Energy supplier refusing to back bill

masonic

This is quite a confusing thread, because surely your desired outcome is not to be back-billed. Back-billing is when you receive a new bill for energy used more than 12 months ago.

You've not stated over what period of time this debt has been built up, or what your account balance was 12 months ago. It seems from what you have said that the EO decision is that your account as at November 2024 should be zeroed and you should receive a new bill for the most recent 12 months with any payments made since November 2024 going towards it. You would then need to clear any debit balance. There should be no back-billing prior to November 2024. They get what you had paid towards your energy already and no more.

I am surprised that no attempt to increase your DD has been made.

To answer your question about enforcing the Energy Ombudsman decision, it does not have the power of a court order like a Financial Ombudsman decision, but the EO is supposed to handle enforcement internally. You can take Octopus Energy to court, but you'd need to rely on a legal protection rather than a regulatory one. The back-billing rules are not recognised in law (unlike say the Guaranteed Standards of Performance compensation).

It would be good if you could share the exact wording of the remedy the EO has imposed on Octopus.

Scot_39

Terry_Daktil said:

The forum won't allow me to post a link as I've only been a member for 13 years. 🤪

Think its the your low numbers of posts - not the length of membership.  

I was a passive reader for quite a while before started posting.  And had the problem in a couple of my first few posts several years ago.

NotArobot24

Terry_Daktil said:

Hi,
Recently sought help from the ombudsman regarding a direct debit issue with payment adequacy.
The ombudsman couldn't help with that but suggested the remedy of back billing as octopus allowed my direct debit to be set too low.
This remedy was agreed but octopus have not discounted my account.
They have allowed me to build up almost 5k in debt and the ombudsman say it was the energy companies fault and I should be back billed.
The energy company say they have run their dreaded payment adequacy on my account and there are no further discounts and I have been back billed.
I have stated to them that this was not the agreed remedy and have asked the ombudsman to contact them so it is on going.
Back billing means they cannot charge for energy used over 12 months ago right?
Is there a chance of taking the ombudsman result to the small claims track failing compliance?
This is the second time they have failed to implement the ombudsman remedy, i had another case several years ago on a seperate matter.

Thanks in advance for any help.

I am on your side, I am with Octopus and very sensitive to under payments, for this reason I pay by variable direct debit, budget accounts  have never worked for me with any supplier and Octopus is as bad as the rest when it comes to estimates.

That being said, they are probably the best of a bad bunch,

I think what will help you is not only OFGEM rules but the Octopus FAQ and Blog, it sounds absolutely wonderful, just how you would want an energy company to be.  However, they do not live up to some of the things they say and have all sorts of weird things you have to do to avoid "computer says no".

Their staff have told me that it is their responsibility to no allow bad debt to build up, they always under estimate and if I was on a fixed direct debt that would have happened to me too.

Of course they stock response is to get a smart meter, my experience from my own account and those I have recommended is that they kind of punish you if you do not work the way they want you to work. 

I would go through the FAQ and Blog, there is so much there to help you,  Then look of OFGEM site, I have definitely come across rules even before back billing where they were not allowed to have debt build up. 

You have a positive decision from the Ombudsman and Octopus have all your usage for the period 12 months before the decision. So if it £4800 now and £1800 is your usage for the last 12 months, but you paid £500 in Direct Debits during that 12 months then  your claim would be for £3500.

You then send them a letter before action in accordance with these rules, give them 30 days to settle or you will file a claim for the amount owing in the County Court without further notice.

Tell them you each understand each other's position from the Ombudsman complaint, the Obbusman has ruled in your favour so the decision has been made for them.  You have tried to meet the overriding objective, calling them on numerous occasions and finally with this letter before claim. You have already used an ADR system and they have failed to comply with the decision that went against them and in your favour.  You have provided all of the information to support the efficient management of these proceedings.  You will be seeking the sum of X being the balance of the account on the day of the decision less 12 months of usage (less any payments you already made).



 
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct#3.1

Objectives of pre-action conduct and protocols

3. Before commencing proceedings, the court will expect the parties to have exchanged sufficient information to—

(a) understand each other’s position;

(b) make decisions about how to proceed;

(c) try to settle the issues without proceedings;

(d) consider a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) to assist with settlement;

(e) support the efficient management of those proceedings; and

(f) reduce the costs of resolving the dispute.

You can call the CAB for advice on how to structure the claim, it is pretty easy

Particulars of Claim is the basics of the claim including the legislation that has been breached.

Witness Statement is your chronological detail of what happened, keep it as brief as possible and have evidence to back up every paragraph.

Mention at the end that the Ombudsman came down in your favour but Octopus have failed to credit your account in accordance with the decision.

Gather all your evidence and everything you want to say, it does not need to be as long as the Ombudsman stuff but everything from that complaint should be in your bundle.   Plus any OFGEM rules plus the information in their own blog and website.

You can file your case online for around 5% of the fee which Octopus will pay when they lose,  if there is a hearing you can get general costs like time off work, travel to the Court, lunch if the case is late and you need lunch.

https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome

A Judge is very likely to defer to the Ombudman decision, it is binding and it is in your favour.

Once you win I would file a new ombudman compliant for them not complying with the first Ombudman decision which cost you time and stress, seek compensation for that over and above the money you are owed.

Moving forward, get a smart meter and move to variable direct debit, if they screw up again, for example if the smart meter gives bad reads, let it ride for 2 years and rinse n repeat.





Yes, energy companies in the UK are bound by the decisions made by the Energy Ombudsman, provided the customer accepts the decision. 

Key Points

• Mandatory Membership: All licensed gas and electricity suppliers, as well as network operators and (from April 2025) heat network suppliers in the UK, are required by the regulator Ofgem to be members of the Energy Ombudsman scheme.
• Binding on Companies, Not Customers: If a customer accepts the Ombudsman's decision and the proposed remedy, that decision becomes legally binding on the energy company. The company then has 28 days to implement the solution, which can include apologies, practical action to correct an issue, or financial compensation (up to £10,000 for domestic customers, £20,000 for small businesses).
• Customer Choice: The customer is not bound by the decision. If a customer is unhappy with the Ombudsman's decision, they can reject it and pursue their complaint through other avenues, such as the courts.
• Enforcement: While the Ombudsman does not have direct power to issue fines, Ofgem can take enforcement action and impose financial penalties on suppliers who fail to comply with an Ombudsman's binding decision. 

If a supplier fails to implement the binding decision within the specified timeframe (usually 28 days), the Ombudsman will follow up and the customer can report the non-compliance to Ofgem Yes, energy companies in the UK are bound by the decisions made by the Energy Ombudsman, provided the customer accepts the decision. 

Key Points

• Mandatory Membership: All licensed gas and electricity suppliers, as well as network operators and (from April 2025) heat network suppliers in the UK, are required by the regulator Ofgem to be members of the Energy Ombudsman scheme.
• Binding on Companies, Not Customers: If a customer accepts the Ombudsman's decision and the proposed remedy, that decision becomes legally binding on the energy company. The company then has 28 days to implement the solution, which can include apologies, practical action to correct an issue, or financial compensation (up to £10,000 for domestic customers, £20,000 for small businesses).
• Customer Choice: The customer is not bound by the decision. If a customer is unhappy with the Ombudsman's decision, they can reject it and pursue their complaint through other avenues, such as the courts.
• Enforcement: While the Ombudsman does not have direct power to issue fines, Ofgem can take enforcement action and impose financial penalties on suppliers who fail to comply with an Ombudsman's binding decision. 

If a supplier fails to implement the binding decision within the specified timeframe (usually 28 days), the Ombudsman will follow up and the customer can report the non-compliance to Ofgem or seek to enforce the decision in court

QrizB

NotArobot24 said:

Some stuff

That's terrible advice, please don't do any of that.

timjim

Terry_Daktil said:

Thanks for all the comments. All thoughts are appreciated.

Just to add:
The ombudsman stated i was not billed correctly as I only received monthly statements not a bill. Also, the company did not take corrective measures to stop debt accruing.
They were quite specific on this.
Despite me paying what I could afford it was the energy company who allowed the debt to accrue and back billing should be applied.

The energy company actually agreed to this resolution and its remedies but I have still not received any deduction on my bill.

So you knew the debt was building up but chose to ignore it.  It would seem you hoped to get to the stage where you didn't have to pay!

Scot_39

Monthly statements are a record of your account - you dont get bills - the DD amount however should have been adjusted regularly to reflect real use.  On SVT Ofgem capped tariffs when changes are large that now happens for some quarterly.

This is the basis of your defence and the basis on which back billing offset would apply - their failure to keep accurate billing - by revising the direct debits.

But they would need accurate measurements to do so.

GingerTim

Don't take advice from Generative AI, kids.

Terry_Daktil

timjim said:

Terry_Daktil said:

Thanks for all the comments. All thoughts are appreciated.

Just to add:
The ombudsman stated i was not billed correctly as I only received monthly statements not a bill. Also, the company did not take corrective measures to stop debt accruing.
They were quite specific on this.
Despite me paying what I could afford it was the energy company who allowed the debt to accrue and back billing should be applied.

The energy company actually agreed to this resolution and its remedies but I have still not received any deduction on my bill.

So you knew the debt was building up but chose to ignore it.  It would seem you hoped to get to the stage where you didn't have to pay!

Not at all!
My initial complaint was that my agreed direct debit amount was not showing in my online octopus account because of ai and i couldnt afford that amount. I did not expect back billing it was the ombudsman that suggested that as a remedy.
I did question this and according to both ofgem and the ombudsman it is not the customer's fault for allowing substantial debt to accrue. They should've billed me for the amount and sorted a repayment plan but what they did was not a corrective measure, allowing further debt to continue because they allowed my direct debit to be set too low.

QrizB

The Ombudsman has issued a ruling. Octopus say they have applied that ruling to your account.

Have Octopus issued you with a revised bill that shows how they have applied it? Can you share that bill here, with any personal identifying info removed?

Terry_Daktil

QrizB said:

The Ombudsman has issued a ruling. Octopus say they have applied that ruling to your account.

Have Octopus issued you with a revised bill that shows how they have applied it? Can you share that bill here, with any personal identifying info removed?

Octopus said there are no discounts, despite accepting the ombudsman ruling. So I don't have a revised bill. I feel like they are gaslighting as the ombudsman said they would try and get out of it.
I am still waiting for the ombudsman to chase it up so will update when that happens.