Electricity Supplier ?

[scooby1]

This is such a useful Forum that I thought I would ask another question which is all about electricty suppliers. This is a small farm
on a 3-phase supply with an outside meter in a cabinet but we do not use much electric for the farm, it is mainly for the house. I
used to be with Southern Electric and we had a great system whereby I read the meter (day & night rates) when asked to do so, sent
the readings in via their site, SE emailed the bill and I paid it promptly on-line. Someone would come once a year to get a reading
(and presumably to check that I wasn't cheating the system !) and everything worked fine.

But of course SE is no more and I was transferred to another supplier who I will not name but some of you will know who it is. And
they are the pits. Firstly, because I won't do Direct Debit they are charging crazy rates per kWh. Their web site is rubbish and as well
as updating my account every day with the daily charge they are also guessing my useage and adding that to my account every day
as well. And of course they are being ridiculous with their estimation.

And I refuse to have a smart meter, in fact I'm under the impression that it is not possible with a 3ph supply but I stand to be
corrected about that.

I want to change supplier and so my simple questions are :
1. Is there a supplier out there who will allow me to send meter readings and who will remind me when one is due and who will then
email me the resultant bill which I have always paid promptly ?
2. Is there a supplier who won't rip me off just because I won't sign a Direct Debit ?

My apologies for being a bit long winded but I am just so fed up with being treated like something that the cat has coughed up.
I have Googled the subject but I feel that practical unbiased advice from Members of this Forum would be much more helpful.

Many thanks and appreciation in advance to anyone who will help and/or advise me on the above.

 

[winston1]

I’m on EON and they allow me to email monthly readings etc. No smart meter but I do pay by DD.

 

[scooby1]

I’m on EON and they allow me to email monthly readings etc. No smart meter but I do pay by DD.

Crikey, that was a quick response @winston1 Thank you very much - I will investigate further.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I want to change supplier and so my simple questions are :
1. Is there a supplier out there who will allow me to send meter readings and who will remind me when one is due and who will then
email me the resultant bill which I have always paid promptly ?

Most/all suppliers do expect you to supply the reading, if you don't have a Smart, or your (older) Smart is not supplying the readings. I have supplied weekly reading updates to each of my past three/four suppliers and now with BGas doing the same. I never get estimated readings.

There is no reason not to accept Smart Meters, they simply avoid the need to manually read them.

2. Is there a supplier who won't rip me off just because I won't sign a Direct Debit ?

There may lie the problem. Most suppliers are encouraging customers to use DD, the way they encourage it is by charging a little more for none DD. My experience of DD is that it works absolutely fine - you just pay for what you expect you will use over the year, divided by 12, for each months payment. The high winter consumption cost is spread through the entire year.

 

[winston1]

There is no reason not to accept Smart Meters, they simply avoid the need to manually read them.

 

[winston1]

There are plenty of reasons not to accept so called smart meters. The whole rollout has been based on lies. They do not save you money and they are not free. The cost of them are paid by everyone through higher bills. You even have to buy your own batteries for the indoor unit. The first generation did not allow you to change suppliers and remain smart so now are being replaced at even more cost to everyone. The government wants them so they can have fluid pricing. Price goes up at dinner cooking time and becomes astronomical on Christmas Day. It is already beginning to happen in Australia so I hear.

 

[JohnW2]

There are plenty of reasons not to accept so called smart meters. The whole rollout has been based on lies. They do not save you money and they are not free. The cost of them are paid by everyone through higher bills. You even have to buy your own batteries for the indoor unit. The first generation did not allow you to change suppliers and remain smart so now are being replaced at even more cost to everyone.

All true, other than that I would question the first sentence at the level of an individual, since there is virtually no impact on an individual. 'Smart' meters will undoubtedly eventually become (literally or effectively) 'unavoidable' but, in the meantime, the effect on bills for everyone (including the individual concerned) of one household out of 30 million/whatever declining such a meter would obviously be 'unnoticeable' - and if someone doesn't actually 'want' such a meter, then they don't need to replace the batteries in the remote unit.

The government wants them so they can have fluid pricing. Price goes up at dinner cooking time and becomes astronomical on Christmas Day. It is already beginning to happen in Australia so I hear.

The main ultimate goals of 'smart' meters are presumably to facilitate 'flexibility' of pricing (and ultimately, probably when few if any of us are still around, interaction between these meters and 'smart' appliances/loads), but I'm not sure why the government would want the sort of things you suggest, per se. If there were not enough energy available to satisfy people's desires at 'dinner cooking time' or on Christmas Day, there would clearly be a problem, but I'm not sure that it could be effectively addressed by 'price hikes' - since only the poorest of people would probably delay their evening meal by a few hours or curtail/delay their Christmas meal, no matter what the cost of the energy.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Why then do you think the government - the government; not the energy companies - is forcing the introduction of smart meters?

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

There are plenty of reasons not to accept so called smart meters. The whole rollout has been based on lies. They do not save you money and they are not free. The cost of them are paid by everyone through higher bills. You even have to buy your own batteries for the indoor unit. The first generation did not allow you to change suppliers and remain smart so now are being replaced at even more cost to everyone. The government wants them so they can have fluid pricing. Price goes up at dinner cooking time and becomes astronomical on Christmas Day. It is already beginning to happen in Australia so I hear.

I don't usually reply to one of Winnies posts, but this is an exception. Yes we are all paying for them, yes the rollout spec. was a shambles, but the fact we are all paying for them is a good reason why we should accept one. Fluid pricing is just a necessity, to limit peak demand and help hold costs of generation down. Fluid pricing will also mean there is cheaper power available at other times, when demand is less.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

and if someone doesn't actually 'want' such a meter, then they don't need to replace the batteries in the remote unit.

There is no reason to replace the batteries anyway - They work perfectly well on mains power. The batteries only enable to display to be carried around and used, not plugged into the mains.

 

[JohnW2]

Why then do you think the government - the government; not the energy companies - is forcing the introduction of smart meters?

Well, certainly not so as they can dramatically hike energy costs on Christmas Day - which would hardly be a 'vote winner'

I suppose the answer has to be that they have somehow been convinced that such meters will substantially reduce energy usage (hence assisting them to meet 'green targets') but I really don't know how that convincing has been done. In any event, it remains the case that all of the publicity/'advertisement' of 'smart' meters continues to major on the alleged resultant 'cost savings' for consumers.

At least for the remotely foreseeable future (until 'smart appliances' are widely deployed), the whole exercise does appear to be 'a waste of money' (ultimately the general public's money) but I feel much the same about the way in which it seems that SPDs and AAFDs (and even RCBOs) are being 'pushed' (ultimately probably forced) onto the public, in the absence (to my mind) of any compelling need/benefit.

With all these things, one has to remember that with something like 30 million households in the UK, any 'new measure' only has to have a marginal additional cost of about £33 per household to result in a total of £1 billion - a lot of money which could probably be spent much more usefully (for society/public) on other things.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I suppose the answer has to be that they have somehow been convinced that such meters will substantially reduce energy usage (hence assisting them to meet 'green targets') but I really don't know how that convincing has been done. In any event, it remains the case that all of the publicity/'advertisement' of 'smart' meters continues to major on the alleged resultant 'cost savings' for consumers.

My guess is that the uk.gov was simply misled on the benefits new Smart Meters could offer. The only tangible benefit has has been the remote meter reading, but the spec. failed to account for customers changing suppliers - someone ought to be shot for that easily foreseeable error in the spec..

 

[JohnW2]

My guess is that the uk.gov was simply misled on the benefits new Smart Meters could offer.

That's obviously what I was suggesting - but I remain surprised that there were not at least some people in government who questionend the 'evidence' for the alleged benefits.

The only tangible benefit has has been the remote meter reading, but the spec. failed to account for customers changing suppliers - someone ought to be shot for that easily foreseeable error in the spec..

I'm not at all sure that even the remote meter reading has produced much of a benefit. In the distant past, the ability to get rid of countless 'meter readers' would have represented an appreciable cost saving but, speaking for myself (without a 'smart' meter), it must be a good few years since I last saw such a parson (despite a switch of suppliers), since all the 'meter readings' have been submitted by myself.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Put it this way, then.

When 'everyone' has an electric car, do you think it will still be as cheap as it is now to charge them?

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

That's obviously what I was suggesting - but I remain surprised that there were not at least some people in government who questionend the 'evidence' for the alleged benefits.

The Government don't do technical, as is so obvious from the many mistakes all partys have made over the years.

I'm not at all sure that even the remote meter reading has produced much of a benefit. In the distant past, the ability to get rid of countless 'meter readers' would have represented an appreciable cost saving but, speaking for myself (without a 'smart' meter), it must be a good few years since I last saw such a parson (despite a switch of suppliers), since all the 'meter readings' have been submitted by myself.

For the brief periods my Smarts have worked, they worked well submitting the readings for every 30 minutes throughout the day. Neither I nor a reader needed to look at them, none-the-less we did/do still get the readers round very occasionally, but I suppose that might vary around the UK.