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

PE556677

Strikes me that the obvious answer is to include some free energy within the standing charge. Helps us low users, doesn't impact vulnerable high energy users and is no advantage to second home owners. 

I am utterly frustrated with all the quangos failing to represent the consumer that they were set up to protect. Ofgem with ridiculous standing charges, ofcom with ridiculous mid contract price rises and contracts that stop customers leaving. Whose side are these people on. Hmm, not customers that's for sure. 

MeteredOut

PE556677 said:

Strikes me that the obvious answer is to include some free energy within the standing charge. Helps us low users, doesn't impact vulnerable high energy users and is no advantage to second home owners. 

I am utterly frustrated with all the quangos failing to represent the consumer that they were set up to protect. Ofgem with ridiculous standing charges, ofcom with ridiculous mid contract price rises and contracts that stop customers leaving. Whose side are these people on. Hmm, not customers that's for sure. 

How many kWh would this obvious answer include? Let's assume a 50p elec standing charge and 25p for gas.

Then we can work out who is going to pay for it (so long as its not you, naturally).

debitcardmayhem

MeteredOut said:

PE556677 said:

Strikes me that the obvious answer is to include some free energy within the standing charge. Helps us low users, doesn't impact vulnerable high energy users and is no advantage to second home owners. 

I am utterly frustrated with all the quangos failing to represent the consumer that they were set up to protect. Ofgem with ridiculous standing charges, ofcom with ridiculous mid contract price rises and contracts that stop customers leaving. Whose side are these people on. Hmm, not customers that's for sure. 

How many kWh would this obvious answer include? Let's assume a 50p standing charge and 25p for gas.

Then we can work out who is going to pay for it (so long as its not you, naturally).

Free lunch, as long as someone else pays for it 

QrizB

MeteredOut said:

PE556677 said:

Strikes me that the obvious answer is to include some free energy within the standing charge. Helps us low users, doesn't impact vulnerable high energy users and is no advantage to second home owners. 

How many kWh would this obvious answer include? Let's assume a 50p elec standing charge and 25p for gas.

If we're looking to completely overhaul residential energy billing, you could move to the same model that mobile phone contracts use.

Eg. a fixed £25/month for a tariff that gives you 60kWh/month (with a notional value of £30), with anything extra charged as an addition. The expectation being that most people will use less than their allowance and so will be subsidising those who do.

You could have tiered tariffs for larger monthly allowances.

MeteredOut

QrizB said:

MeteredOut said:

PE556677 said:

Strikes me that the obvious answer is to include some free energy within the standing charge. Helps us low users, doesn't impact vulnerable high energy users and is no advantage to second home owners. 

How many kWh would this obvious answer include? Let's assume a 50p elec standing charge and 25p for gas.

If we're looking to completely overhaul residential energy billing, you could move to the same model that mobile phone contracts use.

Eg. a fixed £25/month for a tariff that gives you 60kWh/month (with a notional value of £30), with anything extra charged as an addition. The expectation being that most people will use less than their allowance and so will be subsidising those who do.

You could have tiered tariffs for larger monthly allowances.

Agreed that is one option, but it is effectively just a small discount for the customer in exchange for a guaranteed minimum income for the supplier, and I guess any units above the "allowance" would be at greater cost than those paying SVT only. A good product for customers who are confident about their usage.

But, I doubt that's what the poster was suggesting, which is why i asked. They said it was obvious, so it shouldn't be too difficult to explain.

QrizB

Thinking of alternative ways to structure the GB domestic energy market, you could split the cost of "providing a connection to the grid" from the cost of "supplying energy". So you'd have two electricity bills; one from your DNO (SSEN, SPEN, WPS etc) for the costs associated with the connection, and a second one from your chosen energy supplier (Octopus, BG, Outfox ...) for the electricity you've used.

This won't reduce prices but will make it more transparent to certain people as to what they're actually paying for with their "standing charge".

debitcardmayhem

QrizB said:

Thinking of alternative ways to structure the GB domestic energy market, you could even split the cost of "providing a connection to the grid" from the cost of "supplying energy". So you'd have two electricity bills; one from your DNO (SSEN, SPEN, WPS etc) for the costs associated with the connection, and a second one from your chosen energy supplier (Octopus, BG, Outfox ...) for the electricity you've used.

This won't reduce prices but will make it more transparent to certain people as to what they're actually paying for with their "standing charge".

And also a bucket for WHD so that those who receive it will see that they are also contributing from their £150 pounds too, I shouldn’t think many who receive it realise it’s not what it seems.

MeteredOut

Dare I add that they should add a separate bill for the net-zero components of the SC?

pseudodox

QrizB said:

Thinking of alternative ways to structure the GB domestic energy market, you could even split the cost of "providing a connection to the grid" from the cost of "supplying energy". So you'd have two electricity bills; one from your DNO (SSEN, SPEN, WPS etc) for the costs associated with the connection, and a second one from your chosen energy supplier (Octopus, BG, Outfox ...) for the electricity you've used.

This won't reduce prices but will make it more transparent to certain people as to what they're actually paying for with their "standing charge".

The most sensible suggestion yet.  I would be quite happy to pay a fixed monthly S/C in advance, then pay separately each month for the actual energy I have consumed.  Just like paying other bills with split fixed costs/variables (VED/petrol; phone line/ calls; boiler service/repairs).

The S/C could be paid 6 monthly or annually like Council Tax, Insurance, VED or TV Licence, with a discount for upfront rather than monthly payments.

born_again

PE556677 said:

Strikes me that the obvious answer is to include some free energy within the standing charge. Helps us low users, doesn't impact vulnerable high energy users and is no advantage to second home owners. 

I am utterly frustrated with all the quangos failing to represent the consumer that they were set up to protect. Ofgem with ridiculous standing charges, ofcom with ridiculous mid contract price rises and contracts that stop customers leaving. Whose side are these people on. Hmm, not customers that's for sure. 

As a low user you are already paying less than heavy users 🤷‍♀️

Someone has to pay for the freebee...