Outfox refusing to give full refund

EssexHebridean

BikingBud said:

Scot_39 said:

BikingBud said:

molerat said:

They are complying with OFGEM policy of keeping customer accounts in credit.  You could always ask if they will do variable DD where you pay for your monthly use but that could lead to higher payments in winter.

Rubbish, they do not have to keep your account in credit it is a risk decision by them that keeps your money.

I have challenged Octopus on this a number of times and they have confirmed that they still use this model:




I agreed the I would reset my balance in May, but it makes little difference. 

Full details here: https://octopus.energy/blog/credit-refund-account-balance/#:~:text=On%20the%20whole,%20you%20should,might%20be%20worth%20refunding%20some

And how old is that blog post..

Because there new policy is you have to be 5 weeks in credit by April.

https://octopus.energy/blog/direct-debit-payments/


"We then work out where your balance is expected to be in April - If you’ll have less than five week’s credit at the beginning of April, we’ll work out the difference and spread this over 12 months as a balance-adjustment and add this amount to your suggested monthly payment."


Compare that with April being the trough on the graph.


The new policy has been shifting that old fashioned version of the debit credit cycle - the basis of that whole graph up - it's been in progress for at least 2-3 years due to the energy company debt crisis.

£4.15bn and counting in debt plans and 91 day arrears.

You now have to maintain a credit balance at all times - as a condition of annualised direct debit plans at Octopus and other suppliers.

Suggested? I wonder what that means!

Alongside the graph I linked is the comment:

Your balance will generally be at its lowest around May following higher winter payments. This will even out again when the weather gets warmer and you use less energy.

So expected as lowest and expected to even out.

Just demonstrate that you are in control, and reconcile at year end if there is a need.

I am not on smart meter, i submit readings every 28 days and keep track, they have suggested that my DD should increase but their model is crap. I've told them not to.

In line with what we agreed I paid £50 in May to zero the account and we start again, I am up (ahead) going into winter and in Spring I am down and I will settle in May again. 

Or be a slave!

The problem is that what the OP has posted suggests that they are not in control - to be in a relatively small amount of credit at the end of a summer when their Solar should have been producing well, and heading in to winter when they are likely to be using a lot more energy, isn't a great position. Outfox are correct on this basis to be reluctant to refund the whole balance.

Scot_39

BikingBud said:

Scot_39 said:

Suggested I guess rationally would mean current annual cost / 12.

Its the same adjustement as I used to adjust my own DD - to aim for a zero balance

New DD = (New Cost prediction for next year - Any Credit + Any Debit )  / 12

So if your annual bill £1200 pa - suggested = £100 pm

If you April was £300 below the 5 week target - adjustment = £25.

So youd be on £125 - until you catch up the shift - and then go back to £100.

And Octopus aren't the only ones moving that way - Ovo had / have ? a similar system - but I've yet to wrap my head around a recent post about their latest from another forumite.

And EOn Next are also explicit

https://www.eonnext.com/policies/terms-and-conditions

"4.3.3 You should keep your account in credit and we’ll track and carry the balance forward to the next month’s Statement of Account;"

I can do the maths thanks but I am not behind I am on the Sine wave payment cycle.

Where do OFGEM say I need to add that extra in?

Your supply contract isnt with Ofgem its with suppliers.

And Ive given three examples of their terms.

born_again

BikingBud said:

Octopus might have been but my point is that this is a business decision not regulation. The requirement posted above requires them to retain liquidity.

But claiming that we must be in credit and trying to blame OFGEM is just what they do.

In effect it is a regulation. If the company does not have enough liquidity, then they get fined = regulation. As per Tomato, which could be the straw that kills them.

2 ways to liquidity. Up credit balance, or increase price. I know which I prefer & it's not paying more for energy.

BikingBud

Do not pay so much to the shareholders then?

Scot_39

WE pay more for debt satabilisation in the cap - a revised total figure of £50 when Ofgem last listed seperately as budnled it in with supplier operating costs etc in their cap letters - than we allow in the EBIT operating (not final) profit margin allowance.

Since then the debt has increased from £4.15bn to £4.4bn in latest Ofgem quarterly update.

Because without that £50 more suppliers would likely be going belly up - just like the 30 before durging the crisis peak - as millions still struggle with bills.

Bills loaded with even more social and net zero policy costs at just about every turn.  Like the £51 - £35 average regional DF DD cap increase despite £15 ex VAT Drop in wholesale energy costs - just added by EM et al to the October cap.