Smart meters - good choice?

[JohnW2]

No no it was mandated that it could not be more than the cost of energy.

Are you talking about 'over a billing period', or what? As I said, the 'cost of energy' obviously depends upon how much one uses.

I discovered this when I purchased my first house back in 1983, I didn't move in straightaway while I reburbished and paid the estimated bills for gas and electricity 2 or 3 times before they read the meters (at the time the gas meter was in a poly bag and the supply pipe covered with an aerosol cap), my total bill for that early period was well under £1 for both services.

Fair enough - but, as I said, I doubt that, in the absence of local generation (solar etc.) usage of an 'occupied' property is going to be less than the 'advertised' Standing Charge for a significant number of properties.

However, what you say did not work as you describe 'across the board'. I inherited a house in the early 1980s (so similar to when you describe) which then remained unoccupied for a number of years, with electricity supply still 'connected and contracted' (refurbishment was repeatedly 'put off' ), although the gas supply was 'capped off'. I've just looked back and throughout that period of non-occupancy (hence zero electricity usage) the usual Standing Charge was billed (and paid).

 

[JohnW2]

.... the standing charge is to provide the option of a grid supply whether used or not.

There was a time when some (all?) suppliers charged either much less than normal, or even zero, for the first XXX kWh consumed in a billing period - so the Standing Charge was then effectively 'subsidising' that.

The concept of having to pay for something (usually 'a service') 'being available', even if one never uses it, is quite common - and usually not unreasonable.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

There was a time when some (all?) suppliers charged either much less than normal, or even zero, for the first XXX kWh consumed in a billing period - so the Standing Charge was then effectively 'subsidising' that.

The concept of having to pay for something (usually 'a service') 'being available', even if one never uses it, is quite common - and usually not unreasonable.

I half remember, you could apply for some sort of 'SC holiday' if you declared a place unoccupied.

 

[fixitflav]

My brother has had an email from E.ON Next, his supplier, saying he MUST have a smart meter by law. It says

"Every electricity meter is given a certification date when they are manufactured - similar to a ‘best before’ date which is set by the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) - and yours has expired already.

Important to know.​

Under the Electricity Act 1989, enforced by The Office for Product Safety & Standards (OPSS) we’re required by law to change all meters that have passed their certification date. Under Ofgem's New and Replacement obligation this means that all reasonable steps should be taken to exchange all expired meters with next generation smart meters."

Anybody know whether this is true? I thought you couldn't be forced to have a smart meter. His current meter (he's on electric only) is fairly modern - LCD display, showing date and time as well as day and night readings. More modern than mine, which has a rotating disc, and nobody has told me it must be changed (though they've tried to pester me).

 

[Munroast]

usage 2700 kWh, my solar software showsView attachment 384968 so that is for 22 months, so 5000 kWh is my estimate. But still not bad going when only been with Octopus for two months.

where have you got that figure from ? is it from your solar software ?

My solar software grossly over quotes my consumption, about 30% more. Basically the PV power is measured before the inverter, then they measure how much is exported and then assume you have consumed the remainder in your home - So all the losses through the Inverter (which are way above 10%) they hoodwink you into thinking this is monetary saving for yourself

work out what you a truly using and make some comparisons

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Anybody know whether this is true? I thought you couldn't be forced to have a smart meter. His current meter (he's on electric only) is fairly modern - LCD display, showing date and time as well as day and night readings. More modern than mine, which has a rotating disc, and nobody has told me it must be changed (though they've tried to pester me).

They are entitled to replace out of calibration meters, and the only ones they can replace it with is a smart meter, but a smart meter, doesn't have to be set up as a smart meter, it can be used just as a normal one - and your brother can insist it stays dumb. Likely, if your brothers tells them this, they will simply go away and forget changing the meter.

 

[SUNRAY]

Are you talking about 'over a billing period', or what? As I said, the 'cost of energy' obviously depends upon how much one uses.

Fair enough - but, as I said, I doubt that, in the absence of local generation (solar etc.) usage of an 'occupied' property is going to be less than the 'advertised' Standing Charge for a significant number of properties.

However, what you say did not work as you describe 'across the board'. I inherited a house in the early 1980s (so similar to when you describe) which then remained unoccupied for a number of years, with electricity supply still 'connected and contracted' (refurbishment was repeatedly 'put off' ), although the gas supply was 'capped off'. I've just looked back and throughout that period of non-occupancy (hence zero electricity usage) the usual Standing Charge was billed (and paid).

Annoyingly I've been having a sort out in the last year or so and dumped the majority of the paperwork from that era (including every pay slip and bank statement from 1972, CC statement from 1976 etc. so not able to demonstrate. The updated bill certainly shew the same amount for SC and energy, IIRC 32p for electricity but gas was not in situ for ages, I think I only boiled a kettle 3 or 4 times in the first year so a few pennies only.

I half remember, you could apply for some sort of 'SC holiday' if you declared a place unoccupied.

I thought empty properties were not charged a SC, I have never had to pay in between tenants in any of my rental properties apart from the one with prepayment meters which we kept topped up as it took November to April to sell and we wanted the heating to stay on to prevent water or damp problems which the other flats in the block are renowned for.

 

[aveatry]

My brother has had an email from E.ON Next, his supplier, saying he MUST have a smart meter by law. It says

"Every electricity meter is given a certification date when they are manufactured - similar to a ‘best before’ date which is set by the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) - and yours has expired already.

Important to know.​

Under the Electricity Act 1989, enforced by The Office for Product Safety & Standards (OPSS) we’re required by law to change all meters that have passed their certification date. Under Ofgem's New and Replacement obligation this means that all reasonable steps should be taken to exchange all expired meters with next generation smart meters."

Anybody know whether this is true? I thought you couldn't be forced to have a smart meter. His current meter (he's on electric only) is fairly modern - LCD display, showing date and time as well as day and night readings. More modern than mine, which has a rotating disc, and nobody has told me it must be changed (though they've tried to pester me).

Its the latest trick in the book to get people to change - take up harrys advice. I have had countless letters ( actually I can count because I have kept them ) ranging from bribes to your meter is out of date to we have arranged a date to come to you - your heating will not work - then there are the phone calls - to which the last one I went ferrel on them- told them to stop harassing me etc and they have not rang me since.

 

[morqthana]

My brother has had an email from E.ON Next, his supplier, saying he MUST have a smart meter by law.

It doesn't quite say that.

"Every electricity meter is given a certification date when they are manufactured - similar to a ‘best before’ date which is set by the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) - and yours has expired already.

Fair enough - can't argue with that

Under the Electricity Act 1989, enforced by The Office for Product Safety & Standards (OPSS) we’re required by law to change all meters that have passed their certification date.

Ditto.

Under Ofgem's New and Replacement obligation this means that all reasonable steps should be taken to exchange all expired meters with next generation smart meters."

And there you have it. "Reasonable steps".

If you resist all their reasonable blandishments they can't force you. Or can they, insofar as if you need a new meter, and there are no dumb ones available, can they say "OK - take it or leave it. We are required by law to remove your old meter. If you do not want the only new one we can provide then you will no longer have a gas|electricity supply"?

You may have to be aggressive in challenging their assertion that the only options are smart meter or no meter, but sooner or later that will be true.

And frankly the smart meter refuseniks are looking more and more like tinfoil hat wearing swivel eyed conspiracy fantasists.

 

[JohnW2]

Under the Electricity Act 1989, enforced by The Office for Product Safety & Standards (OPSS) we’re required by law to change all meters that have passed their certification date.

That's fair enough.

Under Ofgem's New and Replacement obligation this means that all reasonable steps should be taken to exchange all expired meters with next generation smart meters."

As has been said, "all reasonable steps" does not necessarily including forcing a 'smart' meter onto a customer who doesn't want it.

Some suppliers are apparently arguing, when the time has come to replace an existing meter, that the only one's they have to replace with are 'smart' ones. However, quite apart from the fact that non-'smart' meters are still readily available, as has been also said a 'smart' meter may be installed but not used as a 'smart' meter. Indeed, the communications facility of a 'smart' meter is often a module that can be omitted, or not installed, in which case it cannot be used as a 'smart' meter.

Anybody know whether this is true? I thought you couldn't be forced to have a smart meter. His current meter (he's on electric only) is fairly modern - LCD display, showing date and time as well as day and night readings. More modern than mine, which has a rotating disc, and nobody has told me it must be changed (though they've tried to pester me).

 

[morqthana]

As has been said, "all reasonable steps" does not necessarily including forcing a 'smart' meter onto a customer who doesn't want it.

Indeed not, but is the flipside of that the right to refuse a smart meter if that's all you're offered? Gratuitous forced replacements are one thing, but when someone has to have a new meter, and the only option offered is a smart meter is a different scenario.

Some suppliers are apparently arguing, when the time has come to replace an existing meter, that the only one's they have to replace with are 'smart' ones.

Which may be true. The fact that non-smart meters are still made does not mean that any supplier has to offer them, any more than if they decide to always use Landys & Gyre (for whatever reason), they can be challenged on that.

As far as I'm aware the only legal protection that consumers have against being made to have a smart meter is the absence of any legal right for a supplier to force a swap if the existing meter is OK for continued use.

But when it gets to the situation where the existing meter has to be replaced because of age, or damage, or a fault, or where a new supply is being laid in, I've not heard of any law which gives the consumer the right to refuse a smart meter and insist on a dumb one.

However, quite apart from the fact that non-'smart' meters are still readily available, as has been also said a 'smart' meter may be installed but not used as a 'smart' meter. Indeed, the communications facility of a 'smart' meter is often a module that can be omitted, or not installed, in which case it cannot be used as a 'smart' meter.

Ditto the comms features - if ATEOD a supplier says "all we install are smart meters, and we will neither remove nor disable the communication module", what then?

If the "take it or leave it" choice is "take it or do without any gas/electricity", can the consumer do a damn thing about it?

And should they be able to?

 

[SUNRAY]

So what is the age limit??

 

[JohnW2]

Indeed not, but is the flipside of that the right to refuse a smart meter if that's all you're offered?

As I have written here countless time, I think you will find that most (all?) contracts with suppliers (which consumers are deemed to have agreed to if they use the supplier's supply, even if they haven't seen the contract) involve the consumer agreeing that the supplier may install "any metering or other equipment" which they deem necessary in order to provide (and meter) a supply.

... so, as I always say, if/when that's the case then it seems to indicate that the consumer does not have a right to refuse a 'smart' meter (or any other type of 'equipment) IF they want to have a continuing supply of electricity.

 

[robinbanks]

This is what I have been paying each day, on my smart meter, versus the straight line, on the graph which represents what you would be paying per unit, with a dumb meter.

View attachment 383330

I can't easily understand what you're saying; on your graph I see two lines, a jaggedy one that is usually around 20p and a straight one that is around 5p. If the jagged one is what you pay with a smart meter, and the straight one is what I pay with a dumb meter, I'll take the dumb meter please. I'll also take some advice on how to get a 5p tariff?!

 

[Why Not Indeed]

on your graph I see two lines,

There are two fuels and four lines, the dashed ones represent the SVT unit rate cap. The lines that vary day to day represent what was actually charged.