You’ll realise very quickly that this forum is full of people who are ready and waiting to oppose any view point of another poster just to start an argument, best not to take it so serious.
Energy Prices (Strictly NO referrals!)
- Thread starter DXP55
- Start date
Soldato
Huh?
The SC will be less than 1 unit of electricity soon.
IMO the standing charge is terrific value for money when you consider what you get.
As has been said elsewhere, people with Solar will benefit more dramatically from pushing SC onto unit costs.
Impossible? No it doesn't do that at all unless you use basically no energy from the grid.
Its a fixed amount per day, it isn't unit based and is nothing to do with fuel cost.
Soldato
My bad, my wife does the bills.
Soldato
TBH that OVO plan isn't that great and seems odd in its short/medium/long term goals
Half the items could be in any other one of the three.
I mean why put the Department of energy and climate change as a long term, logically thats something to do now. Yes strategy will take time, but having a minister and bringing them up to speed will at least have a person likely to start conversation in the correct direction.
It looks more like a list that suits OVO to me than a genuine strategy.
Plus, "people don't understand the service charge as it creates confusion". Christ how thick are these people, and OVO need to up their game then, I mean its not rocket science to explain "the service charge is a fixed daily cost which is your contribution to the infrastructure required to be maintained and installed in order to supply every property with grid based utilities in the UK"
Half the items could be in any other one of the three.
I mean why put the Department of energy and climate change as a long term, logically thats something to do now. Yes strategy will take time, but having a minister and bringing them up to speed will at least have a person likely to start conversation in the correct direction.
It looks more like a list that suits OVO to me than a genuine strategy.
Plus, "people don't understand the service charge as it creates confusion". Christ how thick are these people, and OVO need to up their game then, I mean its not rocket science to explain "the service charge is a fixed daily cost which is your contribution to the infrastructure required to be maintained and installed in order to supply every property with grid based utilities in the UK"
Why has it gone up so much then?
Soldato
well currently there is a loading for failed suppliers, which I excluded because if people are struggling that much to understand then there isn't much hope for them, but there are also lots of infrastructure costs, people forget, the storms that wrecked havoc and had people cut off for ages required loads of works
I mean rebrand it if its that hard "provision supply" or something
If you looked at the HYS on BBC yesterday (about the large wind farm now onstream) its clear we have too many idiotic people who are uninformed and yet rush to post their views.
Whether the correct recovery method of putting the failed supplier amount on the SC is correct I am 50/50. Normally people wouldn't notice or care, but now due to the significance they do.
Soldato
Yeah I agree with you on this. It's got some decent ideas in it but it strikes me that Ovo could do some of it themselves anyway. If Ovo were against prepayment costing more or standing charges then why didn't they progress these actions before this crisis appeared.
On the standing charge - it could be reformed but it wouldn't be right for those with solar to pay nothing so there would have to be something there in my view.
Green levies and bailouts. The govt also hasnt allowed Bulb to hedge since it took it over and this is now costing hundreds of millions more than it needed to.
I agree with the standing charge myself.
It shouldn't be this high and its only this high due to failed suppliers.
If you use the infrastructure you should pay it. Even people solely on solar if you sell it to the grid you need the grid.
It shouldn't be this high and its only this high due to failed suppliers.
If you use the infrastructure you should pay it. Even people solely on solar if you sell it to the grid you need the grid.
Soldato
Yep
I wouldn't be against an ultra low usage pay per unit only scheme, but the unit cost should be higher if no SC.
Eg say <=4kwh (per day) usage is just a slightly inflated unit cost.
However when it all boils down its the normal story, those against SC mean they don't want to pay it and want someone else to.
Better to have client monies ring fenced IMO and that way there should be minimal impact on SC of failed suppliers.
There would likely be higher costs per unit though as the upfront purchase of energy would have to be funded by the company or via loans not in part from client monies.
Soldato
Thats got nothing to do with the point that OVO made or I made.
In that people don't understand what it is.
What you have posted there is about the inequity of the charge, which is of course a view. And was not what OVO were talking about!
Although they did get a bit ranty towards the end of their point by then it was nonsense
the standing charge includes distribution charges that are consumption based .. so can legitimately be criticized by the low usage customer -
what is so difficult to understand ?
so
"the service charge is a fixed daily cost which is your contribution to the infrastructure required to be maintained and installed in order to supply every property with grid based utilities in the UK"
what is so difficult to understand ?
so
So, excuse me for probably an obvious answer to the question.
What happens when these prices go up and people really cant pay?,
Obviously after a while they will be cut off, scottish power incorporating a £5 fee for missed payments will be a drop in the ocean on already mass debt.
So, people skip their payments and just live in a powerless house until a time comes when they can pay, but by that time the debt will probably be with them for the next 10 years?.
What happens when these prices go up and people really cant pay?,
Obviously after a while they will be cut off, scottish power incorporating a £5 fee for missed payments will be a drop in the ocean on already mass debt.
So, people skip their payments and just live in a powerless house until a time comes when they can pay, but by that time the debt will probably be with them for the next 10 years?.
Soldato
Yes includes. So move the variable bit onto unit costs and keep the fixed (although fixed is difficult to truly identify depending on time period, they are often stepped costs)
I'm not against that, but anyone with more than a couple of brain cells will look at that (terrible attempt that looks like it was knocked up in 5 minutes in a brainstorming event, I mean why the random / after points, why the . between points 2 and 3) and say, all these points benefit OVO as opposed to anyone else.
If people want a supply then they should pay the fixed costs as a SC. So maybe we charge for a meter, in full upfront for example. Pay for the supply to be added, in full, up front.
If your meter breaks, that sux, how do you want to pay for your new one?
Simply the costs are socialised right now, most people will not pay really in effect for what they have consumed (of install costs etc). Especially low usage customers.
Its where this always breaks down when people start looking at "their" costs and fail utterly to understand its not just the bit they can see.
Soldato
We don't really know TBH.
Its not really hit yet and as such we don't know how the companies will react (historic was to move to PP meters) but thats not a quick process
If enough people don't/can't pay then the companies will struggle (they still need to pay for supply). The whole thing could come crashing down.
Soldato
To be fair, selling excess solar to the grid is already a bit of a **** deal anyway. SEG rates are in the region of 3-4p/kWh, come October then the supplier will be selling that on for ~52p/kWh (even higher to businesses who are the most likely users during the day!). That's a nice ~48p/kWh profit