Another Smart Meter Scam?

[EFLImpudence]

They haven't - but the point I keep making is that, although they say that any consumer may refuse to have a 'smart' meter, as far as I am aware they have not said that a supplier is obliged to supply electricity to someone who exercises that option to refuse to have a 'smart' meter.

Well, that means that an existing supplier would be allowed to cut off someone who refuses to have a smart meter which is obviously not the case as people are allowed to decline their meter being changed to a smart one.

As I said, there are certainly some companies who do not offer any tariffs to people not prepared to have a 'smart' meter (and, of course, many others who only offer expensive tariffs to those who refuse to have such a meter).

If that is the case then presumably people would not switch to that company but if already with that company, then the above must apply.
Perhaps it is just subterfuge and you could insist on not having one, albeit at a higher rate.

I think that implies what I think is a widely-held misconception. As I understand it, the government targets related to the 'offering' of smart meters to all customers by a certain date, regardless of whether or not customers accept those offers - which I suppose reflects the government's/OFGEM's statement that consumers 'may refuse' the offers.

Oh, I don't know if offering is all they have to do. I thought that the instruction was that a certain number/percentage had to be installed by 2020.

 

[JohnW2]

Well, that means that an existing supplier would be allowed to cut off someone who refuses to have a smart meter which is obviously not the case as people are allowed to decline their meter being changed to a smart one.

Agreed, they couldn't cut off someone mid-contract for refusing to have a smart meter installed.

However, that probably only means much to people who are on (and are happy to remain on) a supplier's default (usually expensive) tariff ('SVT'). For anyone on a fixed-price tariff, when that contract comes to an end (usually after 1 year, sometimes 2 years, occasionally 3 years) they could find themselves being offered only the (usually expensive) SVT or fixed-rate tariffs which were available only if they agreed to have a smart meter.

Oh, I don't know if offering is all they have to do. I thought that the instruction was that a certain number/percentage had to be installed by 2020.

The requirement is that "all reasonable steps" be taken to ensure that all domestic (and small commercial) premises have 'smart' meters by the end of 2020. Condition 39 of the Electricity Supplier Standard Licence says ....

Condition 39: Smart Metering System – Roll-out, Installation and Maintenance
PART A - ROLL-OUT DUTY AND EXCEPTIONS TO THE DUTY
The roll-out duty
39.1 The licensee must take all reasonable steps to ensure that a Smart Metering System is installed on or before 31 December 2020 at each Domestic Premises or Designated Premises in respect of which it is the Relevant Electricity Supplier.

There is clearly scope for a lot of debate as to what "all reasonable steps" means, beyond offering smart meters to everyone. In particular, it is not clear as to what extent it would be regarded as "reasonable" to 'bully' or 'bribe' those would declined the offer of a 'smart' meter. I doubt, for example, whether it would be regarded as "reasonable" to seriously financially disadvantage those who declined the 'offer'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Does the "right to refuse" only cover gratuitous meter changes? What if one's meter is due for replacement anyway because of age or faults - can the customer still insist on a dumb one?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Yesterday I received a text message from British Gas

We have an engineer in your area on 14 May 2019 who can change your meters to smart meters. Reply free of charge to 80xxx with either A (8 am - 12 noon) B (10 am - 2 pm) or C (1 pm - 5 pm) Add MED if someone in your house relies on medical equipment.

No option to refuse the change so I replied "no thanks" and will be ready on the day to resist.

What Andy said - best thing would have been to not respond at all. The question is phrased in a standard selling way - offer a prospect a choice between different flavours of "yes" only.

 

[AndyPRK]

I believe suppliers are logging the methods/dates they have make to contact customers recommending a SM install. And also log their responses.

They can use this to show evidence they have taken all reasonable steps and prevent/limit fines.

I believe SSE has already been fined for not getting many gas SM installed.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Silly questions as always but I'll play your games just the once.
Yes

Yes

I'm not playing games, and if you think my questions are silly and I'm playing games then you should put more effort into your thinking, as the way you're doing it right now is leading you to false conclusions.

If that guy arrived, and lied to you about why he was there, and what he was going to do, then his entry to your premises was unlawful, and you should complain to the supplier.

I have eyes

And you used them to scrutinise the fuse which the operative removed? He really shouldn't have left it lying around

I'll accept this part may be badly written but I beleive everyone else may have understood

Sorry - yes - I did misread this:

He was here for well over half hour and even changed the tails as far as my Henley block to 25mm² when I pointed out they are a bit small for the 100A fuse.

as a complaint that he'd changed them to something too small.

 

[JohnW2]

Does the "right to refuse" only cover gratuitous meter changes? What if one's meter is due for replacement anyway because of age or faults - can the customer still insist on a dumb one?

Who knows, but it would not surprise me if one did not have a "right to refuse" (if one wanted a continuing supply) in those circumstances.

More generally, I'm rather surprised that this "right to refuse" exists at all. It presumably exists only because of the paranoia that some people have, but is pretty (probably virtually totally) unprecedented. In general, suppliers (and DNOs) install whatever equipment they see fit in order to provide a supply, and would presumably discontinue the supply if a customer refused to have the equipment (as chosen by supplier or DNO) installed - and I would strongly suspect that the contract/Ts&Cs says something along those lines.

 

[SUNRAY]

I'm not playing games, and if you think my questions are silly and I'm playing games then you should put more effort into your thinking, as the way you're doing it right now is leading you to false conclusions.

If that guy arrived, and lied to you about why he was there, and what he was going to do, then his entry to your premises was unlawful, and you should complain to the supplier.



And you used them to scrutinise the fuse which the operative removed? He really shouldn't have left it lying around



Sorry - yes - I did misread this:


as a complaint that he'd changed them to something too small.

OK I'll confirm my OP was factual (apart from the badly worded tails info) and having had 2 chats to our supplier I now I'm even more convince I haven't misread the situation.
I have complained on the phone and electronically and from their response so far I get the impression their contractors may not be their contractors for much longer due to the number of complaints. They have confirmed that as a result of the phone call (by the contractors sub-contractors) in March, the records show I had agreed to a SM but listening to the recording it clearly indicates the oposite.
Yes he did leave it on the floor with his tools. Additionally I asked for the fuse to be upgraded from 60A some 20 odd years ago when I replaced the CU.

 

[SUNRAY]

Who knows, but it would not surprise me if one did not have a "right to refuse" (if one wanted a continuing supply) in those circumstances.

More generally, I'm rather surprised that this "right to refuse" exists at all. It presumably exists only because of the paranoia that some people have, but is pretty (probably virtually totally) unprecedented. In general, suppliers (and DNOs) install whatever equipment they see fit in order to provide a supply, and would presumably discontinue the supply if a customer refused to have the equipment (as chosen by supplier or DNO) installed - and I would strongly suspect that the contract/Ts&Cs says something along those lines.

Would that be the T's&C's that we have never signed?

 

[EFLImpudence]

John, why are you continuing to doubt this?

The fact is, for whatever reason, people may refuse to have a smart meter if they so wish.

There is no argument. End of.

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/consumers/...-other-energy-meters/smart-meters-your-rights

 

[JohnW2]

Would that be the T's&C's that we have never signed?

It would (at least, the contract/Ts&Cs" that most of us have never signed).

However, I think that it would be naive in the extreme to believe that the fact that most of us have never literally signed anything means that there are are no legally-enforceable conditions associated with most of our electricity supplies.

Indeed, if you have never signed any contract for supply of electricity, that presumably means that, theoretically, the supplier could disconnect or remove your electricity supply whenever it took their fancy (and not necessarily 'for any specific reason').

I'm not sure how this all works in legal terms but, since so few of us have (at least traditionally) ever signed any electricity supply agreement, I can bit presume that, in law, there is some implicit relationship.

However, times have changed. People are now 'swapping' between electricity suppliers all the time, and I think you'll find that whenever one does that, one acquires a new contract with Ts&Cs - which, although you may not bother to even look at it, you are deemed to have seen and accepted if you accept (and pay for) a supply from the company concerned.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Yes, but these are big companies and you have to put up with their conditions.

Actual 'acceptance' does not arise if you want, in this case, electricity.


It's like getting a job. The company's conditions are stated in the contract; you don't have to sign it (or used not to). If you take the job those are the conditions under which you have to work.

 

[JohnW2]

Yes, but these are big companies and you have to put up with their conditions. Actual 'acceptance' does not arise if you want, in this case, electricity. It's like getting a job. The company's conditions are stated in the contract; you don't have to sign it (or used not to). If you take the job those are the conditions under which you have to work.

Exactly so.

As I said, I'm sure that, even for those (probably the majority of us) who have never signed a contract for supply of electricity, I feel sure that accepting (and paying for) an electricity supply implicitly accepts whatever conditions exist in the contract which one hasn't signed (and might well not have bothered to find or read). ... and, as I've said, that contract which one has implicitly accepted might well say that one's ongoing electricity supply is conditional on the supplier being allowed to install 'from time to time' whatever (metering or other) equipment that they see fit.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

As I said, I'm sure that, even for those (probably the majority of us) who have never signed a contract for supply of electricity,

Back in the 1960's 1970's I think you did have to actually sign a form to get a supply.

 

[JohnW2]

John, why are you continuing to doubt this? The fact is, for whatever reason, people may refuse to have a smart meter if they so wish. There is no argument. End of.

For a start, all but the first sentence of what I wrote was expressing surprise, not doubt.

As for that first sentence, OFGEM are obviously saying the same as you, but it is not clear as to the extent that any of it is legislation-based - and it certainly wouldn't be the first time that a government-related body (or government itself) had been 'economical with the truth' (or the whole truth) to the extent of being potentially misleading.

It is clear (and obvious) that anyone can refuse to have a smart meter, but it is less clear (and certainly not explicitly stated) that a supplier is necessarily obliged to continue to provide a supply to people who refuse to have a particular item of supplier's equipment installed (which, as I've said, could well be a requirement of the T&Cs of the {explicit or implicit} contract for supply). Indeed, as I've said, it appears that there are already some suppliers out there who do not offer any supply without acceptance of a smart meter, and others who appreciably financially penalise those without smart meters.

If things go 'according to plan' (albeit undoubtedly slower than 'the plan' would have hoped!), will the day not probably come when non-smart meters cease to be available (or, at least, available at a sensible price)?

Kind Regards, John