NPower gas 'sculpting'

Cardew

I believe this is a systemic fault with npowers billing system and is probably still happening.

Given that the CV can range between 37.5 and 43 this potentially could make a 13% difference(although highly unlikely!)

It is fair to point out that this could work in the customer's favour(assuming the company don't correct it when it works against them!!!!)

DirectDebacle

Their system should have generated a final bill for the period 1/7/08-4/8/08. I don't think it was able to do this as the start reading of this bill would have shown a reading greater than the end reading. The computer program would not recognise this. It then re-billed the whole period as one bill and adjusted it for the credit of £13.75 which would be showing.

As you say if it made the adjustment when it worked against them then no problem but it appears that the this sort of possibility was not considred when the billing program was designed. Or maybe it was, but to only auto adjust if it was in their favour to do so.

Only by carefully checking re-calculated bills will it be known if mine was a one off or not and will only be evident if the C.V. has changed.

DirectDebacle

npower and Ofgem are once again in the spotlight. They have been asked telling questions by The Times, Consumer Focus and Lib Dem MP Simon Hughes. All great news and ensures this fiasco will just not go away. Made my weekend.:D

Story is here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/article6897133.ece

icefall

DirectDebacle wrote: »

npower and Ofgem are once again in the spotlight. They have been asked telling questions by The Times, Consumer Focus and Lib Dem MP Simon Hughes. All great news and ensures this fiasco will just not go away. Made my weekend.:D

Story is here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/article6897133.ece

Great article, at last sounding more like what actually happened. Maybe there will actually be consequences for Npower? I hope so anyway because I have been following this saga for a good while on here and feel it should have a worthy conclusion for the rights of the ordinary energy consumer this time - with any luck.

1carminestocky

Just read that article in my (just delivered) copy of The Times and thought I would see mention of it on here:D Fantastic development IMO. Surely heads will have to roll at Ofgem and npower for this?

So Ofgem saw perfectly fit to investigate a 6-month period for a complaint that involved what constituted a whole year? Seriously, they are either extremely thick or something else I'd better not put in print...

PS Unless I've missed it and apologies if I have, this scandal still being totally ignored by Mr M Lewis?

DirectDebacle

1carminestocky wrote: »

PS Unless I've missed it and apologies if I have, this scandal still being totally ignored by Mr M Lewis?

You haven't missed a thing. Martin has. Not like him to overlook a publicity opportunity.

npower and Ofgem have their backs to wall. This can of worms is being prised open and some of them are beginning to wriggle out.

Consumer Focus have done the job that Ofgem should have done and even widened the issue to npowers advertising campaign aimed at B.G.. npower are refusing to talk to C.F. and it reads as though C.F. are going to continue to seek for ways to persue npower for compensation.

At the same time Ofgem have been made to look weak and ineffectual.

Simon Hughes is the Shadow Lib. Dem. Energy and Climate Change spokesperson. It seems he is keen to have Ofgems role examined and in particular their handling of this enquiry. He is a high profile M.P. and has influence in the corridors of power.

There is a long way to go before customers are re-imbursed but the momentum is now back with us and we need to continue to keep pressing.

It is only just beginning to dawn on others how big this issue really is.

Potentially £156m compensation pay out by npower plus any fine they may receive. That would probably bring them to their knees, customers would leave in droves and their existence as an energy supplier would be in the balance. It would be a real wake up call to the rest of the industry.

For Ofgem the political outcome would be no less serious. An enquiry into their regulatory role would reveal, at least from a consumers point of view, how ineffectual they are. Of course they are, at the moment, hampered by having to enforce weak legislation, but that is no excuse for allowing their limited powers to become timed out.

I expect a review would reveal that they are at the moment not fit for purpose, partly as a result of the way they were set up and also through their own internal policies.

The main purpose of this thread is to get as much compensation for as many victims as possible.

In the past I have not had much faith in organisations such as Consumer Focus. Unlike npower or Ofgem I am happy to report that in this case I was wrong. I take my hat off to them for what they have achieved so far. I sincerely hope they continue their excellent work on this issue and that they bring npower to book. They will have my wholehearted support.

If Ofgem is re-structured and provided with the ability, willingness and tools to excercise effective regulation and protect the consumer, then that can only be good news.

1carminestocky

Performance-related pay? :eek: The pay levels are quite extraordinary for an organisation with such limited powers IMO.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/may/24/ofgem-executive-pay

PS Agree about CF, they have gone up massively in my estimation with this article. I still expect Govt intervention to stop npower getting their come-uppance over this, though (although we will know nothing about it, I'm sure). Hope I'm wrong.

Sterling

I sense the scales are beginning to tip in our favour at long last. I say that because The Times’ report says that Consumer Focus has investigated this sculpting matter and considers that npower was at fault. Until now, the scales have always been in npower’s favour.

Despite Energywatch making a formal complaint to Ofgem about this whole sculpting business back in March 2008, Ofgem merely conducted a sham of an investigation (which it somehow managed to make last a year), and then failed to declare npower to be in any way at fault. How the directors at npower must have laughed.

But now we have a different situation. Now we have the weight of Consumer Focus coming down against npower sculpting tricks and Ofgem’s so-called investigation in this matter. Now the scales are tipping in favour of the consumer.

Nevertheless there is still a way to go yet. Ofgem still refuses to admit it has done anything wrong, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. To my mind, that merely shows that Ofgem has never been fit for purpose, and never will be; and that it should be scrapped, and replaced with a regulator that is not a puppet of the energy supply companies.

I wonder if the directors at npower are quite as confident of holding onto that hundred million or so pounds of customer’s money that npower wrongly fleeced from its affected customers. They may not be quaking in their boots just yet, but I wonder if they’re still laughing.

Hopefully, a test case or class action will be brought against npower, whereupon a court will be able to properly adjudicate on npower’s actions. In the meantime, I am about to bring Ofgem’s shortcomings to the attention of the Parliamentary Ombudsman, where I will be seeking a declaration that Ofgem did not carry out its investigation correctly; and that it was therefore guilty of maladministration. Then I propose to attempt to bring Ofgem to public account before either Parliament or Government as the case may be.

meggsy

DirectDebacle wrote: »

npower and Ofgem are once again in the spotlight. They have been asked telling questions by The Times, Consumer Focus and Lib Dem MP Simon Hughes. All great news and ensures this fiasco will just not go away. Made my weekend.:D

Story is here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/article6897133.ece

Great news DD :T well done !
I read the article earlier, first thing I looked for as you had previously mentioned it was to appear, but as carmine has said I can't believe the excuse from Ofgem either that they were only asked to investigate 6 months.

Can I suggest that we post our comments on The Times link as well
and many congratulations to all of you.

This thread should be a sticky ! Martin seems to be content to let you get on with it doesn't he ? Maybe the first posting will be updated sometime :rolleyes:

DirectDebacle

meggsy wrote: »

I read the article earlier, first thing I looked for as you had previously mentioned it was to appear, but as carmine has said I can't believe the excuse from Ofgem either that they were only asked to investigate 6 months.

They weren't. Below is the formal complaint Energywatch made to Ofgem.

From:
Sent: 07 March, 2008 12:32
To:
Subject: Formal referral of npower
Importance: High
Dear

I believe that you are aware that a (name deleted) has been in touch with energywatch unhappy at the way in which npower effected a change to its methodology for charging customers on its first tier of charges in April 2007. Essentially npower moved from a position of a seasonal percentage application of its first (and higher priced) tier to a flat application across the year to enable it to conduct a migration of customers from one billing platform to another. In November 2007, having completed the migration, it reverted back to the seasonal application. Whilst npower notified customers of its changes ahead of the November change in order to comply with licence condition 23, it did not do so in April 2007 because it was also implementing a price reduction.

Energywatch wishes to formally refer this matter to Ofgem to consider if a licence breach has occurred and/or if the actions of npower raise other issues that result in consumer detriment.

I attach a response we received from npower to questions we raised and also subsequent correspondence received from including a further letter from npower. I understand that you have the other case notes from us on this matter.

The issues we would raise are:

1. It appears to us that during the period of 1st May 2007 and 31st October 2007, the changes effected by npower to the way in which they apportioned their first (higher price) tier of charges resulted in a detriment to the consumer. During a period of the year, when the consumer would have had applied a lower percentage of the core first tier units, they were suddenly subjected to a higher proportion of those units than would have otherwise been the case.

2. npower suggest that they were under no obligation to inform their 2.2 million customers affected of this as they had reduced their prices (of the second tier) at the same time. We would suggest that this is a spurious argument, burying detriment in amongst a price reduction. At worst it is a licence breach (SLC 23), and at best it is an underhand way of introducing a measure that is detrimental to consumers without them knowing.

3, the fact that the two changes to the first tier structure were applied in the same 12 month period, must result in consumer detriment. What happened in previous and subsequent years where a full 12 months elapses and the benefits and detriments even out, is not relevant.

4. we are concerned that the npower first tier of more expensive units does not relate to a period covering a year, ie 12 months, but covers the 'tariff year". They define the "tariff year" as being the period 12 months from any tariff change. Thus in 2007, they had 2 tariff years and with their price changes in early 2008, another tariff year has occurred. That represents 3 "years" in less than actual 12 months period. This has had the effect of resetting the higher tier unit clock 3 times and thus in a subtle way their customers are paying for the higher rate units far in excess of the supposed 4,572 units per annum.

5. npower state that they factored into their price reduction in April 2007 the effects of the tier changes. There is no transparency of this to consumers or to energywatch and we would request Ofgem to review the methodology used by npower to verify if this detriment has been offset by the level of their price reduction. As a matter of principle we find such an opaque reason to be unacceptable as whilst on the one hand the change on the tier structure is quite clear to the consumer, any 'positive" changes are notably hidden.


I would formally request Ofgem to investigate this matter and respond to the particular circumstances of this case, a possible licence breach by npower and the policy issues we have raised

.

As can be seen there are several references made to a 12 month year. Ofgem were not specifically asked to investigate 1st May-31st October. They chose this interpretation which, in their view, then excluded them from investigating the real issues. All they appear to have investigated is issue 1. of the complaint.

They have failed to properly explain this in my and The Times questions to them. This and other questions need to be repeatedly put to them until a credible answer is given.

Unfortunately for them, an honest answer is not going to show them in a good light.