NPower gas 'sculpting'

DirectDebacle

Mick_Steel wrote: »

Hi Sterling

TBH, I only skimmed over what was said and did not read it all. I am sure that DD did not mean to offend and maybe he stepped over the mark with his comments. I cannot speak for DD, but I am sure that on reflection he may retract these and reaffirm his intent to take to task the real enemies in this argument.

I hold both of you gents in very high regard and would hate to give the likes of a certain Mr Chapman (I know you remember him…..!!) and the rest of the npower consortium the pleasure of seeing you fall out over a few misplaced words. I think you are both better than that.

As this post is not strictly an npower matter it does not contradict my last post.

Mick,

When assisting you with your claim I was impressed with your level headed and commonsense approach and so I seriously considered your above suggestion of retraction. I thought there was a slim chance of salvaging the thread if I did.

I could see nothing offensive in my posts other than likening Sterlings search of my posts as an Alice in Wonderland journey and observing that his research and case preparation methods were lazy, slack and sloppy.
Mild stuff by 'chat room standards'.

In his first confrontational post he copy and pasted quotes from previous posts of mine. He used this to support his claim that my advice to gjh to contact the Ombudsman was inconsistent with my previous advice.

This is what he quoted:

and why DD should now advise you to take a different route is quite beyond me, especially in the light of his post #61, page 4 of this thread in which he said

“I will request a refund which I expect they will refuse. I will then give them 14 days to settle or take them to the small claims court.”

This is what I actually said

I will request a refund which I expect they will refuse. I will then give them 14 days to settle or take them to the small claims court. Putting a claim in deadlock is just another way of fobbing you off. I am not going to waste my time writing letters or making endless pointless phone calls. They owe me money and I want it back. If it was the other way round they would have no qualms about instructing debt collectors or getting bailifs in. If the court finds in my favour then it won't matter whether they admit liability or not, they will have been found to be liable. Then perhaps that will open the door for others. It is time something was done other than chatting to their customer service dept. Actions speak louder than words.

To put it in its real context it is from March 2008. It was only my second post on the thread. I was stating an intention. At that time I didn't even know how to start applying for a county court summons let alone know the procedures recommended by the court. I was certainly in no position to be advising anyone on how to make a claim. I hadn't even begun my own.

So he edited my post to support his own flawed argument.

In the same post he then uses this quote to hammer home his point that I have never mentioned the Ombudsman service before advising gjh.

And, in post #422, page 22, DD said

“They have backed us into a corner leaving us few options. You can wait for Ofgem, complain to Trading Standards who now have investigative powers for this type of complaint, go to court or just forget about it. I would recommend you write to them and give them 14 days to refund you or you will take them to court. See if you get a reaction.”

This is what I actually said,

npower told me they were deadlocking my complaint and that the Ombudsman wouldn't deal with it. I contacted the Ombudsman and they confirmed that they saw it as a 'business' issue and was not therefore in their remit. npower refuse to co-operate with Energywatch so that leaves the Ofgem enquiry.

The price change in April tells me that this is a well prepared and thought out plan. The price change was their first line of defence and I am sure it has worked very well. I suspect that the bulk of those that have complained have accepted this explanation and gone away thinking how nice npower were to lower their gas prices for them. The 'reset/tariff year' garbage is their second line of defence. These are not the actions of a company that has made a genuine mistake or a billing error. It is a well prepared plan designed to rake in millions of £s of additional income and was dreamed up well in advance of April.

They have backed us into a corner leaving us few options. You can wait for Ofgem, complain to Trading Standards who now have investigative powers for this type of complaint, go to court or just forget about it. I would recommend you write to them and give them 14 days to refund you or you will take them to court. See if you get a reaction.

Whatever you decide you know that there are many on here willing to help and support you as much as they can.

Good luck.

Time has moved on. It is now the beginning of June 2008. I have done my research and contacted the Ombudsman as I recommended gjh to do. As this did not support Sterlings argument he edited out those parts and posted only that which suited him.

This was a deliberate deception designed to mislead the reader into forming the opinion he had a valid argument.

Larer on he edits out the whole of the advice the HMCS web site gives on court procedure re the Ombudsman with the exception of the final sentence. Not content with editing my posts to deceive, he is quite at ease with manipulating the information contained in Her Majesty's Court Service official web site too.

I later quote the full text in my post #1396. That post ended his game. So he resorted to running round the thread seeking support in his view that I had treated him badly. Unbelievable.

Sterling was never interested in giving gjh sound advice or having a dignified debate as he later stated. In fact a dignified debate was the last thing he wanted and his first two posts were designed for that very purpose. He thought I had given him inconsistent advice and took the opportunity to embark upon one of his points scoring excercises.

He employed disgusting and deceitful tactics in order to prove his point. He lied to you and everone else who read those posts and his behaviour was reprehensible. Had he succeeded he would now be happily giving out his flawed advice to people, some of whom at least would take it as the absolute truth.

His aggressive, bullying and confrontational manner needs to be exposed together with his lack of knowledge.

All bullies are cowards. If they are stood up to they run away, as he has done.

It is a shame that his ego has caused so much damage. Not only has he, in my view, destroyed his own credibility he was selfish enough to destroy the thread in the process.

So having considered your suggestion of retracting my remarks, unfortunately on this occasion I do not think I can. With hindsight I don't actually think they were strong enough.

For me that puts the final nail in the coffin for this thread. It is a shame that something that has been so useful for so many should come to such an undignified end. But I guess thats 'thread life' for you.

kidsmadhouse

Hi

I know that this question is not related to the problems in 2007 (but I do intend to check past bills after reading this thread!)

But, I received my gas bill dated 11/11/09 saying I have £153.16 in credit - I have paid £209.87 by DD during the last quarter and my bill was only £56.71.

It was an estimated bill (23/10/09) saying I had used 1533kwh. cost split of first 307 @ 7.659p and 1226@2.488p. Cost of gas used £54.01.

As I rang Npower to retrieve my credit I was told that I had to provide a reading, which I did 14/11/09 and it turned out to be less than the estimate. I waited for the revised bill to come through so I could request my refund.

Today it came on a bill dated 17/11/09 with a credit of £134.61?

On checking the bill I found that of the 1241 kwh used the cost split was 789@7.659p and 452 @ 2.488p, plus I was being charged £71.68 for using less gas??

I rang up Npower and have been told that it is gas sculpting and quotes of summer and winter rates. I still don't get how the previous summer rate of 1226kwh has now reduced to 452kwh when the reading start for both bills is 21/07/09??

Am I right in querying this? if not can someone explain as I don't get it

Many thanks

KimYeovil

Only 271 units are charged at Tier 1 in October. 882 units are charged at Tier 1 in November.

Your first bill ended in October. Your new bill ended in November. The new bill would also have a larger number of units (estimated between your reading and 17 November.)

So a whole bunch of units (about 550) previously charged at Tier 2 on the old bill now cost 5p more.

Yes, it could be more expensive. (And is a separate issue to this thread - you could start a new thread if you want to scratch your head over this for longer.)

Cardew

kidsmadhouse wrote: »

Hi

I know that this question is not related to the problems in 2007 (but I do intend to check past bills after reading this thread!)

But, I received my gas bill dated 11/11/09 saying I have £153.16 in credit - I have paid £209.87 by DD during the last quarter and my bill was only £56.71.

It was an estimated bill (23/10/09) saying I had used 1533kwh. cost split of first 307 @ 7.659p and 1226@2.488p. Cost of gas used £54.01.

As I rang Npower to retrieve my credit I was told that I had to provide a reading, which I did 14/11/09 and it turned out to be less than the estimate. I waited for the revised bill to come through so I could request my refund.

Today it came on a bill dated 17/11/09 with a credit of £134.61?

On checking the bill I found that of the 1241 kwh used the cost split was 789@7.659p and 452 @ 2.488p, plus I was being charged £71.68 for using less gas??

I rang up Npower and have been told that it is gas sculpting and quotes of summer and winter rates. I still don't get how the previous summer rate of 1226kwh has now reduced to 452kwh when the reading start for both bills is 21/07/09??

Am I right in querying this? if not can someone explain as I don't get it

Many thanks

I think you will find npower are correct - bearing ming they use the crazy sculpting(seasonal weighting)

The problem is the November is a 'heavily weighted' month - 882kWh at tier 1 if I recall correctly. So in the 14 days of November (now on your new bill) that is an additional 410 aprox tier 1 units. Plus some for the 8 days from 23 Oct to 31 oct at tier 1.

So although you have used less units(kWh) overall you have used a lot more high priced tier1 units - 482 to be precise!!!

Much as the system is stupid, it is not incorrect.

kidsmadhouse

Many thanks for your replies.I'm not going to pretend that I fully understand them.

Maybe what I should be asking is am I paying £20 more for my gas in the long run or will it even out with the next bill?

Many thanks

Cardew

kidsmadhouse wrote: »

Many thanks for your replies.I'm not going to pretend that I fully understand them.

Maybe what I should be asking is am I paying £20 more for my gas in the long run or will it even out with the next bill?

Many thanks

Yes it will even out.

The Tier 1 allocation of 4,572kWh per year charged at a high rate is, in effect, a standing charge for the supply of gas. This is the same principle as all other companies who have a Tier 1/Tier2 charging system.

The difference between npower and all other companies is that they have an uneven pattern of charging for Tier 1 units(i.e. seasonal weighting) so you get charged for far more high priced tier 1 units in the winter months, but less in the summer.

kidsmadhouse

Many thanks Cardew

Even today (in fact as we speak) Npower is unable to utter the 5 words I need to here and you have said.

'yes it will even out' instead of quoting the gas sculpting policy!

I'm now going to ask for my overpayment back and to ask for my payments to be reduced in line with the real figures. Oh and yes I have started to look for a new provider!

Case closed!

Cardew

kidsmadhouse wrote: »

Oh and yes I have started to look for a new provider!

Case closed!

The time to leave npower is at the end of the summer when you have been paying for a lower amount of tier 1 units and before you start paying the high winter amounts.

You also need to consider any discounts when deciding on timing.

gjh1936

Just to let you know that I replied to n-power's dismissive response to my request for a refund of the overpayment (£45 ish) by refuting some of the claims they had made in their response (polite but firm). Today I received a cheque for £50 with a letter reiterating some of their original points and, of course the ususal proviso "without any admission of liability". I am now looking for an alternative supplier!
Sorry to read about the altercation between two of our subscribers.

backfoot

I have followed this thread with much interest over its duration and wanting to catch up on progress, I was absolutely dismayed and disappointed to see what had happened.

So much progress has been made to bring this dreadful Npower organisation and its Director's to account. That initiative and ongoing momentum will I believe reap further rewards, including officially showing up the feeble part that Ofgem has played in this and other regulatory issues.

Sitting here, I can see much of that good work potentially being undone by the dispute which has arisen between two of the main architects of much of that progress. We owe a great deal to both DD's and Sterling's efforts and single mindedness to win against all odds against the powerful large organisations.

It is probably that single mindedness, which is a positive trait of many of the best 'Customer Champions', which has led to the heated disagreement and intransigence of both parties. I know, because I recognise how easily it is to fall into trap of ''matters of principle', which quickly turn into positions of no turning back. I am so guilty of this sequence of events in many of my own dealings both in life and on the internet. The internet medium easily gives rise to this sort of damaging escalation because just one word,one phrase or nuance is felt so much more acutely.

Some time has passed for both of you now, and I expect that the emotions are still very raw. That will diminish over time, even if there are ongoing niggles but I would sincerely beg of you both to come back together and seek some sort of compromise over this issue which allows you both to continue to be our excellent 'Champions' and focus your ongoing efforts and diligence towards the real enemy.If you don't you will both go on to regret what essentially should be a combined triumph both in the short and long term. It will not quite feel the same with this dispute hanging over it all.

Sitting here quite neutrally, the heart of the dispute concerns the approach to be taken prior to legal action. One party advocates one approach ,the other suggests a different route. That discussion is laid out before us. Readers can determine which one they prefer. In the scale of things, and in the context of the overall principles here it would be a shame to let this aspect become the showstopper to any further advice which you experts can offer to others.

Clearly, both parties may have used words or phrases which have caused mutual offence, and perhaps now, both parties could agree to make a statement which said that those issues were 'in the heat of the moment' and are now withdrawn for the good of the overall cause.

Please fellas, put aside this blip and return to what you both do best and continue your brilliant efforts for the good of customers and the environment of MSE.

Thanks.