I've been checking recent bills for gas and electricity. Recent bills
include alterations to old estimated bills - going back as much as 2-3
years. The claim is that "a recent reading" means a better estimate can
be given.

Apart from being /exceedingly/ confusing, it seems an odd way of
conducting business - surely once a bill and price are agreed they can't
be altered retrospectively?


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:

I've been checking recent bills for gas and electricity. Recent bills
include alterations to old estimated bills - going back as much as 2-3
years. The claim is that "a recent reading" means a better estimate can
be given.

Are they modifying the bills, ie the website PDF from last year now has different numbers, or are they issuing a new bill based on an updated
estimate - ie a new additional transaction for extra payment?

Apart from being /exceedingly/ confusing, it seems an odd way of
conducting business - surely once a bill and price are agreed they can't
be altered retrospectively?

If it's an estimate, then surely it is by definition not agreed? Until they have an actual meter reading then they can't be sure of usage. It would
seem that estimates are things which are always updating and so will always
be over or under.

The other challenge here is that prices change, and so it's not just an estimate of consumption but an estimate of when the consumption happened.
It is possible that causes adjustment of past payments. eg if they think
you used 1000 units at rate A and then 1000 units at rate B, and they might bill on that basis, then slightly after the meter reading comes in at
10,000, it's more likely you actually spent 5000 at A and 5000 at B and not 1000 at A and 9000 at B.

When was the last time an actual reading was submitted? If it's been years then I can see why they are adjusting past years worth of estimates.

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 23/04/2024 16:28, TTman wrote:

The other challenge here is that prices change, and so it's not just an
estimate of consumption but an estimate of when the consumption happened.
It is possible that causes adjustment of past payments.  eg if they think >> you used 1000 units at rate A and then 1000 units at rate B, and they
might
bill on that basis, then slightly after the meter reading comes in at
10,000, it's more likely you actually spent 5000 at A and 5000 at B
and not
1000 at A and 9000 at B.

When was the last time an actual reading was submitted?  If it's been
years
then I can see why they are adjusting past years worth of estimates.

Theo

It begs the question why are you not submitting meter readings every

^^^^^ raises

month ?

Why should I? AFAIA I have no such agreement. Historically, a meter
reader has been round roughly 6-monthly, with estimates in-between and
very occasional readings by myself. Although I did have an email this
month for the very first time -- "it's time to submit your monthly
reading", which is a new idea and not one that'll catch on here any time
soon.

In any case, some of the revisions pre-date actual readings. I can't see
a particular reason for that, which brings me back to the original
issue, of if a bill has been agreed and settled, by what argument can
they return so long after the fact and change it?


Interestingly, the revised amounts do show minor arithmetical errors:
the standing charge was also scrubbed and reinstated for every period.
The reinstated amount differs in at least one place for the same rate
and time period.


I do wonder if it's an unsubtle way of pushing me to have a smart meter :-}

--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <v08k2c$1mm4j$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:28:11 on Tue, 23 Apr
2024, TTman <kraken.sankey@gmail.com> remarked:

The other challenge here is that prices change, and so it's not just an
estimate of consumption but an estimate of when the consumption happened.
It is possible that causes adjustment of past payments. eg if they think
you used 1000 units at rate A and then 1000 units at rate B, and they might >> bill on that basis, then slightly after the meter reading comes in at
10,000, it's more likely you actually spent 5000 at A and 5000 at B and not >> 1000 at A and 9000 at B.
When was the last time an actual reading was submitted? If it's
been years
then I can see why they are adjusting past years worth of estimates.

It begs the question why are you not submitting meter readings every
month ?

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to
the elderly or infirm.
--
Roland Perry

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to
the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:

In any case, some of the revisions pre-date actual readings. I can't see
a particular reason for that, which brings me back to the original
issue, of if a bill has been agreed and settled, by what argument can
they return so long after the fact and change it?

The bill has an estimate, which is the very definition of not being agreed
or settled.

AIUI suppliers need to have at least one reading a year, be it a customer reading, a smart meter or a physical visit. Prices change 4 times a year,
so it's not surprising the bills for previous quarters are adjusted. It
seems suppliers can't back bill over 12 months ago if not the customer's
fault, but unclear if older than that is happening here here.

See: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/docs/2019/02/licence_guide_metering_billing_and_payments_1.pdf
(although I'm not sure if that's been superseded)

Interestingly, the revised amounts do show minor arithmetical errors:
the standing charge was also scrubbed and reinstated for every period.
The reinstated amount differs in at least one place for the same rate
and time period.

You can ask them to explain their working.

I do wonder if it's an unsubtle way of pushing me to have a smart meter :-}

That would be one answer :)

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 23-Apr-24 20:53, Theo wrote:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to
the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

Not a criticism of Theo's post but...

Vulnerable to what?
I'm certainly vulnerable to (e.g.) knives, bullets, blunt instruments
etc. etc. - and I expect most other people can say the same.
A tremendously broad term like "vulnerable" isn't very useful on its own.


--
Sam Plusnet

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 24 Apr 2024 at 01:34:28 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:

On 23-Apr-24 20:53, Theo wrote:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to >>> the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're
vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

Not a criticism of Theo's post but...

Vulnerable to what?
I'm certainly vulnerable to (e.g.) knives, bullets, blunt instruments
etc. etc. - and I expect most other people can say the same.
A tremendously broad term like "vulnerable" isn't very useful on its own.

It is defined somewhere. Perhaps the regulator? It is a broad term, it
includes everyone over 75 for instance.

--

Roger Hayter

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 23/04/2024 12:01, Mike Scott wrote:

I've been checking recent bills for gas and electricity. Recent bills
include alterations to old estimated bills - going back as much as 2-3
years. The claim is that "a recent reading" means a better estimate can
be given.

Apart from being /exceedingly/ confusing, it seems an odd way of
conducting business - surely once a bill and price are agreed they can't
be altered retrospectively?

Yes they can. I had an example in early March.

I don't have a smart meter, and am emailed at the beginning of every
month to supply a meter reading (for EDF dual fuel). I do that and
within a couple of days am emailed a bill, which I pay within a day or
so by Bacs. Note that EDF changed from quarterly to monthly billing in 2023.

On 4 March I was emailed a bill for £XXX following submission of a meter reading on 2 March. I paid by Bacs the same day. Later that day I
received another bill for £YYY covering 8 May - 23 May 2023. There was unfortunately no explanation for this unexpected additional charge, as I
had previously paid a bill for May 2023 in early June. I contacted EDF,
and received the following explanation:

"Your first bill in our new system that was issued on 8th Jun 2023 was
from 8th May 2023 - 5th Jun 2023 consumption period amounting of £ZZZ
which was billed to estimate.

Your second bill issued on 4th Aug 2023 reversed that estimated charge
of £ZZZ so we can rebill you based on actual readings however the
previous adviser then only rebilled you from 31st May 2023 onwards
instead of 8th May 2023 onwards. That reversed charge of £ZZZ by the way became a credit on your account shown on that second bill.

By doing this they have left a billing gap for 8th May 2023 - 30th May
2023. This gap has now been rebilled and issued to you on 5th Mar 2024
giving the £YYY charge."

This explained why there was not only an extra charge for electricity
used, but also extra days of standing charge. EDF apologised for the
confusion; I did point out to them that if they had given this
explanation in the first place it would have saved both of us a lot of
time and correspondence.

This shows that it is possible to retrospectively alter an agreed and
paid bill. I have no idea what would have happened had I refused to pay it.

--
Jeff

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 23/04/2024 04:47 pm, Mike Scott wrote:

On 23/04/2024 16:28, TTman wrote:

The other challenge here is that prices change, and so it's not just an
estimate of consumption but an estimate of when the consumption
happened.
It is possible that causes adjustment of past payments.  eg if they
think
you used 1000 units at rate A and then 1000 units at rate B, and they
might
bill on that basis, then slightly after the meter reading comes in at
10,000, it's more likely you actually spent 5000 at A and 5000 at B
and not
1000 at A and 9000 at B.

When was the last time an actual reading was submitted?  If it's been
years
then I can see why they are adjusting past years worth of estimates.

Theo

It begs the question why are you not submitting meter readings every

     ^^^^^ raises

month ?

Why should I? AFAIA I have no such agreement. Historically, a meter
reader has been round roughly 6-monthly, with estimates in-between and
very occasional readings by myself. Although I did have an email this
month for the very first time -- "it's time to submit your monthly
reading", which is a new idea and not one that'll catch on here any time soon.

It would have been a good idea to read your meter and send in the
reading on 1st April, because the unit price (this time) reduced on that
date.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Jeff Layman wrote:

I don't have a smart meter, and am emailed at the beginning of every
month to supply a meter reading (for EDF dual fuel). I do that and
within a couple of days am emailed a bill, which I pay within a day or
so by Bacs. Note that EDF changed from quarterly to monthly billing in
2023.

I was previously on six-monthly billing with EdF, they now seem to
request readings on certain days each month, when I logon I tend to find they've estimated their own readings a few days before the requested
date, and raised a bill based on that.

I've begin ignoring their requests in months without price changes, I'm
sure they'll let me know when they *really* need a reading ...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

On 23-Apr-24 20:53, Theo wrote:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to >> the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

Not a criticism of Theo's post but...

Vulnerable to what?
I'm certainly vulnerable to (e.g.) knives, bullets, blunt instruments
etc. etc. - and I expect most other people can say the same.
A tremendously broad term like "vulnerable" isn't very useful on its own.

Ofgem have a lot on this. The definition has shifted in recent years, from roughly 'someone who can't manage their own affairs' to 'someone in need of extra support'. That support can be manifested in numerous ways depending
on your needs, for example priority for restoration of supply if you have medical equipment that must stay powered.

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications/consumer-vulnerability-strategy-2025

But if you say you can't read your meter because you can no longer climb a ladder to reach it, the answer might be that they will install a smart meter
so you don't have to, not that they will regularly send a man to climb the ladder.

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Simon Parker <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote:

The term has its origins in the Care Act 2014 but it now used in many
other places with . (For example, "Protection of Vulnerable Adults"
(often abbreviated POVA), the "Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act"
(SVGA, no, not the connector on old monitor leads) etc.)

One definition of a 'vulnerable adult' (from the Department of Health)
is "A person who is 18 years of age or over, and who may be in need of community care services by reason of mental or other disability, age or illness and who is or may be unable to take care of themselves, or
unable to protect themselves against significant harm or serious exploitation."

Other definitions are available including those that start at the final
"may be unable..." but, in the current context, it is those that might
be scammed by fake meter readers gaining access to their home whilst
being unable to access the meter themselves through old age, infirmity,
etc. to provide readings to their energy supplier.

Ofgem's current definition is:


<quote>
Appendix 1 – Defining vulnerability

Our strategy aims to support some of the poorest and most vulnerable households in the
energy market. For this purpose, a vulnerable consumer is defined as one who is:

* significantly less able than a typical consumer to protect or represent their own
interests; and/or
* significantly more likely to experience detriment, or for that detriment to be more
substantial

We recognise that whether a customer is vulnerable in the energy market, and the likelihood
of them suffering detriment, depends not only on personal characteristics such as age, or
disability, but also the situation or scenario they are in, and how the market responds to their
needs.

Vulnerable characteristics - risk factors

In practice there may be a range of characteristics that put a consumer or member of a
household at greater risk of detriment, and/or impact in different ways their ability to
represent their interests. These include, but are not limited to:
* living with physical health issues or mental illness
* cognitive impairment
* literacy or numeracy difficulties
* having a speech impairment
* not speaking English as a first language
* being a child
* low confidence
The extent to which an individual is aware of their vulnerability may also impact the depth
and likelihood of any detriment they suffer, and their ability to limit that impact.

Circumstances - risk factors

There are also a range of circumstances or situations that can make consumers with
vulnerable characteristics more likely to suffer detriment. These risk factors include but are
not limited to:

Personal circumstances
* living alone
* not having internet access
* being on a low income
* being unemployed or being made redundant
* being a full-time carer
* being a lone parent
* leaving care
* experiencing relationship breakdown
* experiencing bereavement

Wider circumstances
* living in a rural area
* living off the gas grid
* living in private rented accommodation
* living in a cold, energy-inefficient home
* having a certain meter type eg prepayment, dynamic tele-switching meter.

The list above is not exhaustive, nor does it indicate that a consumer in such circumstances
will always experience detriment. However, these circumstances can make a customer more
vulnerable to detriment and the likelihood and impact of the detriment tends to increase if
consumers have more than one of these risk factors.

Characteristics or circumstances can change over time

We also recognise that individual characteristics or circumstances can change over time.
Vulnerability can affect anyone at any time and for many different reasons. It may be
permanent or long-term, but equally it can be transitory following a bereavement or
relationship breakdown. A consumer can quickly fall into a vulnerable situation, but it may
take them time to recover from it. For example, if someone is made redundant, their
vulnerability may continue even once they have a new job if they have accumulated debt
during that time.

The role of markets

Markets themselves in combination with a customer’s characteristics and situation can also
cause or exacerbate vulnerability. This includes the action or behaviour of suppliers, network
companies or third parties. The nature, design and delivery of goods and services for
example, can put some consumers with vulnerable characteristics, at greater risk of
detriment. For example:
* lack of affordable phone access can result in an increased likelihood of detriment for
consumers without internet access on low incomes
* complex information on products or services can limit any consumer’s ability to make
appropriate decisions, but this may particularly cause problems for customers with
cognitive impairments
* consumers with sight, hearing or speech impairments may struggle to communicate
with a company if their written communications or customer services are not designed
to be accessible and inclusive.

Consumers in some vulnerable situations may also be served less well by competitive
markets because, for example:
* they may be more expensive to serve
* they have less market access
* they are a higher debt risk so greater risk to the company
* it is not cost-effective to meet their needs
</quote>

from: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/docs/2020/01/consumer_vulnerability_strategy_2025.pdf

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <umx*ZrGIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 20:53:48 on Tue,
23 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to
the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're >vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

I have a smart meter, but it's broken, and to all intents and purposes
they refuse to fix it. I gather there are several million others in the
same boat.
--
Roland Perry

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 23/04/2024 20:06, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <v08k2c$1mm4j$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:28:11 on Tue, 23 Apr
2024, TTman <kraken.sankey@gmail.com> remarked:

The other challenge here is that prices change, and so it's not just an
estimate of consumption but an estimate of when the consumption
happened.
It is possible that causes adjustment of past payments.  eg if they
think
you used 1000 units at rate A and then 1000 units at rate B, and they
might
bill on that basis, then slightly after the meter reading comes in at
10,000, it's more likely you actually spent 5000 at A and 5000 at B
and not
1000 at A and 9000 at B.
 When was the last time an actual reading was submitted?  If it's
been years
then I can see why they are adjusting past years worth of estimates.

It begs the question why are you not submitting meter readings every
month ?

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to
the elderly or infirm.

And also in positions where a smart meter cannot possibly work. My
brother in law's dumb meter is down the side of his fridge sandwiched
between a very thick wall and the side of the fridge. Effectively in a
Faraday cage and the phone signal in his kitchen is almost non-existent.

Fortunately the meter reader comes equipped with a selfie stick.

My new smart meter installation would require the guy to levitate 6' in
the air and press about 10 buttons in exactly the right order to get a
meter reading it ever the smart feature stops working. It's predecessor
you could read the dials just by shining a torch or taking a picture.

I don't consider that an improvement. YMMV

--
Martin Brown

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 24-Apr-24 9:56, Roger Hayter wrote:

On 24 Apr 2024 at 01:34:28 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:

On 23-Apr-24 20:53, Theo wrote:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to >>>> the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're
vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

Not a criticism of Theo's post but...

Vulnerable to what?
I'm certainly vulnerable to (e.g.) knives, bullets, blunt instruments
etc. etc. - and I expect most other people can say the same.
A tremendously broad term like "vulnerable" isn't very useful on its own.

It is defined somewhere. Perhaps the regulator? It is a broad term, it includes everyone over 75 for instance.

Thank you for that. I seem to be on the cusp of vulnerability and was
entirely ignorant of the fact.
(Ignorance seems to be my superpower.)

--
Sam Plusnet

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 24/04/2024 16:45, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <umx*ZrGIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 20:53:48 on Tue,
23 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to >>> the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're
vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

I have a smart meter, but it's broken, and to all intents and purposes
they refuse to fix it. I gather there are several million others in the
same boat.

If you live in a rural area or change suppliers the first generation
ones become dumb as a rock. Or has your remote sender mechanism failed completely - ie. does the local loop display still work OK.

About half the smart meters in my village are working. The rest failed
within a few months of installation. The one in our VH is dead and has
failed so many times that they have given up trying to fix. Basically
the engineer can't get a mobile signal to talk to his base without
running up and down the stairs so the unit stands no chance.

We (the VH) were once been billed for half the national debt when some
clueless meter reader zero padded the 5 digit reading at the wrong end!
(ie 9x all the electricity we had ever used since it was installed)

Their billing system is entirely lacking in sanity checks. Some
suppliers are worse than others with incomprehensible opacity bills.

--
Martin Brown

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 24-Apr-24 17:42, Martin Brown wrote:

We (the VH) were once been billed for half the national debt when some clueless meter reader zero padded the 5 digit reading at the wrong end!
(ie 9x all the electricity we had ever used since it was installed)

I wonder if that meter reader did the same thing at a whole string of
addresses - before someone _eventually_ fired or 'retrained' them?

--
Sam Plusnet

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <v0bcpo$2ds2n$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:42:31 on Wed, 24 Apr
2024, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> remarked:

On 24/04/2024 16:45, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <umx*ZrGIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 20:53:48 on
Tue, 23 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to >>>> the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're
vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

I have a smart meter, but it's broken, and to all intents and
purposes they refuse to fix it. I gather there are several million
others in the same boat.

If you live in a rural area or change suppliers the first generation
ones become dumb as a rock. Or has your remote sender mechanism failed >completely - ie. does the local loop display still work OK.

The first thing that broke was the local display, and seems British Gas
won't either replace it free of charge, or even sell you one. Extensive
advice sought on magic-bullet third party replacements all turned to
dust.

A year so later the actual meter stopped sending numbers back to base.

And yes, I have now switched suppliers too, but the new one (popularly perceived "can do no wrong" Octopus) seems disinclined to replace my
meter. Which is a big disappointment, I'd expected them to do it
routinely for new customers.

About half the smart meters in my village are working. The rest failed
within a few months of installation. The one in our VH is dead and has
failed so many times that they have given up trying to fix. Basically
the engineer can't get a mobile signal to talk to his base without
running up and down the stairs so the unit stands no chance.

We (the VH) were once been billed for half the national debt when some >clueless meter reader zero padded the 5 digit reading at the wrong end!
(ie 9x all the electricity we had ever used since it was installed)

Their billing system is entirely lacking in sanity checks. Some
suppliers are worse than others with incomprehensible opacity bills.

--
Roland Perry

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Martin Brown wrote:

If you live in a rural area or change suppliers the first generation
ones become dumb as a rock.

Mine retains enough intelligence to relay information from both meters
to the in-home display, which saves me from getting cobwebs in my face
to provide readings ... I have no problem with it like that.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25-Apr-24 6:50, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <v0bcpo$2ds2n$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:42:31 on Wed, 24 Apr
2024, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> remarked:

On 24/04/2024 16:45, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <umx*ZrGIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 20:53:48 on
Tue,  23 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or
inaccessible to
the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're >>>> vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

 I have a smart meter, but it's broken, and to all intents and
purposes  they refuse to fix it. I gather there are several million
others in the  same boat.

If you live in a rural area or change suppliers the first generation
ones become dumb as a rock. Or has your remote sender mechanism failed
completely - ie. does the local loop display still work OK.

The first thing that broke was the local display, and seems British Gas
won't either replace it free of charge, or even sell you one. Extensive advice sought on magic-bullet third party replacements all turned to dust.

A year so later the actual meter stopped sending numbers back to base.

And yes, I have now switched suppliers too, but the new one (popularly perceived "can do no wrong" Octopus) seems disinclined to replace my
meter. Which is a big disappointment, I'd expected them to do it
routinely for new customers.

Suppliers are under heavy pressure to replace dumb with smart. Anything
which doesn't boost their 'conversion' figures isn't worth worrying about.

--
Sam Plusnet

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25/04/2024 21:03, Sam Plusnet wrote:

On 25-Apr-24 6:50, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <v0bcpo$2ds2n$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:42:31 on Wed, 24 Apr
2024, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> remarked:

On 24/04/2024 16:45, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <umx*ZrGIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 20:53:48 on
Tue,  23 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked: >>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or
inaccessible to
the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're >>>>> vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

 I have a smart meter, but it's broken, and to all intents and
purposes  they refuse to fix it. I gather there are several million
others in the  same boat.

If you live in a rural area or change suppliers the first generation
ones become dumb as a rock. Or has your remote sender mechanism
failed completely - ie. does the local loop display still work OK.

The first thing that broke was the local display, and seems British
Gas won't either replace it free of charge, or even sell you one.
Extensive advice sought on magic-bullet third party replacements all
turned to dust.

A year so later the actual meter stopped sending numbers back to base.

And yes, I have now switched suppliers too, but the new one (popularly
perceived "can do no wrong" Octopus) seems disinclined to replace my
meter. Which is a big disappointment, I'd expected them to do it
routinely for new customers.

Suppliers are under heavy pressure to replace dumb with smart.  Anything which doesn't boost their 'conversion' figures isn't worth worrying about.

I guess the figures don't require the "smart" meters to work in a
"smart" way.

--
Max Demian

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26-Apr-24 11:44, Max Demian wrote:

On 25/04/2024 21:03, Sam Plusnet wrote:

On 25-Apr-24 6:50, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <v0bcpo$2ds2n$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:42:31 on Wed, 24 Apr
2024, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> remarked:

On 24/04/2024 16:45, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <umx*ZrGIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 20:53:48 on
Tue,  23 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked: >>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or
inaccessible to
the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know
you're
vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

 I have a smart meter, but it's broken, and to all intents and
purposes  they refuse to fix it. I gather there are several million >>>>> others in the  same boat.

If you live in a rural area or change suppliers the first generation
ones become dumb as a rock. Or has your remote sender mechanism
failed completely - ie. does the local loop display still work OK.

The first thing that broke was the local display, and seems British
Gas won't either replace it free of charge, or even sell you one.
Extensive advice sought on magic-bullet third party replacements all
turned to dust.

A year so later the actual meter stopped sending numbers back to base.

And yes, I have now switched suppliers too, but the new one
(popularly perceived "can do no wrong" Octopus) seems disinclined to
replace my meter. Which is a big disappointment, I'd expected them to
do it routinely for new customers.

Suppliers are under heavy pressure to replace dumb with smart.
Anything which doesn't boost their 'conversion' figures isn't worth
worrying about.

I guess the figures don't require the "smart" meters to work in a
"smart" way.

However stupid that might be, it is the correct answer.

--
Sam Plusnet

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

In message <umx*ZrGIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 20:53:48 on Tue,
23 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to >> the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're >vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

I have a smart meter, but it's broken, and to all intents and purposes
they refuse to fix it. I gather there are several million others in the
same boat.

If you are unable to reach your meter, and a smart meter is the solution to that, and the smart meter doesn't work, then I think you'd be entitled to insist they send somebody out to read it. They might try to fix the smart meter first, however.

Perhaps one forcing function would be to tell them you can't read your meter and would they like to send somebody around to read it regularly? :-)

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 27-Apr-24 12:34, Theo wrote:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

In message <umx*ZrGIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 20:53:48 on Tue,
23 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

Many meters are in extremely inaccessible places. And/or inaccessible to >>>> the elderly or infirm.

Utilities have registries of vulnerable customers. If they know you're
vulnerable they can fit a smart meter so you don't have to read it.

I have a smart meter, but it's broken, and to all intents and purposes
they refuse to fix it. I gather there are several million others in the
same boat.

If you are unable to reach your meter, and a smart meter is the solution to that, and the smart meter doesn't work, then I think you'd be entitled to insist they send somebody out to read it. They might try to fix the smart meter first, however.

Perhaps one forcing function would be to tell them you can't read your meter and would they like to send somebody around to read it regularly? :-)

Hmm.. The utility company could:

1. Incur the costs of sending someone to read the meter, or

2. Simply use (inflated) usage estimates (hence taking payment for
energy you haven't used).

I wonder which one would seem more attractive to them?

--
Sam Plusnet

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

Hmm.. The utility company could:

1. Incur the costs of sending someone to read the meter, or

2. Simply use (inflated) usage estimates (hence taking payment for
energy you haven't used).

I wonder which one would seem more attractive to them?

I believe they have to have a meter read (by you or them) every 12 months, according to their licence from Ofgem. However they can estimate the rest
of the time, which is troublesome when the price cap changes every 3 months.
So you would still potentially lose out with annual readings.

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)