Plans for all major energy suppliers to offer at least one low Standing Charge tariff from Jan 2026

born_again

Only thing that gets anywhere near the standing charge is a phone line. As just like gas/electric it has a infrastructure that needs to be maintained.
Guess what that also has 2 charges. One for calls (although you can get bundled packages) & one for you having a line to receive calls. 

If our retail energy suppliers owned the infrastructure then I could see a argument for removing the SC. As they do not, then somewhere along the line this has to be paid for. If it was public owned, then government pot could pay. But expect taxes to rise to pay. 

It people expect them to pay, then expect energy prices to rise to pay them back. There is no such thing as a free lunch. 
As we should all know given the number of failed energy suppliers in the last few years.

QrizB

wrf12345 said:

 it would sort of reflect in usage in small properties with few people in them against five bedders full of people

If you want to link it to property size, you're arguing in favour of moving to a model like Council Tax or water rates.

It's an option, I guess.

wrf12345 said:

Much easier to have no standing charges and a higher unit rate (approx ten percent up)

I'm sure we've discussed this before, but.if you wanted to cover the same costs you'd be looking at adding ~8p/kWh to electricity and ~1p/kWh to gas.

wrf12345 said:

You can make a similar case against council tax as it does not reflect the incomes of the people in the property nor the blatant way that councils waste money.

Now you've confused me. Earlier in your post you were in favour of higher charges for larger households. Now you're arguing against CT. I'm not sure you can have it both ways.

debitcardmayhem

@WibbleBaaaaaa you are talking tongue in cheek I hope, the pipe for delivering gas and the cables supplying electricity are the same if you live in a beach hut or a 10beds mansion. 

I live 60 yards from the electricity sub station , so I should not pay as much as someone 300 yards away, but of course he lives 300 yards closer to the gas main so I should pay more for my gas, both houses are the same size, but I use more electric than him and less gas than him. 

We don’t have balconies either of us.

WibbleBaaaaaa

GingerTim said:

WibbleBaaaaaa said:

Scot_39 said:

WibbleBaaaaaa said:

Standing charge should be based on size of property and usage, so if you are sitting in a 4 bedroom semi with gas and lekky running through the building then you should be paying for all that in a higher standing charge, while those sitting in say a 1 bedroom flat with just lekky should be the lowest standing charge.......but at present the whole system is so broken that those sitting in a 1 bedroom flat can be paying some of the highest standing charges just for lekky, and this needs to be fixed because usually it is the poor that are the ones sitting in the 1 bedroom freezing through the winter months.......it's wrong at every level and i do not understand why it has been allowed to continue in this manner.

So the one pays the gas c£130 and the electric c£200 - and the person in the flat pays just the electric c£200

You missed the point totally, which around here is no surprise, so again for the crowd in the balcany, it does not matter if you have only lekky or gas, or both, what matters is that larger properties should be paying a bigger standing charge period for their lekky or gas sc because their larger property requires more piping and cabling, so as i said, the 4 bedroom house should NOT have a lower lekky standing charge than the 1 bedroom flat lekky standing charge, no matter where it is in the UK, the smaller properties should always cost less in lekky or gas standing charge than the bigger properties.

So that 4 bedroom house should in fact be paying at least 70p sc and upwards for their lekky, and the 1 bedroom should be paying 20p sc or less for their lekky, no matter where they are in the UK.........job done, people pay what they actually should be paying for their bigger properties and the materials it uses to transmit lekky and gas around said bigger properties, rather than at present where people sitting in small properties are paying more in lekky sc than people who live in largers properties, and all because of locations, and that is just wrong as the smaller properties with higher SC are basically funding the lower charges for bigger homes......and that is wrong on every level, and this is what Ofgem needs to change, lekky and gas standing charges based on property size, and not location.

Any wiring after the energy meter (i.e. the connection to the grid, which the standing charge pays for) is the householder's responsibility, and completely irrelevant in relation to the standing charge. Larger homes are already 'paying for their bigger properties' by using more energy. You are essentially asking them to pay twice over for no good reason.

(I say this as a one-bed property owner who the above would benefit).

Of course they should be paying more, they use more, their property uses more materials, they chose to buy a bigger property, so they should be paying more across the board, that was their choice when deciding they could afford a bigger property, so why are they NOT paying more in lekky or gas sc than a smaller properties, why are they getting away with paying lower sc charges than smaller properties simply because of location, why is suddenly the exception that proves the rule?

This is what is fundamentally broken with the SC, based on location, but not for those living in smaller properties it seems or those who live next to wind farms areas who enjoy higher lekky and gas charges compared to those who have never seen a wind farm. lol

Scot_39

WibbleBaaaaaa said:

Scot_39 said:

WibbleBaaaaaa said:

Standing charge should be based on size of property and usage, so if you are sitting in a 4 bedroom semi with gas and lekky running through the building then you should be paying for all that in a higher standing charge, while those sitting in say a 1 bedroom flat with just lekky should be the lowest standing charge.......but at present the whole system is so broken that those sitting in a 1 bedroom flat can be paying some of the highest standing charges just for lekky, and this needs to be fixed because usually it is the poor that are the ones sitting in the 1 bedroom freezing through the winter months.......it's wrong at every level and i do not understand why it has been allowed to continue in this manner.

So the one pays the gas c£130 and the electric c£200 - and the person in the flat pays just the electric c£200

You missed the point totally, which around here is no surprise, so again for the crowd in the balcany, it does not matter if you have only lekky or gas, or both, what matters is that larger properties should be paying a bigger standing charge period for their lekky or gas sc because their larger property requires more piping and cabling, so as i said, the 4 bedroom house should NOT have a lower lekky standing charge than the 1 bedroom flat lekky standing charge, no matter where it is in the UK, the smaller properties should always cost less in lekky or gas standing charge than the bigger properties.

So that 4 bedroom house should in fact be paying at least 70p sc and upwards for their lekky, and the 1 bedroom should be paying 20p sc or less for their lekky, no matter where they are in the UK.........job done, people pay what they actually should be paying for their bigger properties and the materials it uses to transmit lekky and gas around said bigger properties, rather than at present where people sitting in small properties are paying more in lekky sc than people who live in largers properties, and all because of locations, and that is just wrong as the smaller properties with higher SC are basically funding the lower charges for bigger homes......and that is wrong on every level, and this is what Ofgem needs to change, lekky and gas standing charges based on property size, and not location.

And that is why some network charges - for electric are considered fixed - so in the standing charge (at least for electricity) and some are built into the unit rates.

By more - I assume you mean in percentage terms - but thats the whole point they are not all percentage terms - they are in fact in part absolutes.  £100 is a £100 cost.  And to counter your size argument - ultimately the all eletrci home may need more power - even thicker cables / higher fuse ratings and more grid backbone to support it - see section on French method below.

And the last time that was studied in full detail by Ofgem - the last charging review - it led Ofgem to move £103 more iirc between 2022 and 2024 -  into the at the time regional average £220 electric standing charge.

Because low users werent in fact paying for their physical supply costs - for the pylons, the cables under their roads etc.  

And dont just think of those in small flats - but those in much larger homes - with large solar and battery capacity - who import virtually nothing in summer months.

As they don't pay an equivalent standing charge for export say - who would end up contributing zero towards grid and local network distribution costs without a standing charge for several months per year.

They still need the same wire to their house - the same local backbone - and some of the same grid capacity to deliver it from the generation stations if hook in at grid level.

And perversely - to counter your property size view point - small flats on all electric may typically have not only a far bigger overall electric energy use - but if using say storage heaters and or electric showers - a far bigger peak use  - so actually need more grid capacity and not less.

And so in a system like France - where the electric standing charges for many (if not all) - are banded by kVA (think kW) peak demand e.g. 

https://www.french-property.com/guides/france/utilities/electricity/tariff/

whereas someone with gas hw and cooking - might never need much more than 3kW for 5 min for a fast boil kettle (*) - and only 200-300W rest of time.

someone with an electric shower - might need 10 kW peak,  

And someone with NSH and HW immersion heater even in a 1 or 2 bed - might need 10kW peak

And if happens to take an electric shower at the same time heating nearer 20kW peak.

Above the tabled 18KVA in that link - so taking the 3.2 large home on gas could easily pay the 6 kVA - the other over double on - c€345 vs c€168 - but I dnt think know if they apply it as a spot peak - so a 5-10 min peak for shower - may not exceed say the 12kVA band at €260 - still nearly €100 / £80 more 

And of course the all elecric flat much higher unit price per kWh.

Edit

(*) And re the 3kVA band in table 3.1 - in Europe - it's not abnormal to find lower rated non fast boil kettles (you at least to - still ? get them in UK too ) that are only rated 2.2 or 2.4 kW - which could keep them even under the 3kVA limit.

It was the move to fairer distribution of fixed electric network costs - after of course the temporary SoLR shocks - which started a lot of the fresh complaints on standing charges.

And as to gas - well as of 2024 - all the gas network charges were on the unit rate (as were the SoLR charges iirc they replaced) - so higher users already do pay more.  

And like with electric larger users / larger homes would probably benefit if those costs split into part fixed via SC part variable via unit rate basis - so a large 4 bed home would pay less relative to now - than a 1/2 bed flat home with gas - with the same standing charges - and the same lowered unit rate recovering less in total.

molerat

WibbleBaaaaaa said:

......... what matters is that larger properties should be paying a bigger standing charge period for their lekky or gas sc because their larger property requires more piping and cabling, so as i said, the 4 bedroom house should NOT have a lower lekky standing charge than the 1 bedroom flat lekky standing charge, no matter where it is in the UK, the smaller properties should always cost less in lekky or gas standing charge than the bigger properties.

So my property that has never seen a load of more than 4 Kw, around 17 Amps, needs more "piping" than the flat with storage heaters and an electric shower that can often have a load of 15 Kw or 65 amps ?  How does that work ?  Surely that flat should be paying a higher standing charge as it is putting more strain on the grid ? And is the hole in the road they have to dig to repair the main outside a small flat cheaper than a large house ?  Those costs are the same whatever sized property or how much energy you use so should be shared evenly on a per MPAN basis.

EssexHebridean

WibbleBaaaaaa said:

Scot_39 said:

WibbleBaaaaaa said:

Standing charge should be based on size of property and usage, so if you are sitting in a 4 bedroom semi with gas and lekky running through the building then you should be paying for all that in a higher standing charge, while those sitting in say a 1 bedroom flat with just lekky should be the lowest standing charge.......but at present the whole system is so broken that those sitting in a 1 bedroom flat can be paying some of the highest standing charges just for lekky, and this needs to be fixed because usually it is the poor that are the ones sitting in the 1 bedroom freezing through the winter months.......it's wrong at every level and i do not understand why it has been allowed to continue in this manner.

So the one pays the gas c£130 and the electric c£200 - and the person in the flat pays just the electric c£200

You missed the point totally, which around here is no surprise, so again for the crowd in the balcany, it does not matter if you have only lekky or gas, or both, what matters is that larger properties should be paying a bigger standing charge period for their lekky or gas sc because their larger property requires more piping and cabling, so as i said, the 4 bedroom house should NOT have a lower lekky standing charge than the 1 bedroom flat lekky standing charge, no matter where it is in the UK, the smaller properties should always cost less in lekky or gas standing charge than the bigger properties.

So that 4 bedroom house should in fact be paying at least 70p sc and upwards for their lekky, and the 1 bedroom should be paying 20p sc or less for their lekky, no matter where they are in the UK.........job done, people pay what they actually should be paying for their bigger properties and the materials it uses to transmit lekky and gas around said bigger properties, rather than at present where people sitting in small properties are paying more in lekky sc than people who live in largers properties, and all because of locations, and that is just wrong as the smaller properties with higher SC are basically funding the lower charges for bigger homes......and that is wrong on every level, and this is what Ofgem needs to change, lekky and gas standing charges based on property size, and not location.

BIB - whatever makes you think that - my gas supply to my old flat was fed with exactly the same size pipe to he same sized meter as my far larger house. Meanwhile on the electric side, the incoming cable was the same size as current, as was the meter, in real terms. The main fuse however had a greater capacity at the flat because the flat had electric heating. 

Standing charge should absolutely not be related to property size, and making it so would leave a lot of folk who could ill afford it in a far worse position currently. property size is irrelevant to the infrastructure in almost all cases.

I'm afraid your lengthy and repeated argument is based entirely on a misunderstanding of the facts. 

On the flip side, the flat did have two balconies in spite of being ground floor - one large enough to fit a small crowd, at least. 

Chrysalis

This mean they abandoned the zero SC plan then?

The reason the per property costs are insisted on being covered is of course the suppliers are being used as stealth tax collectors, a government headache if the plan could be reduced SC without those costs covered.  So for this reason, a low or zero SC plan would have very limited benefit for low usage customers, as there is a requirement that the same amount of revenue is to be collected.  Whole thing just seems to be an empty gift designed to pacify those who are unhappy who will fool for it.

Chrysalis

born_again said:

Only thing that gets anywhere near the standing charge is a phone line. As just like gas/electric it has a infrastructure that needs to be maintained.
Guess what that also has 2 charges. One for calls (although you can get bundled packages) & one for you having a line to receive calls. 

If our retail energy suppliers owned the infrastructure then I could see a argument for removing the SC. As they do not, then somewhere along the line this has to be paid for. If it was public owned, then government pot could pay. But expect taxes to rise to pay. 

It people expect them to pay, then expect energy prices to rise to pay them back. There is no such thing as a free lunch. 
As we should all know given the number of failed energy suppliers in the last few years.

Of course if you enough rental you can get unlimited calls, fixed line phones are antiquated at this points, whats more interesting is mobile phones, you can get a service with no rental type costs at all, and end up paying practically nothing for a inbound only service.  This includes MVNO's and is especially the case with MVNO's who dont own the infrastructure.
The infrastructure costs currently make up a minority of the SC.
The real difference is the regulation impact, the communications providers dont have a mandate to cover costs related to government policy, so they have freedom to cross subsidise packages to suit different customers.

merlodlliw

What about the different pricing  in areas where North Wales,Merseyside and Cheshire has the highest unit price and standing charge, even if the standing charge becomes the same price for all areas it still means the unit price will still be the  highest  making the elderly and low income users turning off their heating and using very little electricity or gas  to cook. Surely those with 2nd homes should be made to pay a high rate over 12months to balance out the fairness towards local people who have to find the money to pay their bills