes to supermarkets whose without loyalty cards are subsidising those with them. With contracted services those who do not shop around or make some effort to reduce their costs are subsidising others.

JKenH said:
which I think is what is happening with smart tariffs. Those who can take advantage do. 

That is not what is happening with smart tariffs, or more accurately ToU tariffs. The cost of generation (and transmission to a lesser extent) is not flat, it fluctuates, so a ToU tariff reflects that. Me getting cheaper overnight usage on an EV tariff is not me being subsidised by anyone because whilst I pay less per kWh the cost for the supplier to buy that energy in is also hugely cheaper.

MattMattMattUK

JKenH said:

Scot_39 said:

michaels said:

JKenH said:

I have started this thread to respond to a comment on a different thread ( Martin Lewis: Standing charges update risks households paying more) without taking that thread off topic

QrizB said:

» show previous quotes

This isn't entirely true if you look beyond standing charges (the subject of this thread) and include unit costs (which the thread has begun to include).

Someone on a flat rate tariff will be paying a weighed average price covering the entire period of the tariff (3 months for the SVT, 12 or more for a fix). Swapping to a ToU tariff will allow the householder to choose to use more electricity during cheaper periods and less during more expensive ones. This can save the householder money without creating a loss for the supplier that needs recovering from elsewhere. A "winner" without a corresponding "loser".

That is an interesting (and valid) point. 

Ultimately if every individual optimised their consumption to achieve the lowest import price on a ToU tariff then prices would adjust to meet demand until they levelled out. So at the moment those able to take advantage of ToU prices can do so because others can’t. 

That is the short answer and applies to tariffs such as EV tariffs which are underpinned by the variable utility of electricity - we value it more at tea time than in the middle of the night. 

The situation is more complicated with tariffs like Octopus Agile and Tracker and Intelligent Octopus which have arisen to reflect price variability driven by the intermittency of renewable generation and I concede there can be winners here without corresponding losers. In fact it can be win-win on occasions if curtailment is avoided as SVT customers also benefit. 

Seems a very odd question. Either we use prices to match supply and demand or we choose state control and rationing.

I don't see what state control has to do with rationing power.

Not at the moment anyway in UK.

In fact if anything its the exact opposite.

What we have is definitely not rationing - we have massive overcapacity thanks to net zero and renewables without storage model we use - so actual capacity duplication.

Solar (approaching 20GW) and wind (over 30GW) at certain times, and when they cannot, gas/biomass etc at others.

And the imbalance at times leading to folk like Octopus "dumping power" on people - certainly on agile in past for hours at a time - actually paying them to use energy - whether using for useful things (like moving a washing into cheap times) or say turning on a bar fire on in the middle of the garden in summer to get paid to burn kWh of power.  (Their was even a thread here discussing the morality of potentially "wasting power" in such ways - whether it was even wasteful at all)

So we have state - net zero policy - in control - actually interfering - de-stabilising the traditional supply and demand model - not by constraining peak supply to potentially require rationing - but by boosting it under the right weather conditions.

In fact the only rationing going on is amongst our poor and vulnerable - who cannot afford - not the luxury of what they might like to - but the basic standards of life - of using what they need - for a comfortable healthy existence.

As thanks to policy - including our rushed net zero policy - UK has amongst the highest energy costs in comparable countries.

While I generally agree with your comments you do appear to be confusing generation capacity with generation. At times our renewables capacity means that we can generate more than we need resulting in all the expenses associated with curtailment that you refer to but at times during the winter months there is a genuine shortage of generation because of intermittency of renewable generation. Much of the year we are relying on imports to fill the gaps but when they are tight prices surge. As @michaels suggests ToU tariffs play a role in managing demand or we might well need rationing. ToU pricing also includes the provision for surge (negative) pricing to enable consumers to dump excess generation into the garden which presumably is a cheaper option than curtailment. I have enjoyed many afternoons of negative pricing this summer.

These problems of generation shortages and excesses are solely the result of our renewables focussed generation policies (aka Net Zero madness) and lack of storage and the development of smart tariffs to manage demand is an integral part of the roll out of renewables. As you have pointed out the UK has some of the highest energy costs (both domestic and commercial) in the world but because of my solar panels and smart tariff I am not (so far) feeling these. Given the furore in the media about energy prices someone else must be taking my pain. 

The fact that you are a climate change denier discredits your position. You can either choose to look at things rationally and scientifically, or you can choose conspiracy theories, if you choose the latter then your arguments lack merit. 

Ildhund

MattMattMattUK said:
That is not what is happening with smart tariffs, or more accurately ToU tariffs. 

Perhaps neither term is accurate enough, so there's ample scope for confusion. For example, Economy 7 is a Time of Use tariff, but not necessarily 'smart'. I'm not even sure what is generally meant by 'smart tariff'; is it any tariff only available to those with a (fully operational) smart meter? Or perhaps a tariff that changes with grid supply and demand, i.e. is dynamic? It could also be one that relies on the meter both to record ToU consumption on different registers and to switch restricted circuits on and off at remotely-configurable times. 

Could we come up with terminological suggestions to dispel the confusion?  

MattMattMattUK

Ildhund said:

MattMattMattUK said:
That is not what is happening with smart tariffs, or more accurately ToU tariffs. 

Perhaps neither term is accurate enough, so there's ample scope for confusion. For example, Economy 7 is a Time of Use tariff, but not necessarily 'smart'. I'm not even sure what is generally meant by 'smart tariff'; is it any tariff only available to those with a (fully operational) smart meter? Or perhaps a tariff that changes with grid supply and demand, i.e. is dynamic? It could also be one that relies on the meter both to record ToU consumption on different registers and to switch restricted circuits on and off at remotely-configurable times. 

I agree it could be somewhat confusing, I suspect ToU tariff pricing makes sense for some, E7 as you rightly point out is ToU priced, so are heat pump tariffs and most EV tariffs contain an element of ToU. Smart tariffs are somewhat different, I always get the night charging window on my EV tariff, but it is also linked to my car and can charge at the lower rate at any time of day if the supplier initiates that (usually when they are being paid to get rid of over generation), it has not happened to me yet but I know people who are home more during the day who it regularly happens to in the middle of the day in summer. Suppliers also have the ability to trigger battery charging or hot water production on some heat pump tariffs and I believe that battery discharge on demand is also being added in (the consumer can set max discharge, retained power etc.). The dynamic pricing model is then an additional complication, one that is neither ToU or Smart. 

Ildhund said:

Could we come up with terminological suggestions to dispel the confusion?  

I think we (or more accurately the industry) needs to agree and standardise terminology. Smart, where the supplier has an element of control over usage, ToU, pricing varies by time and Dynamic, where pricing varies based on grid demand and production. It might make sense that a combination of those can be applied to tariffs. Or consumers need to learn to pay slightly more attention to what their options are.