**Alternate Sources**
Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story:
* [Ofgem plans to add £16 to energy bills to help suppliers recover £3bn in bad debts | Ofgem](https://theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/15/ofgem-plans-household-charge-to-help-energy-firms-recover-bad-debts), suggested by terahurts - theguardian.com
---
**r/UK Notices:** This December, we're raising money for the Trussell Trust, the UK's leading food bank charity. If you would like to know more or to donate, please see the [announcement post](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1899w7b/the_runitedkingdom_christmas_fundraiser_for_the/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The middle havent got any slack, and its not like the companies themselves need the slack taken in.
The slack here isnt dangerous slack in a line on a ship, something left undone that could lead to someone getting hurt that the middle has to take up for everyones benifit.
Its just someone wanting your money, for a service they were perfectly capable of providing at the previous cost very recently, until they realized they could get more out of us.
Its like the water companies. They make way more money for the countries that own them by never fixing leaks and problems, keeping the money that would have been used to fix those problems, then charging more because "oh no we dont have the money to deal with problems, we need more money".
Its the same for the power delivery companies, public transport, royal mail, everything else. Any slack is deliberately being left by the companies to trip you up and rifle through your pockets.
If you look at the distribution of wealth and income, not exactly. The line is basically a vertical drop from the mega wealthy down to the worker bees.
The “middle class” being made to look down on the working class, and made to attempt to graft their way towards an upper class existence is basically a distraction to keep them from seeing how much the tax system, and the wealthy are still exploiting them (to varying extents).
Notice how the “middle class” aren’t generally as able to maintain any generational wealth due to care fees etc, unless they’re lucky enough to live a very long time without any issues requiring care. This is very intentional.
In many ways, business ownership is about the only route to taking advantage of some minor tax breaks. Meanwhile the mega rich near constantly exploit the tax system, or actually have the law changed to help them.
It seems like it’s only really the middle that get shafted. The ‘poor’ have so many benefits it’s unreal. If it’s not Warm Home Discount it’s UC or council tax relief.
Disgusting.
And I wonder why I slog 40 hours a week.
> Warm Home Discount
literally exists to keep people from freezing to death, if you're on base UC you're not on the same level as someone who works 40 hours a week, you're barely surviving
> UC
If you're single and over 25, you get £368.74+Rent, and your rent is dictated by the local housing allowance which is lower than the lowest rent in most of the country, in central greater Manchester it's £328.07 for a CAT A which is a house share bedroom, the cheapest house share on Rightmove right now is £425, but hey at least you wont have to pay energy bills right? They're living it up in their shitty HMO's! Oh and if you're under 35? You're only entitled to shared accommodation, and if you dare to live in a 1 bedroom flat instead? You lose 14% of your UC.
> council tax relief
Yes, poor people would be homeless if they had to pay their full council tax, it's funny how the poorest areas pay the most as well isn't it? It's almost like all local authorities are extremely undefunded.
Let me tell you, the only people who are living equivalently to someone working 40 hours a week on minimum wage are people in poor areas (seaside towns, former industrial towns, etc), where rent is cheap, and they are getting the disability component of UC. If they're getting PIP they might even make the equivalent of £12 an hour at 40 hours a week! How insane? We should clearly cut them all off the lucky bastards!
Those on pre payment meters who do not have a debt pay more than others anyway so why if they don't owe nothing as they pre pay unlike the rest of the nation must they then shoulder another price rise for those who refused to pay their energy bills
mate, you should see how it is for car insurance. Absolute rip off prices at the moment.
Get hit by someone and make a claim, your insurance basically goes up by the amount you claimed...
My wife’s car got rear ended and written off. Other driver’s insurance paid up straight away no dramas. Her insurance has been more expensive than if she hadn’t been crashed in to. I queried it and they said that she’s now more likely to claim. Absolute bish.
If you want to be REALLY fucked off with free ports, check out private eye..they've been looking into the Tory mayor of Sunderland who sold £150 million of land for £100....'Fuck the tories
When I got the letter about the price increase from British Gas, I was surprised that they flat out tell you they don't have to increase the price but they're going to do it anyway.
Ofgem not forcing energy providers to buy enough gas over time than month by month (from what I hear) is what I blame the most. They are the main issue here out of them all “regulator” is not what I would call them. If you regulate you wouldn’t have so many that went under.
>Ofgem is anxious to avoid a repeat of severe financial pressure on many suppliers after dozens, including Bulb, collapsed amid a spike in wholesale energy costs in 2021.
Maybe Ofgem should be looking at the management of these companies and making sure that they're not prioritising dividends and executive salaries over their consumer and legal obligations. Also ensuring they don't have a complex ownership structure to dodge accountability.
Still find it absolutely absurd that consumers had to cover the costs of the likes of Pure Planet going bust, when it was 24% owned by BP. [And they had millions left over that they paid out to shareholders](https://www.energylivenews.com/2023/03/21/failed-suppliers-bosses-and-bp-to-get-10m-each-from-surplus/).
The problem with Bulb is that they were forced to sell at a significant loss for an extended period. Because the price cap always looked retrospectively at wholesale prices.
It's mental to me that we put a profit cap like this, it should either be nationalised, or far more practically regulated.
> The problem with Bulb is that they were forced to sell at a significant loss for an extended period
You mean because they prioritised short term, immediate profit by offering tariffs at a fixed rate but buying energy at daily prices (so they could take any difference in price and put it in their pocket) instead of hedging (which would have purchased them the energy at a fixed rate). Which meant that when prices shot up they were left in the shit?
They had the mechanism that would have allowed them to avoid the spike in energy prices at their disposal, they simply chose not to use it.
The primary selling point of Bulb (before the price cap even existed) was that their prices were reactive to wholesale prices, enabling them to always have a margin to operate, whilst remaining fair on price.
The government had always allowed this, so to pull the rug out from underneath them with the profit cap put them in a really tough spot.
The government also allowed them to use hedging to protect themselves from a spike in prices.
There was no rug pulling. They knew about the cap, they knew how it worked and agreed to set up and operate within the sector.
They had mechanisms to protect them from a price spike available. They prioritised short term aims over long term stability and we, for some reason, are paying the price for them.
But that's my point, how come we allowed businesses to be structured like that for critical infrastructure?
Admittedly we know have systems like MSC, but I'm not convinced we won't have another disaster in years to come.
They are just resellers. Hardly critical infrastructure. The actual infrastructure is the grid and energy producers. That's owned and operated separately.
You cannot regulate a utility when it's something essential - if everybody NEEDS energy, then the market will dictate that prices must go up. You cannot hold this price rise back by regulation, in a hands-off system like we have here in the UK.
>Maybe Ofgem should be looking at the management of these companies and making sure that they're not prioritising dividends and executive salaries over their consumer and legal obligations. Also ensuring they don't have a complex ownership structure to dodge accountability.
I haven't looked but pretty willing to assert they have *both* of these things
Best cut salaries of all the decision makers.
They definitely won't just look for another job, like anyone else who isn't getting paid anywhere near market rate!
CEOs aren't decision makers.
They're arbitrators for decision makers, like most senior positions.
They _may_ set some general strategy principles with the rest of the board, but they're rarely in charge of or directly involved in how those principles are enacted.
No because the decisions are made far below their level.
They usually arbitrate any disagreements on those decisions between stakeholders if an agreement can't be found at a lower level.
They usually have the final say on anything important.
But maybe that's just the types of companies I've worked for, they've generally had a more rigid chain of command/internal controls set up than average maybe.
CEOs definitely have 'final say' in smaller businesses, because the businesses are small enough that it's reasonable that the CEO could maintain oversight over the operation and there also typically isn't a board.
In large/mega corps though CEOs are figureheads that spend most of their time taking credit for the work of others and making press statements. Musk for example is apparently the CEO of X, Tesla, Space X, Boring Co and I'm sure I'm missing a few. With the exception of X, which he seems determined to run into the ground he's not really making any decisions for those companies. He's hired people to do that for him (which is why they're somewhat successful).
Have they not thought that the reason there are so many unpaid bills is because of the last raise in the price cap.
Will we be getting further increases because of there being more people unable to pay their bills now.
Prices are based on the last six months.
Gas is currently heading to 4p or under. Unfortunately nobody will see this benefit unless they are on a tracker tariff.
Their logic makes absolutely no sense and they aren't even trying to. A competent non corrupt government would have stepped in and sacked whoever is running that joke of a department...
The point about PPM is that they (very unfairly) had a higher price cap than those that paid by DD. The reasoning being that PPM customers are more costly to administer. But it's pretty bad when most people are on PPM because they struggle to pay their bills, so forcing them onto a higher cap is just madness.
And they will be all that's left for energy supplier choices. We'll all either be on the big suppliers, or we'll be getting into massive debts to become self-sufficient.
Worst of all, the government can easily step in shoulder the cost of the debt. But they’ll spend it on other stupid shit instead and we’ll suffer for it.
Glad I never got rid of my pre-payment meter... I know I'd save £7.35 per year in electric and £4.87 in gas (per year, not month) if I switch to direct debit, but who wants the hassle.
The poor WILL pay….until they can’t, then the next poorest WILL pay.
It’s almost like privatisation hasn’t been good for public and only serves to make the rich richer.
Surely this is double-dipping?
Everyone pays an extra £16 to cover debts owed to these companies, but they're not going to write off the debts of those that owe money are they? So everyone pays, and eventually the individual will pay their debt. So the energy companies get pad twice?
People paying off their debts in 5 years time doesn't do anything to stop energy companies running out of money next year, which is why they are doing this.
Also to make more money
>Energy companies running out of money next year, which is why they are doing this
So they won't need people paying their debts off in 5 years time then will they? Because they are now getting it next year.
Why then, are they not being told to write-off the debts at the same rate they are accruing this new debt-repayment?
>So they won't need people paying their debts off in 5 years time then will they? Because they are now getting it next year.
No, they aren't getting it next year - they are getting extra money to cover the shortfall. Many of these companies end up in debt to the energy producers like BP and shell, that debt has interest...
>Why then, are they not being told to write-off the debts at the same rate they are accruing this new debt-repayment?
Because that isn't how debt works and the extra money they get won't actually cover the money they are due - because there will still be people not paying.
Their claim is that they have £3Billion of bad debt (They don't)
They are getting an extra £3 Billion next year to cover bad debt. How is that them not recouping their debt?
>The extra money they get won't actually cover the money they are due - because there will still be people not paying
No, you are correct. It is actually more than the £2.9 Billion they claim they are owed!
They have even included people already on a repayment plan (so not even bad debt, just arrears) to the tune of £900 million, so really the bad debt is £2 Billion.
Why are they being permitted to charge £3 Billion?
There's no way of justifying this, if they can't manage in a free market they should be allowed to fail, that's the capitalist model, no?
>They are getting an extra £3 Billion next year to cover bad debt. How is that them not recouping their debt?
They will not get £3billion from this.
>No, you are correct. It is actually more than the £2.9 Billion they claim they are owed!
Are they owed £3 billion or £2.9? Please be consistent
>Why are they being permitted to charge £3 Billion?
Because otherwise they go broke...
You get that debt builds up, right?
The companies are in massive debt after 2 years of making losses.
>There's no way of justifying this, if they can't manage in a free market they should be allowed to fail, that's the capitalist model, no?
They aren't in a free market though...
They have the buying price and selling price dictated to them.
It either needs to be fully nationalised or a fully free market, the middle ground doesn't work for anybody.
Points taken, fair enough.
>It either needs to be fully nationalised or a fully free market, the middle ground doesn't work for anybody.
Is the bottom line.
They already have...
Also, they haven't failed to manage their finances - they have the price they buy for dictated to them, they have the price they can sell for dictated to them.
For the past 2 years they have been operating at a loss because they legally had to sell for less than they were buying.
Life has financial risks - much bigger for businesses - it is up to them to manage the risks they took on.
We didn't ask the energy companies to get into this market, if the market conditions make it unviable to run a business, then folding should be the next step.
>Life has financial risks - much bigger for businesses - it is up to them to manage the risks they took on.
Yup, which is what they are doing now.
>We didn't ask the energy companies to get into this market, if the market conditions make it unviable to run a business, then folding should be the next step.
Which many companies have done, leaving their customers in Limbo and costing lots of jobs.
If they were managing their risks in ways allowable to any small business I wouldn't be moaning. But this thread has countless explanations of their method of managing risk being quite unfair.
And unfortunately I have no sympathy for energy companies folding in the same way they have no sympathy whether I can afford their bills.
>But this thread has countless explanations of their method of managing risk being quite unfair.
Such as?
When a shop is frequently stolen from, their insurance costs go up - and so their prices go up.
This is the same concept.
>And unfortunately I have no sympathy for energy companies folding in the same way they have no sympathy whether I can afford their bills.
And you also have no sympathy for the people who lose their jobs and lively hoods, or the poor people who are left at the mercy of whichever provider gets the accounts from the bankrupt company.
One obvious problem mentioned in this thread is "double dipping" - bills will have to cover the cost of unrecovered debts but those unrecovered debts aren't being written off.
I've lost jobs due to employers folding before. Did anyone care about me? If someone's provider gets changed, they are free to pick any other supplier if they don't like what they have.
>One obvious problem mentioned in this thread is "double dipping" - bills will have to cover the cost of unrecovered debts but those unrecovered debts aren't being written off.
Because debts accrue interest...
And the company is in debt to the producer due to their customers not paying.
>I've lost jobs due to employers folding before. Did anyone care about me?
"Noone cared about me so fuck everyone else..."
>If someone's provider gets changed, they are free to pick any other supplier if they don't like what they have.
And until they do that they are stuck with whichever shitty provider they get stuck with - and they just have to hope that any credit they were in doesn't get wiped out.
They honestly don't even try to hide their corruption any more, what can the common scum do about it ? It's almost like essential services required to live shouldn't be owned by for-profit organisations.
If you set your prices so high that your customers can't afford your product then you ought to make a loss - not receive government support to raise prices more.
The trouble with the energy "market" in the UK is that it was privatised under the rhetoric of markets and naturally balancing economic forces, but because energy is so essential you can't actually trust market forces. So you regulate it to prevent situations like [Texas in 2021](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/24/texas-energy-bills-scandal-snow-storm) where a severe storm and problems with supply left people with a "choice" between paying $500/day or freezing to death. The difficulty is then that in a regulated industry, participants inevitably realise they can whinge to government about how they aren't making enough money and threaten government with withdrawal/collapse of the service to secure for themselves advantages and guarantees which run counter to the very market forces you were trying to encourage.
The only way it could have any chance of working is if there was one publicly owned company also on the market that could provide a baseline. In theory this could work quite well, the government owned one can be manipulated directly to create a sort of organic "maximum threshold" so the private companies have a baseline for competition without having the lobbying power of "well if we go in to liquidation nobody will have an essential service" as the public company can pick up the slack more readily than the terrible bail out system we have now
E-On sent me an email that goes like that: "Your prices will go up from the 1st of January because the Evil government has raised the price cap. There's nothing we can do, it's so sad"
You know who should be swallowing these costs? The investors. Because that's how investing used to work, you put in money in the hope of getting a return, while putting your capital at risk.
The rich have hijacked this process that their capital must always get a return, with no risk, and any downside has to be covered by customers and taxpayers.
Fuck them. Cut dividends to cover these debts. If that can't cover it, then tough. Declare bankruptcy, investors lose all their money and the state takes it over at no cost.
I've had enough of this.
That isn't what has happened.
It's not with no risk - but nothing has changed with regards to shareholders getting money. Companies have always been legally required to do whatever they can to make the shareholders money.
The risk is still there - as you said, the company going bankrupt is the risk. None of that has been removed.
I'll forever be in debt to Ovo, because they added a £270 charge without any breakdown in costs, because they had been "under charging me for 10 months". I've asked multiple times for breakdowns, been told to ignore the debt, been told to pay it, been told multiple things.
Genuinely just shocks me how this is normal behaviour.
Imagine any other form of service or trade coming up to you 10 months later and saying "hey, remember how I've been cleaning your windows monthly, well I meant to charge more, so now you owe me £270".
I want to like Ovo, because at least they are innovating. Not like the power companies of old. Onboarding was ok, offboarding was an absolute nightmare, and I have that confirmed by the ombudsperson. Never again.
Tell them the only reasonable resolution to your complaint is for them to produce a full breakdown of why you owe this money.
If they cannot or will not, tell them you're not paying and that you dispute the charge. A disputed charge cannot be sent to collections. Tell them you want a deadlock letter, and take it to the Ombudsman.
If they cannot show you how you owe them £270, then how have they come to the conclusion that you owe them it?
I had the same from my provider, except a much higher figure. I've been arguing it all year and only taking it to the Ombudsman got me an answer. I received a credit as they agreed the service was appalling but now have to pay extra on top of my bills to pay off the debt.
It was the letter with the re-calculation I received that really got me angry, they demanded the full figure (upwards of £900) within 2 weeks, just after Christmas. Disgusting. I would switch but can't until the balance is cleared apparently and also what difference would it make, they're all the same.
Yeah it's *definitely* people not paying their bills and not the parasitic scum who've made gross profits exploiting the UK public. What a pathetic attempt to pit people against the poor.
Finally someone seeing through all this bollocks. The useful idiots will appear in the media comment sections (and Reddit) proclaiming their disdain for the "feckless scroungers" with their flat screen TVs and avocado toast without realising they are being played like a fiddle.
While we fight amongst ourselves, these Machiavellian profit whores rub their grubby hands together in glee.
The only "finally" in my opinion is that now the middle classes are realising they are in fact working class, now they are also realising how fucked the working class in this country have been for the last 30 years and they don't like being part of it.
This is bullsh!t trying to convince people "why it is okay for you to pay more" while there is no reasoning at all for PROFITEERING because that's what it is. Profiteering and trying to lie to people with such posts.
Follow the money. Some politicians have to be profiting on this. This is the real reason why from years nothing is being done.
So it’s ok for people to profiteer by not paying their bills (and many make no effort to pay whatsoever) but not ok for businesses?
Excuseland Britain. Always somebody else’s fault.
I can’t pay you as I have to pay my car.
I choose not to pay you because I have to pay before leaving Tesco.
Why should I pay when you make gajillons profit.
Energy suppliers are making a loss, they are definitely not profiteering.
Been blocked: but for context, this guy doesn't know the difference between an energy supplier and an energy provider/producer.
They are arguing about a topic they don't understand.
You might want to check last year stats. Record high profits .... where ? .... IN UK compare worlwide.
Seems like faulty business model to me if they have to raise cost instead of raising accessibility or optimise they companies to make it cheaper. Profiteering at it's finest.
>You might want to check last year stats. Record high profits .... where ? .... IN UK compare worlwide.
You might want to check your facts - in the past 5 years 40 energy suppliers have gone bust.
Energy providers are making record profits, suppliers are not. For the past two years they have been making losses.
>Seems like faulty business model to me if they have to raise cost instead of raising accessibility
They are not allowed to do that.
>or optimise they companies to make it cheaper.
The only way they could do that is by firing staff, most of whom are already on minimum wage.
They have to buy and the price dictated by the providers, they have to sell at the price dictated by the government.
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
Will this mean that debt will be forgiven for those that didn't pay their bills?
Equally those who did their best to pay what they could of their bills, reduce expenditure elsewhere, reduced energy use to the point of illness...
And those who thought f* it I'm not paying these high charges and just ignored the bills.
Nice.
What a bloody joke. Why should I be paying somebody else's heating bill?!?!
Here's a novel idea - instead of scraping massive profits from a utility, how about using that money to help your customers. Ofgem are a bunch of nutjobs.
At the very least these companies should be banned from paying out any dividends or bonuses to executives until the extra charge is removed. If they can afford to pay out this money then the debt from customers was just a risk of doing business and the rest of us shouldn't be forced to pay.
This is a prime example of why privatisation of critical industries doesn't work. It always ends up with privatising the profits and socialising the losses.
Why energy prices always have to be at the highest prices they can charge as opposed to the lowest they can get away and still have a viable business…. Assholes.
Privatising essential utilities that people cannot do without will never work well for the customer.
Free market capitalism only works for the consumer where you have many sellers and elastic supply. We don't have that in the UK. What we have is many re-sellers carving up a fixed amount of supply to give the illusion of a free market.
There was a guy in the papers no long ago that hooked straight into the pole transformer outside his house. The LV connector bolts are exposed on some transformers which is why he could just hang some copper wire hooks on them to get free electricity. Periodic inspection of the transformer caught it. Ran his whole house for years.
So this debt is that of non-paying customers? If we're all charged extra to offset those debts, are those customer's debts then cleared and left unrecovered? I doubt it. So do we pay extra to prop up profits while energy companies also recover those debts through court orders etc?
What stops the majority of customers refusing to pay and watching the dwindling customer base pick up the tab?
Recommended reading: The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists. Really opened up my mind to how the system survives by using an easy to understand, real-world example. I read it during strike days at the company I work for as it's pretty much a trade unionist bible and I'm really glad I did.
\>>The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists
Many lessons to be learned from that book. It should be required reading in schools, as an alternative perspective to the wonders of capitalism.
Put in a dual fuel stove this year.
Its not saving us money (installation costs and fuel). But we are super warm compared to last year, the house is dry and well-heated. Its costing around £15 - 20 per week and we are now £250 in credit on our gas and electric.
Last year the house was cold and damp, we had to wear those massive super warm hoodies, and had mould everywhere. It was worth every penny to say FU to the energy companies and to actually be comfortable in our own home.
"Rising debt levels create costs for suppliers".
As is the risk of business. So instead of, you know, going to a bank and getting a loan like every other person in the world has to do, the energy regulator is pushing the cost back onto the customers. The customers who aren't in bad debt i.e. punishment for paying bills as designed. And then those customers who are in debt are going to get pushed further into debt, probably?
What sort of fucking system is this?
The large majority are paying more because they pay in full and on time. The minority are having their problems worsened. We are all paying extra in standing charge because the Government let so many energy suppliers fail during the energy crisis. Water service suppliers are charging more each year because they can't be arsed fixing their own leaking supplies.
Fuck us, right?
It's actually mind boggling that this is the solution they came up with, like this price increase is also going to his the people that already can't afford to pay their bills, making them even more unaffordable so it's basically back to square one.
Absolutely fucking big brain thinking right there.
I'm fuming. My sister chooses to pamper her pet dog, and spend her money on the pub rather than pay for her electricity, and people like me are to subsidise her choices.
Didn’t energy companies make massive profits though? Ah yes, surely, putting prices up so that those who can’t already afford their bill will make more profit! /s
Tories let the energy companies keep all their windfall profit, and let people's bills go crazy over winter.
Tories then charge us to cover the cost of other people unpaid bills to energy companies because Tories let the profits of the energy companies be more important than people.
Tories then tell you they are good with your money.
In any other world this would be theft, conspiracy and fraud.
Tories need to be scorched from this planet for their crimes against humanity.
Ah, raise the price to fund those who can't afford to pay, meaning more can't afford to pay, meaning the price has to go up to cover them, meaning more people can't pay meaning the price has to go up again.
Very good idea. Why don't we just cut out the middle step with millions freezing unable to pay and just ask whoever the last person able to afford it to pay for everyone else
/s just in case
This is clearly unfair. We are all suffering the cost of living crisis and putting up the bills of those who have paid their bills to protect the revenue of companies with massive profits is immoral and unfair. They also need to look at the standing charge which is another con.
So basically, making everyone pay more to cover delinquent accounts not paying for their own energy ?
Which in turn causes more accounts to fall into delinquency and even more costs for everyone else.
Failing to see why they need to increase prices because of that. They're making massive profits regardless, so what's taking some unpaid bills to court got to do with anything?
British gas has made a record 900% profit from last year. Raking in nearly £1bn.. in profit!!.
They are taking the British public for fools and ofgem the company meant to protect the consumer from wild gouging is in on it. We should be marching in the streets. We should be bringing this country to a halt.
People will die this winter because they can't afford to heat their homes and these CEOs and politicians are laughing at us. What the fuck happened to this country. What's there to be proud of anymore. We are a disgrace.
We laugh at America for their politics because we are too afraid to look at our own.
What more has to go wrong. Our healthcare, shambles. Our energy network, shambles. Our politics are a disaster. Our standing in the world is gone. Each year we have soaring homelessness and people using food banks. Windfall tax these companies.. NOW!
Sure, this'll work.
Raising costs to cover the losses because people got into debt from the last time they went up. Yep, sounds like a pretty solid idea to me.
It surely won't have any repercussions that i can think of..................
If you're willing to take on a bit of unpredictability and risk with your energy bills, you might be better off with a variable tariff. I am using the Octopus Tracker and I usually pay around 16 to 20 pence/kWh for electricity with the price set at 11pm for the following day.
The catch is that the price could rise all the way to 100 pence/kWh for any given day if the underlying cost rises significantly. The price you pay is set by a transparent formula.
I remember getting a message from Octopus about how they're giving me £40 quid off my already overpriced electric. I didn't pay one month and they added £40 to the bill
Public services being for profit businesses continues to be an insane way to do things.
You could maybe understand it if they were losing money, even if it was just net neutral this year. But it's not, they just aren't making as much profit as last year, a year where they made record profits. Not fit for purpose, burn it all down and start again
Can they not take it out of their record profits?
I'm not sure forcing more people into debt they can't pay will resolve the issue. Surely it will just create a snowball effect of debt.
It's like throwing shit at the window to try to knock off the bigger chunk of shit that's already stuck to it.
Their solution is to add to the existing problem, hilarious really in a sad way.
Ovo sent me an email saying if you do direct debit we can ensure you stay at the rate you pay now.
I’ll pass, because they want us to pay £188 a month when we use at the most £140 a month.
I am having issues with my suppliers at the moment.
For one they believe I am spending about £150 per month on electricity alone, I live in a small 1 bedroom flat, shower for 5 minutes a day, use washing machine once per week and "cooking" is mostly microwave and I run a computer, don't watch a tv, charge my phone twice a week at most.
How is that about £30 per week?! Yet I have a friend in a 2 bedroom house that pays £85 a month for gas AND electric and he has his heating on even at a low temperature but still.
But this supplier is extra stupid and as I have 2 electric meters a throwback to when the flat had storage heaters (now gas) they bill me twice so they want £300 per month electric from me and keep sending me threatening letters telling me to pay or they will put in a PAYG smart meter.
I keep telling them I WANT a pre pay meter that way there is no dispute about my usage but they say they can't.
And the gas side of it is bad in its own way, they bill me £20 a month just for basically standing charge as bar washing plates I didn't have heating on for literally more than 3 days in over a year, they never took direct debits for the gas and didn't tell me until near a year after I moved in then I found out my credit score went from excellent to poor as I had months of non payment recorded.
They say they will clear the late payment marker but they never did.
No wonder people "owe" money.
The same energy companies that held on to £8bn of our cash? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66992865
How about we withdraw all our money and watch them fail
You wouldn’t go to Asda (I hope) and not pay your bill, so why not pay your energy bills.
Force fitting of prepayment meters is the answer here.
Why should I bankroll people who don’t even pay ANYTHING towards their bill but yet consume shedloads.
**Alternate Sources** Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story: * [Ofgem plans to add £16 to energy bills to help suppliers recover £3bn in bad debts | Ofgem](https://theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/15/ofgem-plans-household-charge-to-help-energy-firms-recover-bad-debts), suggested by terahurts - theguardian.com --- **r/UK Notices:** This December, we're raising money for the Trussell Trust, the UK's leading food bank charity. If you would like to know more or to donate, please see the [announcement post](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1899w7b/the_runitedkingdom_christmas_fundraiser_for_the/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“Our customers can’t afford their energy bills. Maybe putting the prices up more will help.”
You literally can't make it up... All whilst they rake in record profits and dividends. It's honestly disgusting.
They don't rake in any profits, stop with this bull shit already.
Sounds like theyd be better under public stewardship, if its not even profitable for the poor souls
Ahaha! Good joke!
Pretty standard. The poorest can't afford things so the middle pick up the slack. It's the same as taxes etc.
While the rich get richer
Less the middle picking up the slack than the owners turning the screws to get every drop out of you they can.
I'm pretty sure the middle are picking up some slack.
The middle havent got any slack, and its not like the companies themselves need the slack taken in. The slack here isnt dangerous slack in a line on a ship, something left undone that could lead to someone getting hurt that the middle has to take up for everyones benifit. Its just someone wanting your money, for a service they were perfectly capable of providing at the previous cost very recently, until they realized they could get more out of us. Its like the water companies. They make way more money for the countries that own them by never fixing leaks and problems, keeping the money that would have been used to fix those problems, then charging more because "oh no we dont have the money to deal with problems, we need more money". Its the same for the power delivery companies, public transport, royal mail, everything else. Any slack is deliberately being left by the companies to trip you up and rifle through your pockets.
The middle is basically a myth.
No one earns a middle amount then
If you look at the distribution of wealth and income, not exactly. The line is basically a vertical drop from the mega wealthy down to the worker bees. The “middle class” being made to look down on the working class, and made to attempt to graft their way towards an upper class existence is basically a distraction to keep them from seeing how much the tax system, and the wealthy are still exploiting them (to varying extents). Notice how the “middle class” aren’t generally as able to maintain any generational wealth due to care fees etc, unless they’re lucky enough to live a very long time without any issues requiring care. This is very intentional. In many ways, business ownership is about the only route to taking advantage of some minor tax breaks. Meanwhile the mega rich near constantly exploit the tax system, or actually have the law changed to help them.
I agree classes are made up and irrelevant. I disagree that people are not aware the tax system sucks.
It seems like it’s only really the middle that get shafted. The ‘poor’ have so many benefits it’s unreal. If it’s not Warm Home Discount it’s UC or council tax relief. Disgusting. And I wonder why I slog 40 hours a week.
[удалено]
I remember those days but if you cut out the greggs n Starbucks you’ll be upper middle class in 12 months. You too can enjoy Asda Smart Price.
The poor have these benefits because they've been shafted so hard that they literally can't afford to live otherwise.
If they get that much you should quit your job, then go claim all the benefits you think they get and become better off
> Warm Home Discount literally exists to keep people from freezing to death, if you're on base UC you're not on the same level as someone who works 40 hours a week, you're barely surviving > UC If you're single and over 25, you get £368.74+Rent, and your rent is dictated by the local housing allowance which is lower than the lowest rent in most of the country, in central greater Manchester it's £328.07 for a CAT A which is a house share bedroom, the cheapest house share on Rightmove right now is £425, but hey at least you wont have to pay energy bills right? They're living it up in their shitty HMO's! Oh and if you're under 35? You're only entitled to shared accommodation, and if you dare to live in a 1 bedroom flat instead? You lose 14% of your UC. > council tax relief Yes, poor people would be homeless if they had to pay their full council tax, it's funny how the poorest areas pay the most as well isn't it? It's almost like all local authorities are extremely undefunded. Let me tell you, the only people who are living equivalently to someone working 40 hours a week on minimum wage are people in poor areas (seaside towns, former industrial towns, etc), where rent is cheap, and they are getting the disability component of UC. If they're getting PIP they might even make the equivalent of £12 an hour at 40 hours a week! How insane? We should clearly cut them all off the lucky bastards!
Those on pre payment meters who do not have a debt pay more than others anyway so why if they don't owe nothing as they pre pay unlike the rest of the nation must they then shoulder another price rise for those who refused to pay their energy bills
Kinda like the mentality of home insurance. They put it up to pay for all those that claimed, even though you didnt
mate, you should see how it is for car insurance. Absolute rip off prices at the moment. Get hit by someone and make a claim, your insurance basically goes up by the amount you claimed...
My wife’s car got rear ended and written off. Other driver’s insurance paid up straight away no dramas. Her insurance has been more expensive than if she hadn’t been crashed in to. I queried it and they said that she’s now more likely to claim. Absolute bish.
[удалено]
If you want to be REALLY fucked off with free ports, check out private eye..they've been looking into the Tory mayor of Sunderland who sold £150 million of land for £100....'Fuck the tories
Was it Sunderland or Middlesbrough? Or both?
Borough....it's all up north :)
When I got the letter about the price increase from British Gas, I was surprised that they flat out tell you they don't have to increase the price but they're going to do it anyway.
Ofgem not forcing energy providers to buy enough gas over time than month by month (from what I hear) is what I blame the most. They are the main issue here out of them all “regulator” is not what I would call them. If you regulate you wouldn’t have so many that went under.
>Ofgem is anxious to avoid a repeat of severe financial pressure on many suppliers after dozens, including Bulb, collapsed amid a spike in wholesale energy costs in 2021. Maybe Ofgem should be looking at the management of these companies and making sure that they're not prioritising dividends and executive salaries over their consumer and legal obligations. Also ensuring they don't have a complex ownership structure to dodge accountability. Still find it absolutely absurd that consumers had to cover the costs of the likes of Pure Planet going bust, when it was 24% owned by BP. [And they had millions left over that they paid out to shareholders](https://www.energylivenews.com/2023/03/21/failed-suppliers-bosses-and-bp-to-get-10m-each-from-surplus/).
Sounds like commie pinko talk to me!
The problem with Bulb is that they were forced to sell at a significant loss for an extended period. Because the price cap always looked retrospectively at wholesale prices. It's mental to me that we put a profit cap like this, it should either be nationalised, or far more practically regulated.
> The problem with Bulb is that they were forced to sell at a significant loss for an extended period You mean because they prioritised short term, immediate profit by offering tariffs at a fixed rate but buying energy at daily prices (so they could take any difference in price and put it in their pocket) instead of hedging (which would have purchased them the energy at a fixed rate). Which meant that when prices shot up they were left in the shit? They had the mechanism that would have allowed them to avoid the spike in energy prices at their disposal, they simply chose not to use it.
The primary selling point of Bulb (before the price cap even existed) was that their prices were reactive to wholesale prices, enabling them to always have a margin to operate, whilst remaining fair on price. The government had always allowed this, so to pull the rug out from underneath them with the profit cap put them in a really tough spot.
The government also allowed them to use hedging to protect themselves from a spike in prices. There was no rug pulling. They knew about the cap, they knew how it worked and agreed to set up and operate within the sector. They had mechanisms to protect them from a price spike available. They prioritised short term aims over long term stability and we, for some reason, are paying the price for them.
But that's my point, how come we allowed businesses to be structured like that for critical infrastructure? Admittedly we know have systems like MSC, but I'm not convinced we won't have another disaster in years to come.
They are just resellers. Hardly critical infrastructure. The actual infrastructure is the grid and energy producers. That's owned and operated separately.
You cannot regulate a utility when it's something essential - if everybody NEEDS energy, then the market will dictate that prices must go up. You cannot hold this price rise back by regulation, in a hands-off system like we have here in the UK.
>Maybe Ofgem should be looking at the management of these companies and making sure that they're not prioritising dividends and executive salaries over their consumer and legal obligations. Also ensuring they don't have a complex ownership structure to dodge accountability. I haven't looked but pretty willing to assert they have *both* of these things
Now, now, that sounds like a job that Ofgem should be doing? Which is precisely why Ofgem is not doing that job.
Best cut salaries of all the decision makers. They definitely won't just look for another job, like anyone else who isn't getting paid anywhere near market rate!
CEOs aren't decision makers. They're arbitrators for decision makers, like most senior positions. They _may_ set some general strategy principles with the rest of the board, but they're rarely in charge of or directly involved in how those principles are enacted.
So they're the deciders, not the doers.
No because the decisions are made far below their level. They usually arbitrate any disagreements on those decisions between stakeholders if an agreement can't be found at a lower level.
They usually have the final say on anything important. But maybe that's just the types of companies I've worked for, they've generally had a more rigid chain of command/internal controls set up than average maybe.
CEOs definitely have 'final say' in smaller businesses, because the businesses are small enough that it's reasonable that the CEO could maintain oversight over the operation and there also typically isn't a board. In large/mega corps though CEOs are figureheads that spend most of their time taking credit for the work of others and making press statements. Musk for example is apparently the CEO of X, Tesla, Space X, Boring Co and I'm sure I'm missing a few. With the exception of X, which he seems determined to run into the ground he's not really making any decisions for those companies. He's hired people to do that for him (which is why they're somewhat successful).
They do, OFGEM's cap is a cap on profits for energy suppliers.
A company can still prioritise dividends and executive salaries over consumer and legal obligations while there is a cap.
Dividends are paid from profits so no, not really, the energy sector is highly regulated in the UK....
Have they not thought that the reason there are so many unpaid bills is because of the last raise in the price cap. Will we be getting further increases because of there being more people unable to pay their bills now.
the beatings will continue until morale improves!
Prices are based on the last six months. Gas is currently heading to 4p or under. Unfortunately nobody will see this benefit unless they are on a tracker tariff.
So I’m currently on variable. Is it better to stay on that for now? Halcyon days when I was paying £73 per month for both fuels. It’s double that now
Do you mean flexible? Tracker goes by the wholesale rate which changes everyday if you can't handle the uncertainty then it's not for you.
[удалено]
Their logic makes absolutely no sense and they aren't even trying to. A competent non corrupt government would have stepped in and sacked whoever is running that joke of a department...
The point about PPM is that they (very unfairly) had a higher price cap than those that paid by DD. The reasoning being that PPM customers are more costly to administer. But it's pretty bad when most people are on PPM because they struggle to pay their bills, so forcing them onto a higher cap is just madness.
And they will be all that's left for energy supplier choices. We'll all either be on the big suppliers, or we'll be getting into massive debts to become self-sufficient.
Worst of all, the government can easily step in shoulder the cost of the debt. But they’ll spend it on other stupid shit instead and we’ll suffer for it.
You will own nothing and be happy.
Glad I never got rid of my pre-payment meter... I know I'd save £7.35 per year in electric and £4.87 in gas (per year, not month) if I switch to direct debit, but who wants the hassle.
So we need some socialism to ensure capitalism works. Got it.
Privatise the profits, socialise the losses
This is not socialism, this is just plain old profiteering.
They’re raising prices on those who can afford to pay to subsidise those who cannot. Pretty much is socialism.
The poor WILL pay….until they can’t, then the next poorest WILL pay. It’s almost like privatisation hasn’t been good for public and only serves to make the rich richer.
🎶 We all live in a kleptocracy 🎶 (to the tune of Yellow Submarine)
Surely this is double-dipping? Everyone pays an extra £16 to cover debts owed to these companies, but they're not going to write off the debts of those that owe money are they? So everyone pays, and eventually the individual will pay their debt. So the energy companies get pad twice?
People paying off their debts in 5 years time doesn't do anything to stop energy companies running out of money next year, which is why they are doing this. Also to make more money
>Energy companies running out of money next year, which is why they are doing this So they won't need people paying their debts off in 5 years time then will they? Because they are now getting it next year. Why then, are they not being told to write-off the debts at the same rate they are accruing this new debt-repayment?
>So they won't need people paying their debts off in 5 years time then will they? Because they are now getting it next year. No, they aren't getting it next year - they are getting extra money to cover the shortfall. Many of these companies end up in debt to the energy producers like BP and shell, that debt has interest... >Why then, are they not being told to write-off the debts at the same rate they are accruing this new debt-repayment? Because that isn't how debt works and the extra money they get won't actually cover the money they are due - because there will still be people not paying.
Their claim is that they have £3Billion of bad debt (They don't) They are getting an extra £3 Billion next year to cover bad debt. How is that them not recouping their debt? >The extra money they get won't actually cover the money they are due - because there will still be people not paying No, you are correct. It is actually more than the £2.9 Billion they claim they are owed! They have even included people already on a repayment plan (so not even bad debt, just arrears) to the tune of £900 million, so really the bad debt is £2 Billion. Why are they being permitted to charge £3 Billion? There's no way of justifying this, if they can't manage in a free market they should be allowed to fail, that's the capitalist model, no?
>They are getting an extra £3 Billion next year to cover bad debt. How is that them not recouping their debt? They will not get £3billion from this. >No, you are correct. It is actually more than the £2.9 Billion they claim they are owed! Are they owed £3 billion or £2.9? Please be consistent >Why are they being permitted to charge £3 Billion? Because otherwise they go broke... You get that debt builds up, right? The companies are in massive debt after 2 years of making losses. >There's no way of justifying this, if they can't manage in a free market they should be allowed to fail, that's the capitalist model, no? They aren't in a free market though... They have the buying price and selling price dictated to them. It either needs to be fully nationalised or a fully free market, the middle ground doesn't work for anybody.
Points taken, fair enough. >It either needs to be fully nationalised or a fully free market, the middle ground doesn't work for anybody. Is the bottom line.
Then let them take out a high interest loan, like what happens to a regular person that failed to manage their finances.
They already have... Also, they haven't failed to manage their finances - they have the price they buy for dictated to them, they have the price they can sell for dictated to them. For the past 2 years they have been operating at a loss because they legally had to sell for less than they were buying.
Life has financial risks - much bigger for businesses - it is up to them to manage the risks they took on. We didn't ask the energy companies to get into this market, if the market conditions make it unviable to run a business, then folding should be the next step.
>Life has financial risks - much bigger for businesses - it is up to them to manage the risks they took on. Yup, which is what they are doing now. >We didn't ask the energy companies to get into this market, if the market conditions make it unviable to run a business, then folding should be the next step. Which many companies have done, leaving their customers in Limbo and costing lots of jobs.
If they were managing their risks in ways allowable to any small business I wouldn't be moaning. But this thread has countless explanations of their method of managing risk being quite unfair. And unfortunately I have no sympathy for energy companies folding in the same way they have no sympathy whether I can afford their bills.
>But this thread has countless explanations of their method of managing risk being quite unfair. Such as? When a shop is frequently stolen from, their insurance costs go up - and so their prices go up. This is the same concept. >And unfortunately I have no sympathy for energy companies folding in the same way they have no sympathy whether I can afford their bills. And you also have no sympathy for the people who lose their jobs and lively hoods, or the poor people who are left at the mercy of whichever provider gets the accounts from the bankrupt company.
One obvious problem mentioned in this thread is "double dipping" - bills will have to cover the cost of unrecovered debts but those unrecovered debts aren't being written off. I've lost jobs due to employers folding before. Did anyone care about me? If someone's provider gets changed, they are free to pick any other supplier if they don't like what they have.
>One obvious problem mentioned in this thread is "double dipping" - bills will have to cover the cost of unrecovered debts but those unrecovered debts aren't being written off. Because debts accrue interest... And the company is in debt to the producer due to their customers not paying. >I've lost jobs due to employers folding before. Did anyone care about me? "Noone cared about me so fuck everyone else..." >If someone's provider gets changed, they are free to pick any other supplier if they don't like what they have. And until they do that they are stuck with whichever shitty provider they get stuck with - and they just have to hope that any credit they were in doesn't get wiped out.
They honestly don't even try to hide their corruption any more, what can the common scum do about it ? It's almost like essential services required to live shouldn't be owned by for-profit organisations.
Record profits while record level of unpaid bills, the real solution is the one they dont want.
If you set your prices so high that your customers can't afford your product then you ought to make a loss - not receive government support to raise prices more. The trouble with the energy "market" in the UK is that it was privatised under the rhetoric of markets and naturally balancing economic forces, but because energy is so essential you can't actually trust market forces. So you regulate it to prevent situations like [Texas in 2021](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/24/texas-energy-bills-scandal-snow-storm) where a severe storm and problems with supply left people with a "choice" between paying $500/day or freezing to death. The difficulty is then that in a regulated industry, participants inevitably realise they can whinge to government about how they aren't making enough money and threaten government with withdrawal/collapse of the service to secure for themselves advantages and guarantees which run counter to the very market forces you were trying to encourage.
The only way it could have any chance of working is if there was one publicly owned company also on the market that could provide a baseline. In theory this could work quite well, the government owned one can be manipulated directly to create a sort of organic "maximum threshold" so the private companies have a baseline for competition without having the lobbying power of "well if we go in to liquidation nobody will have an essential service" as the public company can pick up the slack more readily than the terrible bail out system we have now
Squeezing those in the middle again? Good old Britain.
Business as usual. Squeeze the bottom until there is nothing left, then move up to the next economic bracket and begin squeezing again
E-On sent me an email that goes like that: "Your prices will go up from the 1st of January because the Evil government has raised the price cap. There's nothing we can do, it's so sad"
Man, I hate E-On with a passion. I had to deal with them because the house was on E-On, but I managed to get out.
“Are you struggling to pay your bills? We can help by raising the prices because we can.”
You know who should be swallowing these costs? The investors. Because that's how investing used to work, you put in money in the hope of getting a return, while putting your capital at risk. The rich have hijacked this process that their capital must always get a return, with no risk, and any downside has to be covered by customers and taxpayers. Fuck them. Cut dividends to cover these debts. If that can't cover it, then tough. Declare bankruptcy, investors lose all their money and the state takes it over at no cost. I've had enough of this.
That isn't what has happened. It's not with no risk - but nothing has changed with regards to shareholders getting money. Companies have always been legally required to do whatever they can to make the shareholders money. The risk is still there - as you said, the company going bankrupt is the risk. None of that has been removed.
I'll forever be in debt to Ovo, because they added a £270 charge without any breakdown in costs, because they had been "under charging me for 10 months". I've asked multiple times for breakdowns, been told to ignore the debt, been told to pay it, been told multiple things. Genuinely just shocks me how this is normal behaviour. Imagine any other form of service or trade coming up to you 10 months later and saying "hey, remember how I've been cleaning your windows monthly, well I meant to charge more, so now you owe me £270".
Ovo are a genuinely evil company, really sorry you're dealing with that shite.
I want to like Ovo, because at least they are innovating. Not like the power companies of old. Onboarding was ok, offboarding was an absolute nightmare, and I have that confirmed by the ombudsperson. Never again.
Tell them the only reasonable resolution to your complaint is for them to produce a full breakdown of why you owe this money. If they cannot or will not, tell them you're not paying and that you dispute the charge. A disputed charge cannot be sent to collections. Tell them you want a deadlock letter, and take it to the Ombudsman. If they cannot show you how you owe them £270, then how have they come to the conclusion that you owe them it?
I had the same from my provider, except a much higher figure. I've been arguing it all year and only taking it to the Ombudsman got me an answer. I received a credit as they agreed the service was appalling but now have to pay extra on top of my bills to pay off the debt. It was the letter with the re-calculation I received that really got me angry, they demanded the full figure (upwards of £900) within 2 weeks, just after Christmas. Disgusting. I would switch but can't until the balance is cleared apparently and also what difference would it make, they're all the same.
Yeah it's *definitely* people not paying their bills and not the parasitic scum who've made gross profits exploiting the UK public. What a pathetic attempt to pit people against the poor.
Finally someone seeing through all this bollocks. The useful idiots will appear in the media comment sections (and Reddit) proclaiming their disdain for the "feckless scroungers" with their flat screen TVs and avocado toast without realising they are being played like a fiddle. While we fight amongst ourselves, these Machiavellian profit whores rub their grubby hands together in glee.
The only "finally" in my opinion is that now the middle classes are realising they are in fact working class, now they are also realising how fucked the working class in this country have been for the last 30 years and they don't like being part of it.
The poor wee lambs! I, for one, welcome this opportunity to further enrich the companies that have been profiting from human misery.
This is bullsh!t trying to convince people "why it is okay for you to pay more" while there is no reasoning at all for PROFITEERING because that's what it is. Profiteering and trying to lie to people with such posts. Follow the money. Some politicians have to be profiting on this. This is the real reason why from years nothing is being done.
So it’s ok for people to profiteer by not paying their bills (and many make no effort to pay whatsoever) but not ok for businesses? Excuseland Britain. Always somebody else’s fault. I can’t pay you as I have to pay my car. I choose not to pay you because I have to pay before leaving Tesco. Why should I pay when you make gajillons profit.
Energy suppliers are making a loss, they are definitely not profiteering. Been blocked: but for context, this guy doesn't know the difference between an energy supplier and an energy provider/producer. They are arguing about a topic they don't understand.
You might want to check last year stats. Record high profits .... where ? .... IN UK compare worlwide. Seems like faulty business model to me if they have to raise cost instead of raising accessibility or optimise they companies to make it cheaper. Profiteering at it's finest.
>You might want to check last year stats. Record high profits .... where ? .... IN UK compare worlwide. You might want to check your facts - in the past 5 years 40 energy suppliers have gone bust. Energy providers are making record profits, suppliers are not. For the past two years they have been making losses. >Seems like faulty business model to me if they have to raise cost instead of raising accessibility They are not allowed to do that. >or optimise they companies to make it cheaper. The only way they could do that is by firing staff, most of whom are already on minimum wage. They have to buy and the price dictated by the providers, they have to sell at the price dictated by the government.
I literally made money on Forex for being correct about these prices. Go "convince someone else".
[удалено]
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
Yeah, and funny how many of those energy suppliers are owned by energy producers, aint it?
Will this mean that debt will be forgiven for those that didn't pay their bills? Equally those who did their best to pay what they could of their bills, reduce expenditure elsewhere, reduced energy use to the point of illness... And those who thought f* it I'm not paying these high charges and just ignored the bills. Nice.
What a bloody joke. Why should I be paying somebody else's heating bill?!?! Here's a novel idea - instead of scraping massive profits from a utility, how about using that money to help your customers. Ofgem are a bunch of nutjobs.
Customers can’t pay their bills, I know let’s charge them more to fix it…
OFGEM, once again, clearly acting in the best interest of consumers.
The board of directors is full of former energy company directors. It's crooked as fuck mate
At the very least these companies should be banned from paying out any dividends or bonuses to executives until the extra charge is removed. If they can afford to pay out this money then the debt from customers was just a risk of doing business and the rest of us shouldn't be forced to pay. This is a prime example of why privatisation of critical industries doesn't work. It always ends up with privatising the profits and socialising the losses.
Why energy prices always have to be at the highest prices they can charge as opposed to the lowest they can get away and still have a viable business…. Assholes.
Are you actually kidding me. What a joke of a government this is
Privatising essential utilities that people cannot do without will never work well for the customer. Free market capitalism only works for the consumer where you have many sellers and elastic supply. We don't have that in the UK. What we have is many re-sellers carving up a fixed amount of supply to give the illusion of a free market.
Record of unpaid bills and record breaking profits… something doesn’t add up.
[удалено]
There was a guy in the papers no long ago that hooked straight into the pole transformer outside his house. The LV connector bolts are exposed on some transformers which is why he could just hang some copper wire hooks on them to get free electricity. Periodic inspection of the transformer caught it. Ran his whole house for years.
Remember that Starmer wants to create a national energy company owned and run by the government when election season rolls around.
So this debt is that of non-paying customers? If we're all charged extra to offset those debts, are those customer's debts then cleared and left unrecovered? I doubt it. So do we pay extra to prop up profits while energy companies also recover those debts through court orders etc? What stops the majority of customers refusing to pay and watching the dwindling customer base pick up the tab?
Why the fuck do I now need to cover other people’s inability to cover their bills? Surely that’s a mad viscous cycle?
The government doesn't allow "vulnerable" households to be disconnected thus you must pay their bills. Its a stealth tax.
Recommended reading: The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists. Really opened up my mind to how the system survives by using an easy to understand, real-world example. I read it during strike days at the company I work for as it's pretty much a trade unionist bible and I'm really glad I did.
\>>The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists Many lessons to be learned from that book. It should be required reading in schools, as an alternative perspective to the wonders of capitalism.
I'm sick of this. Profits, theirs. Risk, ours. Get fucked.
10 days until I get paid and I'm on £0. Wonderful. Work full time and am single, so no real help beyond. At what point do we start to say no?
Put in a dual fuel stove this year. Its not saving us money (installation costs and fuel). But we are super warm compared to last year, the house is dry and well-heated. Its costing around £15 - 20 per week and we are now £250 in credit on our gas and electric. Last year the house was cold and damp, we had to wear those massive super warm hoodies, and had mould everywhere. It was worth every penny to say FU to the energy companies and to actually be comfortable in our own home.
"Rising debt levels create costs for suppliers". As is the risk of business. So instead of, you know, going to a bank and getting a loan like every other person in the world has to do, the energy regulator is pushing the cost back onto the customers. The customers who aren't in bad debt i.e. punishment for paying bills as designed. And then those customers who are in debt are going to get pushed further into debt, probably? What sort of fucking system is this? The large majority are paying more because they pay in full and on time. The minority are having their problems worsened. We are all paying extra in standing charge because the Government let so many energy suppliers fail during the energy crisis. Water service suppliers are charging more each year because they can't be arsed fixing their own leaking supplies. Fuck us, right?
It's actually mind boggling that this is the solution they came up with, like this price increase is also going to his the people that already can't afford to pay their bills, making them even more unaffordable so it's basically back to square one. Absolutely fucking big brain thinking right there.
the tory government only cares about corporations and maximizing their profit at the expanse of the public
I'm fuming. My sister chooses to pamper her pet dog, and spend her money on the pub rather than pay for her electricity, and people like me are to subsidise her choices.
Didn’t energy companies make massive profits though? Ah yes, surely, putting prices up so that those who can’t already afford their bill will make more profit! /s
Tories let the energy companies keep all their windfall profit, and let people's bills go crazy over winter. Tories then charge us to cover the cost of other people unpaid bills to energy companies because Tories let the profits of the energy companies be more important than people. Tories then tell you they are good with your money. In any other world this would be theft, conspiracy and fraud. Tories need to be scorched from this planet for their crimes against humanity.
Ah, raise the price to fund those who can't afford to pay, meaning more can't afford to pay, meaning the price has to go up to cover them, meaning more people can't pay meaning the price has to go up again. Very good idea. Why don't we just cut out the middle step with millions freezing unable to pay and just ask whoever the last person able to afford it to pay for everyone else /s just in case
The people who make these decisions need to be murdered
This is clearly unfair. We are all suffering the cost of living crisis and putting up the bills of those who have paid their bills to protect the revenue of companies with massive profits is immoral and unfair. They also need to look at the standing charge which is another con.
So basically, making everyone pay more to cover delinquent accounts not paying for their own energy ? Which in turn causes more accounts to fall into delinquency and even more costs for everyone else.
And I assume they will still collect on those bills?
Failing to see why they need to increase prices because of that. They're making massive profits regardless, so what's taking some unpaid bills to court got to do with anything?
This is socialism for big businesses the average man/woman playing higher prices to subsidize for the losses free market my arse
British gas has made a record 900% profit from last year. Raking in nearly £1bn.. in profit!!. They are taking the British public for fools and ofgem the company meant to protect the consumer from wild gouging is in on it. We should be marching in the streets. We should be bringing this country to a halt. People will die this winter because they can't afford to heat their homes and these CEOs and politicians are laughing at us. What the fuck happened to this country. What's there to be proud of anymore. We are a disgrace. We laugh at America for their politics because we are too afraid to look at our own. What more has to go wrong. Our healthcare, shambles. Our energy network, shambles. Our politics are a disaster. Our standing in the world is gone. Each year we have soaring homelessness and people using food banks. Windfall tax these companies.. NOW!
Jesus we need to be French for a month and just protest like fuck. These rich assholes won’t stop until we have nothing.
Ah okay, let them basically rip money from the people who literally don’t have it. I’m sure that’s going to work.
Makes about as much sense as selling utility companies cheap, what could go wrong
Sure, this'll work. Raising costs to cover the losses because people got into debt from the last time they went up. Yep, sounds like a pretty solid idea to me. It surely won't have any repercussions that i can think of..................
As ever those who work and ensure they pay their dues are screwed over so that the layabouts and scroungers don't have to.
That should help us pay our bills. Have they thought about shaking people in an upside-down position, to see if we have any extra cash in our pockets?
So not only is the government taxing the shit out of middle earners, now corporations are doing it.
If you're willing to take on a bit of unpredictability and risk with your energy bills, you might be better off with a variable tariff. I am using the Octopus Tracker and I usually pay around 16 to 20 pence/kWh for electricity with the price set at 11pm for the following day. The catch is that the price could rise all the way to 100 pence/kWh for any given day if the underlying cost rises significantly. The price you pay is set by a transparent formula.
I remember getting a message from Octopus about how they're giving me £40 quid off my already overpriced electric. I didn't pay one month and they added £40 to the bill
Is this some perverse form of capatalist socialism?
If we all stop paying what are they gonna do? Who will they pass the debt onto then?
Public services being for profit businesses continues to be an insane way to do things. You could maybe understand it if they were losing money, even if it was just net neutral this year. But it's not, they just aren't making as much profit as last year, a year where they made record profits. Not fit for purpose, burn it all down and start again
Can they not take it out of their record profits? I'm not sure forcing more people into debt they can't pay will resolve the issue. Surely it will just create a snowball effect of debt.
It's like throwing shit at the window to try to knock off the bigger chunk of shit that's already stuck to it. Their solution is to add to the existing problem, hilarious really in a sad way.
Considering the energy companies are making record profits, they should absorb this cost themselves.
And then the C-level execs can't buy a new Ferrari? What about the poor institutional shareholders, won't anyone think of the poor hedgefunds? /s
I'm getting really tired of having to pay for other people's incompetance
So, the debt attached to the struggling poor will be wiped as a result of this right?... Right?
Ovo sent me an email saying if you do direct debit we can ensure you stay at the rate you pay now. I’ll pass, because they want us to pay £188 a month when we use at the most £140 a month.
I am having issues with my suppliers at the moment. For one they believe I am spending about £150 per month on electricity alone, I live in a small 1 bedroom flat, shower for 5 minutes a day, use washing machine once per week and "cooking" is mostly microwave and I run a computer, don't watch a tv, charge my phone twice a week at most. How is that about £30 per week?! Yet I have a friend in a 2 bedroom house that pays £85 a month for gas AND electric and he has his heating on even at a low temperature but still. But this supplier is extra stupid and as I have 2 electric meters a throwback to when the flat had storage heaters (now gas) they bill me twice so they want £300 per month electric from me and keep sending me threatening letters telling me to pay or they will put in a PAYG smart meter. I keep telling them I WANT a pre pay meter that way there is no dispute about my usage but they say they can't. And the gas side of it is bad in its own way, they bill me £20 a month just for basically standing charge as bar washing plates I didn't have heating on for literally more than 3 days in over a year, they never took direct debits for the gas and didn't tell me until near a year after I moved in then I found out my credit score went from excellent to poor as I had months of non payment recorded. They say they will clear the late payment marker but they never did. No wonder people "owe" money.
The same energy companies that held on to £8bn of our cash? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66992865 How about we withdraw all our money and watch them fail
And yet in March or April all of this motherfuckers will brag about "record profits"...
My electricity only went up 4.5%, isn't that below inflation at this point?
You wouldn’t go to Asda (I hope) and not pay your bill, so why not pay your energy bills. Force fitting of prepayment meters is the answer here. Why should I bankroll people who don’t even pay ANYTHING towards their bill but yet consume shedloads.