NPower gas 'sculpting'

alleycat`

DD, thank you yet again for a great post (which i suspect you might have had to repeat more than once).



From my previous post:-


The letter from the 17th has turned up in today’s post.
It was dated the 17th but wasn't posted until the 24th judging by the franking stamp.



As for the letter:-


By and large it explains the reasoning behind seasonal weighting and also explains primary and lower block weights, when and why they were introduced and also about the complexities involved in moving a billing system(?)
.
In essence it is quite a lot of letter and yet adresses almost nothing for 80% of the content.



The interesting parts of the entire thing to me are the following (and I quote):

"NPower gas tariffs for non-prepayment customers are "two tier" tariffs, i.e. 4,572KWh each year (my emphasis) are charged at the higher 'primary' block rate, the remainder at the lower 'follow-on' rate."

and further on

"Importantly, when suspending seasonal block weighting in this way, we reduced the price of our 'follow-on' units and increased our direct debit dual fuel discount from £60 to £80."


I might be a bit thick but i don’t understand what the second quoted part has to do with the overcharging on primary units.

I refuse to believe that a large company like NPower really thinks that chucking £20 at DD customers and knocking off a percentage of a penny off the 'follow on units' magically makes all things equal.

I would also assume that “none direct debit dual fuel customers” would not have had this £20 offset given to them.

So in essence that £20 would have nothing at all to do with the adjustment.


Overall the letter does not hold much water to my eyes.
The thing I find most ridiculous/suspect is that they insist on telling their phone staff to quote "tariff years" in conversation and yet they continue to not actually do that in writing (always quoting "years").


One final note.


The lady i spoke to also let me know that their are currently two to three weeks worth of backlogged scultping complaints with the "senior complaints team" (i.e. those that are not buying into this letter i just received).

I guess i just added to their administrative overhead...

--
Richard

DirectDebacle

alleycat` wrote: »

I guess i just added to their administrative overhead....

Good' now add to their administrative headache.

Obtain the remainder of the billing information you need and once you have worked out how much they owe you write to them requesting re-payment as per previous posts. Include in that letter that if not resolved to your satisfaction within four weeks (14 days is ok too) then you will start recovery proceedings through the courts and that they will be liable for all additional costs. Post recorded delivery.

Reducing the price of the tier 2 rate does not excuse or in anyway compensate for overcharging on the higher rate. Good luck.

meggsy

http://www.ofgem.gov.uk:80/Pages/MoreInformation.aspx?docid=207&refer=MEDIA/PRESSREL

DirectDebacle

Cardew wrote: »

Bravo DD - that is tremendous!

However at the risk of appearing mercenary, may I remind you of this:



You accepted that wager and I fully expect you to honour your debt!

Hmmm worried now. Just turned down another offer so now your going to badger me for another pint.

At this rate pints are gonna cost me more than I get in a refund.

fiddling_flower_petals

DirectDebacle wrote: »

Hmmm worried now. Just turned down another offer so now your going to badger me for another pint.

At this rate pints are gonna cost me more than I get in a refund.

Well done DD!:T
Npower must be getting a little more concerned as your day in court is rapidly approaching.:D

I wouldn't worry too much about the virtual pint wagered between yourself and Cardew, because if you successful take your case to court, many Npower customers past and present, should be queueing around the block to buy a pint:beer: , as the floodgate at Npower open.:D

alleycat`

I got an offer from NPower today (verbally) for almost all (to within a few %) of what i requested be re-reimbursed.

I don't want to comment much further until i see the letter to go with the offer.

However, i got the impression that the money is on offer due to poor customer service / the time taken to resolve the complaint than it is to do with any admission of liability over sculpting.

Cardew

alleycat` wrote: »

I got an offer from NPower today (verbally) for almost all (to within a few %) of what i requested be re-reimbursed.

I don't want to comment much further until i see the letter to go with the offer.

However, i got the impression that the money is on offer due to poor customer service / the time taken to resolve the complaint than it is to do with any admission of liability over sculpting.

For certain that will be the 'official' reason, there is no way that they are going to admit liability.

alleycat`

It does bring up an interesting point.

If people accept the money on the standpoint of poor customer service and they then lose in court / are found liable for the overcharged sculpting by ofgem (or replacement) would that then open them up for reclamation of the sculpting money as well?

Cardew

DirectDebacle wrote: »

Hmmm worried now. Just turned down another offer so now your going to badger me for another pint.

At this rate pints are gonna cost me more than I get in a refund.

For sure I am!!

Just a thought. As Energywatch is no more and OFGEM have a new complaints procedure, is it worth making a formal complaint and/or notification to them of the position of your case.

I think it is an absolute disgrace that a public spirited individual has had to 'take on' the might of NPower instead of the Regulator.

I suspect that NPower will try and use delaying tactics, appeals etc to get other claimants to lose interest.

It is also a little disappointing that Martin hasn't used his muscle, or even commented, on this subject.

Any chance of the Mods asking Martin for at least a comment? - even if to say he cannot intervene as he did on bank charges.

Cardew

alleycat` wrote: »

It does bring up an interesting point.

If people accept the money on the standpoint of poor customer service and they then lose in court / are found liable for the overcharged sculpting by ofgem (or replacement) would that then open them up for reclamation of the sculpting money as well?

No!

Sculpting is not the issue in this dispute. A company can structure their charges in any way they wish, and they are indeed still 'sculpting'

The issue is very simple. NPower's terms and conditions stated that they would charge for 4,572kWh per year at Tier 1 rates.

They have in fact charged many(the majority) of their customers around 2,000 kWhs more than the 4,572 figure in a year.

Npower have belated admitted that this has been the case, and have come up with a number of excuses for this overcharging.

The one I personally found most amusing was that they could 'reset' a year at their convenience. So in theory they could charge you 4,572 tier 1 units in July, 'reset' the calendar for August and charge you another 4,572 in August, reset for September etc!!!!

It will be interesting to see which of these excuses they use in their defence in DD's case.