Sir, – Comparing the cost of energy plans is an area where obfuscation seems to be a policy of most, if not all, energy providers. They insist on competing on the basis of who can provide the biggest percentage discount without any common baseline.
My electricity supply contract expired last month and, in an effort to cut through the fog of information, I turned to one of the energy cost comparison websites, approved by the Commission for Regulation of Utilities. After inputting the required details of my existing supplier, meter type, residential region, etc, I was offered a choice of an astonishing 55 different plans from multiple suppliers. To my surprise, none of these plans were from my existing supplier. Thinking they might be leaving the market, as others have done, I contacted the (cost comparison) website to clarify. I was advised that the supplier makes available to them their plans for new customers only, not those for existing customers. Why should there be any difference? Additionally, the website would not allow me to factor in the surplus from my solar panels that I export to the grid, though this forms an essential part of the calculation. The website is obliged to use the proportions of day, night and peak time units mandated by the regulator rather the actual proportions, as measured by the smart meter, thus negating some of the value of the smart meter.
I than checked my existing supplier’s website and was satisfied with their latest version of my existing tariff so I attempted to sign up for a further year. The website would not allow me because I was an existing customer. It directed me to phone for an offer. After an exasperating and lengthy conversation with the sales agent, in which the agent insisted on my holding on until she could determine the best rate for me, I did manage to persuade her to tell me the actual rates but only after the third time of specifically requesting these. I did eventually sign up for the contract I originally selected. Clearly the supplier makes it harder for existing customers to replace expired contracts with new ones. It is difficult to avoid concluding that the supplier is attempting to take advantage of existing customers, by offering higher rates than to new ones.
For this one service, my bill comprises nine separate line items but nowhere does it show the one that is most important to me; the cost I am paying per unit of electricity. The ridiculousness of this situation is that regardless of the plan, the product sold is precisely the same product in every tiny detail. All that changes is who is paid for it and how much is paid. The regulator should be given the power to require all energy suppliers to present their plans in a clear and transparent manner that facilitates the consumer to directly compare the cost of all of the plans. – Yours, etc,
America Letter: Podcast giant Joe Rogan may have played key role in US elections
Malachy Clerkin: Whatever happens tonight, Na Fianna will celebrate it. What else would we do?
Sports Books of the Year: Conor Niland’s The Racket the best in a year dominated by autobiographies
Designer Helen James: I was teased at school about being English, a Protestant. There was always something of the ‘other’ about me
DAVID JACOBS,
Dublin 16.