Smart Meters

Options
1…1718202223…139

Comments

  • badmemory
    badmemory Posts: 7,791 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    edited 29 December 2017 at 4:45AM
    Options
    Whilst House Martin does at times seem a little obsessed with energy theft he does actually have a point. Suppliers who do not make any attempt to stop energy theft should be forced to do so. The suppliers do not pay for energy theft - we do. It is akin to shoplifting. No supermarket is going to make a loss because they have large shoplifting losses, they just put their prices up to compensate & that is exactly what an energy supplier will do. Whilst a supermarket will try to reduce their shoplifting loses (they need to because of the competition) it would appear that energy suppliers do not because of the cost to them & presumably the LACK of real competition.

    It is time that the energy suppliers were penalised for those energy thefts so that it is in their best interests to stop the thefts. That would be in OUR best interests too.
  • System
    System Posts: 178,093 Community Admin
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    badmemory wrote: »
    Look at Scottish Power's 40p per day standing charge -Isn't that the customer being forced to pay for their failed smart meter roll out? How much more of these rip offs are we going to be prepared to tolerate.

    You can choose to look at standing charges in isolation or you can take a wider view. For example, high standing charges tend to sit alongside low unit prices. This type of offer better suits the high energy user; conversely, a low or no standing charge offer suits the low energy user. It is also worth pointing out that upwards of 60p that we all pay in £ for our energy has nothing to do with the wholesale cost of the product. Most of these costs are down to Government policies on the environment; future energy (Hinckley C) and, yes. the £12Bn (and rising) cost of the rollout of smart meters.

    If you are not prepared to tolerate what you feel is a 'rip off', then just switch and ditch. Even the mighty BG has been hit hard in recent months by the number of consumers switching away from them. It is this that will cause energy suppliers to take note rather than short-term Government intervention.
  • House_Martin
    House_Martin Posts: 1,462 Forumite
    edited 29 December 2017 at 6:24PM
    Options
    Nick_C wrote: »
    OFGEM used to require suppliers to physically inspect meters at least once every two years.

    This requirement was revoked in April 2016 largely because smart meters make this no longer necessary.

    Being forced to admit meter readers to our homes every two years should be a thing of the past if you have a smart meter. In itself, this could be a good reason to get one!
    I think you have the wrong idea if you think you are now in charge of who you admit to view OUR meters.
    OFGEM has revoked the 2 year obligation for suppliers and reverting back to only the existing legislation which is already in place.
    The t /cs everyone signs up for to receive energy, states that occupiers must admit their meter readers to inspect the meters as and when they deem it necessary.
    OFGEM have actually made it tougher by removing the set period of 2 years.
    Its too long anyway IMO.
    If a supplier wants to inspect the meters then the occupiers have to admit the meter readers, does nt have to be every 2 years, effectively it can be as and when required.
    They are supposed to be clamping down on rogue suppliers who take no action to stop or deter theft of energy.
    Energy theft is of course increasing because of lax suppliers who do not spend any money on revenue protection duties. Only British Gas do a very good job.SSE are also very good.

    If you refuse then we can apply for a warrant and possibly disconnect.
    This will work better .If a supplier is happy with the metering arrangements and can see by the occupiers usage that a normal usage pattern is in place then they can go as long as they wish.
    I have a property in my area which has refused access to meter readers fro over 10 years. BG Revenue Protection officers have checked their usage and do not deem it necessary to force entry.
    Everyones happy.
  • Nick_C
    Nick_C Posts: 7,459 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Home Insurance Hacker!
    Options
    House_Martin wrote: »
    I think you have the wrong idea if you think you are now in charge of who you admit to view OUR meters.

    Good to know that you think. But you have no idea what I think. I am well aware of the conditions that one agrees to when one enters into a contract.

    I didn't know that Morrison DS owned meters though. News to me. Probably news to them as well! Lol
  • zeupater
    zeupater Posts: 5,355 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    badmemory wrote: »
    I very much doubt that ANY of the current energy suppliers are capable of "getting it right" for all their customer's. I doubt that they ever will be. It is past time that the industry got a major overhaul as I can't see any of them as being capable "safe hands". Look at Scottish Power's 40p per day standing charge -Isn't that the customer being forced to pay for their failed smart meter roll out? How much more of these rip offs are we going to be prepared to tolerate.
    Hi

    Whilst there's no obligation on the supplier to justify in detail the cost elements of their standing charge they'll simply use the facility to add complexity to tariffs in order to prevent the energy consumer from making immediate competitive decisions and therefore charge whatever their marketing departments & accountants believe they can get away with - as such, if standing charges are to be allowed, Ofgem should both prescribe the costs/services which must be contained in a standing charge as well as having remit to audit those charges.

    If Ofgem were 'on the ball' and applied the relevant logic to meet their supposed remit of protecting consumer interests and driving energy efficiency there'd be two obvious steps which would deliver with little effort ... firstly improve competition: create immediate national price transparency by removing both standing charges & regional pricing, and secondly: set standard percentage surcharge thresholds to encourage high energy users to reduce consumption ... in simple terms, give the highest energy users the incentive/option to reduce their energy consumption or do nothing & 'pay through the nose'.

    HTH
    Z
    "We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. " ...... Aristotle
    B)
  • PhilE
    PhilE Posts: 566 Forumite
    Options
    House_Martin wrote: »
    The UK government or any supplier is nt remotely interested in monitoring what you SAY, lol do and think.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/05/court-to-hear-challenge-to-gchq-bulk-hacking-of-phones-and-computers
  • Nick_C
    Nick_C Posts: 7,459 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Home Insurance Hacker!
    Options
    Standing charges are fair. There are two types of costs to the supplier, fixed and variable. The SC is designed to cover the fixed costs, the unit charge is designed to cover the variable - the actual cost of the electricity (plus a profit margin).
  • zeupater
    zeupater Posts: 5,355 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    Nick_C wrote: »
    Standing charges are fair. There are two types of costs to the supplier, fixed and variable. The SC is designed to cover the fixed costs, the unit charge is designed to cover the variable - the actual cost of the electricity (plus a profit margin).
    Hi

    Possibly, but there's no obligation to charge only fixed costs with the standing charge, the industry can effectively charge whatever they want .... if there was an obligation then there'd be very little differential in the SC element between the various suppliers as they all need to pay their own fixed overheads, administration & sub-contracted services (meter reading, meter replacement, DCC, NG, DNO etc) .. however, the industry wouldn't want to have regulator prescribed elements to their SC because it can be used to gauge relative efficiencies, and they wouldn't want that with new entry supplier competition growing ...

    I understand the idea of standing charges, but as already mentioned, they're maintained to prevent price transparency .. take for example the exercise of checking the competitiveness of your own supply contract - your variables are ..

    Your particular location
    Your own known (/estimated) consumption
    Unit price
    Standing Charge
    Paperless Billing Discount ?
    Online management Discount ?
    Annual loyalty discount ?

    .. so in seeing any energy supplier advert, how can competitiveness be gauged ?

    So, in contrast, how about seeing a national advertising campaign which includes a single figure, the price you pay per unit ... if, from memory (it's only a single figure in pennies!) you are paying more then you immediately know - it's that simple fact that drives the spark required for true competition ...

    When you drive past a petrol station (whilst they still exist!) there's a mandated sign containing the price/unit so that an immediate competitive decision can be made ... the petrol vendor has fixed cost elements as well a variable ones, but it's accepted that there is a single unit price no matter what volume (within reason) is pumped. It's not really rocket science, it's simple logic - above that it's logic that the energy industry already understand as there's a direct relationship between electricity/gas supply & petroleum supply ...

    Some would obviously say that standard charges keep bills down, but through adding unnecessary tariff complexity it acts to stifle transparency & price competition and achieves the opposite - bills are being kept high because there's no immediate 'spark' to drive the prices down ... national tariffs with no standing charge would provide that spark.

    HTH
    Z
    "We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. " ...... Aristotle
    B)
  • Nick_C
    Nick_C Posts: 7,459 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Home Insurance Hacker!
    Options
    Getting rid of SCs would mean people with high usage would be subsidising low users. Not sure this is a good idea in the commercial sector.

    Those high users could be mums with babies in nappies, or pensioners who need to keep the heating turned up. Should they be subsidising a working couple who are out all day?
  • House_Martin
    House_Martin Posts: 1,462 Forumite
    Options
    badmemory wrote: »
    I very much doubt that ANY of the current energy suppliers are capable of "getting it right" for all their customer's. I doubt that they ever will be. It is past time that the industry got a major overhaul as I can't see any of them as being capable "safe hands". Look at Scottish Power's 40p per day standing charge -Isn't that the customer being forced to pay for their failed smart meter roll out? How much more of these rip offs are we going to be prepared to tolerate.
    Its not really anything to do with the smart meter roll out at all.
    Its a simple enough procedure to input your annual usage into a comp site and let the comp do the sums.. Ignore the s.c. and go for the lowest yearly amount.
    Eg Ebico have even higher standing charges, I think it was over 50 p a day but for my old vacant property it was the cheapest supplier by far saving me almost £15 a month in s.c. alone
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.1K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards