Electricity Suppliers - advice?

[JohnW2]

The losing suppliers aren’t concerned about the final meter readings you submit or passing on, to anybody, what they (or you) consider to be accurate readings based on what you, their customer, has just supplied,...they have a mandated process to take care of that for them. They don’t need to do anything except wait for the verified reading. Why would they make work for themselves!

Well, it wouldn't be any different (or 'more work for themselves') from what they (presumably) do whenever they issue any bill on the basis of customer-provided meter readings (i.e. I would expect that they would always 'do something' if the customer's submitted reading was inconsistent with historical readings) - so, as I've said, why any different if it is a 'final' bill?

They verifiers act as honest-brokers and go-betweens. Sure the losing supplier has all the info required to assess the veracity of your final-reading and there is probably nobody better placed to do that task,... but the ‘verifiers’ also have access to that info.

Are you saying that my historical meter readings (which, as far as I can see, really provide the only rational basis for a 'verification', other than reading the meter themselves) are stored somewhere other than (in addition to) with a customer's supplier?

There are lots of ways that final readings could be assessed and ‘verified’,...but Ofgem have mandated this particular verification process,...we can rant about it till we’re blue in the face but it’s here to stay.

I'm not "ranting" - as I keep saying, I'm merely intrigued to know what this process actually IS (given than no-one here seems to know)

Have a glance at this John,...it's an overview of the verification process...if you’ve not already seen it that is. ,link to So Energy>

I have a feeling that that might be one of the articles I read previously, but I'll have another look and let you know.

Kind Regards, John

 

[bri160356]

I'm not "ranting" - as I keep saying, I'm merely intrigued to know what this process actually IS (given than no-one here seems to know)
I have a feeling that that might be one of the articles I read previously, but I'll have another look and let you know.

Kind Regards, John

I certainly didn’t mean to infer you were ranting John, ...sorry if it appeared that way.

However, you’re now embedded in the switch-over process and unless you choose to terminate said process it’ll take you along for the ride. I’m sure it will all go smoothly for you.

If it’s of any comfort during my last switch the leccy verification was completed within about 4 days of the switch-over date;...it would have been perfect apart from the gas verification taking over 7 weeks!

 

[JohnW2]

Have a glance at this John,...it's an overview of the verification process...if you’ve not already seen it that is. <link to So Energy.

Although I've read similar (and ended up not very enlightened!), I haven't seen this one - so thanks!

I rather hope I am misunderstanding since, if I'm not, the whole process would appear to be a bit of a joke, capable of only detecting very gross anomalies in 'final meter readings' (probably usual due to actual errors in reading meters).

One of the confusions/uncertainties is that this article talks incessantly about "reads" without anywhere making it explicitly clear as to whether these "reads" relate to 'official' meter readings (by 'meter readers') or whether it also includes customer-provided meter readings. However, given the context of many of the appearances of this word, it would seem that "reads" are probably primarily customer-provided readings.

On that basis, on the face of it they appear to be saying that a final "read" will only 'fail verification' if EITHER it is lower than "the previous read" OR if it is such as to imply a consumption since "the previous read" which was more than 2.5 times larger than their estimate of what consumptio shouyld have been during that period. If that is the case, as above, that 'process' would, with few exceptions, only be capable of rejecting 'final readings' which were erroneous in a manner that would be glaringly obvious on just eyeballing the figures (particularly in the case of readings lower than the previous ones ) - and I find it rather amazing/worrying that an industry of 'verifiers' seems to have appeared to do that!

In my case, for example, it looks as if my 'final reading' would only 'fail verification' if it were lower than the one I submitted to my present supplier yesterday (!), or if it were so high as to suggest that my electricity consumption in the last two weeks before switching was more than 2.5 times greater than was 'expected' for a 14-day period.

So, if I am understanding correctly what I am reading, I find it rather hard to take this 'verification process' very seriously. It may be capable of detecting gross errors of meter reading (or stupidly extreme attempts at fraud), but that's about it.

Have I misunderstood?

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

I certainly didn’t mean to infer you were ranting John, ...sorry if it appeared that way.

No, I didn't feel 'accused' but was merely pointing out that I was not 'ranting'!

However, you’re now embedded in the switch-over process and unless you choose to terminate said process it’ll take you along for the ride. I’m sure it will all go smoothly for you.

Sure, this discussion has got way beyond the point of being about my switch - which is now simply 'taking its course' - but it's moved onto my desire to actually understand some of the "processes" involved!

If it’s of any comfort during my last switch the leccy verification was completed within about 4 days of the switch-over date;...it would have been perfect apart from the gas verification taking over 7 weeks!

Well, following from I posted a couple of minutes ago, I'll probably submit a further reading to my present supplier a day or two before the changeover date (in addition to the one ON the changeover date).

If I do that, and if the verification process is as per my understanding of the article you posted, then all 'the verifier' will need to do is to confirm that my final reading is not lower than the one I submitted a day or two earlier ("the previous read") and that it did not indicate that I had used more than 2.5 the 'expected' amount of electricity in that day or two. For a person with even a modicum of reading ability and intelligence, that should take all of 10 seconds, let alone '4 days' ... but is that article really saying that?!

Kind Regards, John

 

[bri160356]

So, if I am understanding correctly what I am reading, I find it rather hard to take this 'verification process' very seriously. It may be capable of detecting gross errors of meter reading (or stupidly extreme attempts at fraud), but that's about it.

Have I misunderstood?

Kind Regards, John

They will also provide a verified reading in the absence of any input from the customer,..but that’s about the top and bottom of it John.

Ofgem moves in mysterious ways on occasion.

 

[bri160356]

For a person with even a modicum of reading ability and intelligence, that should take all of 10 seconds, let alone '4 days' ... but is that article really saying that?!

Kind Regards, John

You may get it verified in record time ;...it just depends how busy they are I guess. It’s quite a lax period atm, but next month should see an increase in switching activity.

 

[JohnW2]

They will also provide a verified reading in the absence of any input from the customer,..but that’s about the top and bottom of it John. Ofgem moves in mysterious ways on occasion.

Well, in my (not necessarily all that humble!) opinion, it's plain daft - and is presumably costing/'wasting' a fair bit of money, which ultimately will inevitably be paid for by the customers ....

IF one's 'final reading' is lower than the previous meter reading, then I'm sure that the 'previous' supplier will have something to say about that before preparing a final bill
....OR
IF one's 'final reading' is so high as to indicate more than 2.5 times the 'expected consumption' since the previous reading, such that the 'previous' supplier generates an enormous final bill, then it's very probable that the customer would have something to say about that.
....OR
In any other situation, 'verification succeeds' (and really achieved nothing!).

That's how I see it, anyway! Thanks for the interesting discussion.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

You may get it verified in record time ....

How will I know when it's happened - by seeing when my 'final bill' from E.ON appears?

Kind Regards, John

 

[bri160356]

How will I know when it's happened - by seeing when my 'final bill' from E.ON appears?

Kind Regards, John

Generally (but it depends on the supplier) by keeping your eye on the meter reading submission section on your new suppliers website,...there will be (or should be ??) an annotation against your opening read/s that says ‘Customer’,...once verified it will (should??) change to ‘Industry’.

Of course, if Eon issue your official final-bill that is proof positive that your final read has been verified.

 

[JohnW2]

Generally (but it depends on the supplier) by keeping your eye on the meter reading submission section on your new suppliers website,...there will be (or should be ??) an annotation against your opening read/s that says ‘Customer’,...once verified it will (should??) change to ‘Industry’.

Thanks. Will the same happen on my 'old' supplier's website (assuming that I still have access then)?

Of course, if Eon issue your official final-bill that is proof positive that your final read has been verified.

Indeed - assuming that they play by the 'rules'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[bri160356]

Thanks. Will the same happen on my 'old' supplier's website (assuming that I still have access then)?

Kind Regards, John

Not sure;...I’ve always filed final reads on the losing suppliers website on switch-over day (as a matter of course more than anything else), but to be honest I’ve never paid much attention after that point. It’s an academic exercise anyway, because the losing supplier (Eon) will at some point quite early in the proceedings withdraw your access to the billing/meter-read side of your account.

Eon will just sit and wait for the only final-readings that really matter,...and you know which ones they are.

 

[JohnW2]

Not sure;...I’ve always filed final reads on the losing suppliers website on switch-over day (as a matter of course more than anything else), but to be honest I’ve never paid much attention after that point. It’s an academic exercise anyway, because the losing supplier (Eon) will at some point quite early in the proceedings withdraw your access to the billing/meter-read side of your account.

Indeed - as I wrote "(assuming that I still have access then)". Anyway, we'll see.

Eon will just sit and wait for the only final-readings that really matter,...and you know which ones they are.

It will be interesting to see whether they do 'sit and wait'. IF what was described in the article you linked to yesterday is the OFGEM-dictated 'verification process', E.ON will know what the outcome of that process will be before they even involve the 'verifier' - so we'll see! Not long to wait!

Kind Regards, John

 

[SimonH2]

In any other situation, 'verification succeeds' (and really achieved nothing!).

I wouldn't say it's achieved nothing.
As has been previously pointed out, it means that someone other than the losing or gaining supplier has stated what meter reading should be used at switchover. If either supplier were responsible for doing that, then there's the opportunity (and incentive) to "fudge the numbers" - the losing supplier would profit from adding a bit on, the gaining supplier would gain by knocking a bit off.
You have to remember that we are not typical customers - while we could look at the bills and spot such fiddles, the vast majority really don't understand their bills beyond the large print "amount you owe us" number. It doesn't need much of a memory to think back and recall how companies will fiddle the numbers for profit if given the opportunity, this process removes the opportunity in this case

 

[JohnW2]

I wouldn't say it's achieved nothing. ... As has been previously pointed out, it means that someone other than the losing or gaining supplier has stated what meter reading should be used at switchover. If either supplier were responsible for doing that, then there's the opportunity (and incentive) to "fudge the numbers" - the losing supplier would profit from adding a bit on, the gaining supplier would gain by knocking a bit off.

Yes, I understand all that (and it might be a reason for having a 'useful/proper' verification process), BUT, as I've said ....

... IF the explanation of the 'verification process' to which I was directed yesterday is a true reflection of "how it's done", then the customer-supplied meter reading on the changeover day will only NOT become, and be accepted as, the 'verified reading' if either (a) it is less than the previous meter reading or (b) if it is so high that it would mean a >2.5-fold excess (compared with 'expected') consumption since the previous meter reading. In any other situation (I presume the vast majority of cases), both suppliers would be obliged to accept the customer-provided reading as being the 'verified' one.

That means that, unless one of those extreme scenarios existed (which, in practice, would nearly always be due to a customer error in reading the meter), neither supplier would have any ability to 'fudge the figures', because they would both be obliged to accept the customer's reading as the 'verified' one - and, as I've said, if either of those extreme scenarios does exist, the obvious way to resolve the situation would be for one or both of the suppliers to send someone to read the meter (or maybe ask the customer for another one, maybe a photos of the meter, if they would trust that).

A seemingly really daft thing is that, if I understand correctly, this 'verification process' has to be gone through even if the customer has a functioning 'smart' meter!

Kind Regards, John

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

That means that, unless one of those extreme scenarios existed (which, in practice, would nearly always be due to a customer error in reading the meter), neither supplier would have any ability to 'fudge the figures', because they would both be obliged to accept the customer's reading as the 'verified' one - and, as I've said, if either of those extreme scenarios does exist, the obvious way to resolve the situation would be for one or both of the suppliers to send someone to read the meter (or maybe ask the customer for another one, maybe a photos of the meter, if they would trust that).

A seemingly really daft thing is that, if I understand correctly, this 'verification process' has to be gone through even if the customer has a functioning 'smart' meter!

Kind Regards, John

The customer him/herself could fudge the readings, to squeeze a little more from the cheaper supplier.

Yes, even with smart meters, they ask the customer to supply a manual reading and it goes through verification process. I have gone through the process three times now, with a fully functioning smart meter. They have never disputed the manual readings I have provided.