12 month billing ruling?

peggydoodaa

Thanks Cardew.
I'm of the same opinion that it's not worth actually spending money to fight this as we haven't 'lost' money so to speak.
I understand that the ruling was put in place for a completely different reason, but it's more the principle of the matter than the money to be honest!
They are claiming that they have been billing me...I've requested copies of these of which I should hopefully receive next week. When I first got EW involved they said that if they can provide copies of the bills then it proves they sent them, regardless of whether I received them or not.

My arguments are:

1 - i didn't receive the bills
2 - if they do provide bills for the said period, I suspect they will be for the old meter and so not correct
3 - they had my property as 'de-energised' at some point but they were happy to keep taking my money
4 - they've had to re-build my account to get this sorted, meaning that they've had to build a whole new bill showing my payments and also the charge for the elec used over the period. I feel that this is backbilling regardless of whether they've already received the money or not!

peggydoodaa

Haha....after writing all that down I got really annoyed and rang EW myself lol

Anyway, it appears that EW have already received the letter from BG regarding their decision about my account not being applicable to the 12 month ruling.

:j BG have confirmed in writing they didn't bill us correctly for the last 3 years! :j
Upto now they've been coy about it saying they definately have sent us bills, so I think they've just put the nail in their coffin.

EW have responded to BG already by email saying that the reasons for not following the ruling are ridiculous and they do not agree with BG!!!!! :T

To be continued.....................

UtilityMan_3

Hi Peggy

Sorry, are you saying that even though you paid by DD, EW are saying the unbilled rule applies?

Very interesting if that's the case!

peggydoodaa

In short & in my circumstances, it appears so...

I shall update when it all gets sorted one way or the other as I don't want to tempt fate and jeopardise the decision.

UtilityMan_3

Hi Peggy

This is fundamental to the interpretation of "unbilled" and as the boundaries are constantly being set by the supplier.

They tell us THEIR interpretation and we have to live with it. Presently, we have EW on our side, until September.

Then, due to the "super complaint" lodged by Ofgem (EW's parent!), EW will cease to exist and a suppliers consortium will take over :

In its response to the Super Complaint Ofgem called on energy suppliers to deliver in three key areas:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldselect/ldrgltrs/189/7041711.htm#note63

• — Independent dispute resolution body: energy suppliers should establish and finance, by July 2006, an independent dispute resolution body with the principal function of addressing account and billing disputes where the customer is able to demonstrate that (s)he has been unable to resolve the dispute with the supplier. The body should have powers to award compensation to customers who are shown to have received very poor customer service. A similar body exists in the telecommunications industry

• http://www.energy-ombudsman.org.uk/

• The "independent" board are all the major suppliers, as requested. Funded and judged by themselves!

• To me that is asking the fox to look after the chickens!

• I would be extremely interested to hear from anyone who has had a ruling from these people. The maximum compensation is £5k per case. Nothing is stated in their case studies regarding compensation and this should be freely available so as to compare like for like

Ken68

BLIMEY....Energywatch raise a Super Complaint and OFGEM supports the energy companies.
Then EW get the sack, and the ERA code only applies to non direct debit customers.
Have I interpreted that right, Utility Man, where the hell is the Press or Parliament.!!!!!

UtilityMan_3

Parliament? That was the House of Lords!

It's criminal, the HoL, tried to punish the suppliers by making them fund it, and making it "independent".

Just look at the "Energy Member Board"

http://www.energy-ombudsman.org.uk/links/4-13-member_board.php

Underlines my boundary point. They are telling us, their interpretation of the rules. If we lay down and get our bellies tickled, we have had it to a man! It's supposed to be OUR service, where is OUR representation or voice?

I will push the boundaries and reset the precedents for as long as there are issues like this.

I pay by DD, get billed quarterly and everything is tickety boo! It's only cases such as this that highlight the stupidity of the whole scenario, and allow me to share my knowledge.

UtilityMan_3

Sorry Ken, just to reiterate Peggy's (hopeful!) findings. It would appear the DDI being in place does not affect the ruling!

"Unbilled" is unbilled. Nobody SHOULD EVER stop making payments when an account is in dispute. Just because Peggy carried on paying, should not discriminate her case.

From what we have found on this thread (singularly), the DDI is not an issue. If they don't bill for 12 months they cannot recoup.

As stated on other threads, this means that if they do not bill for 15 months, the first three months are lost. NOT that you are billed for 366 days and only pay for one day! Just to make it clear!

To clarify,OFGEM are EW's parent. OFGEM made the "super complaint" and by doing so, in effect destroyed EW.

Ken68

Wasn't there a case recently of an OFGEM director moving to Centrica at double the pay. Wouldn't you have thought his Contract of Employment allowed that.
Sounds very fishy all round.
Glad you are on the consumers side.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/utilities/article3456455.ece

SwanJon

EnergyWatch is being rolled into the Consumer {cant rmember?} Council, and following the billing supercomplaint the Ombudsman was set up.
EnergyWatch is funded by the suppliers on a per customer basis, so essentially it is part of your tariff.
The Ombudsman is funded differently (but similar to Otelo, the telecommunications one). The suppliers pay per complaint, so a 'good' supplier pays less then a 'bad' one.
However, this only applies to the members of the ERA (i.e. the big 6), so if you want to complain about anyone else...