[GSimpson]

My latest bill from EONext is even more confusing than usual.

Instead of just entering the unit price per kWh that I should pay, first they price it out at 48.88p/kWh, multiplied by the number of units used.
The next line shows the Energy Price Guarantee at 17.00p/kWh multiplied by the number of units used which gets deducted from the first line total.

Why, oh why, can't they just enter the price of 31.88p/kWh which shows as the unit price on my online account?

EONext seem determined to make bills as incomprehensible as possible. Is it so that users find them so confusing they give up trying to check them?

[JoeSoap]

@GSimpson

See here for an explanation.

''The bills are a little tricky, and I'll explain how this will work below in the hope that this can provide you with some clarification.

On your bill, you'll see a top line called "Energy Used" and will show how many Kilowatt hours have been used and at what cost - this cost will be at the original £3.5k Ofgem price cap firstly.

We must bill you to this price first and then display the reduction on your bill, based on the Energy Price Guarantee.

Please also note, the rates you see on your online account include VAT at 5%, the rates you see on the bill don't as VAT is added at the end.

Underneath, there will be another line called "Energy Price Guarantee" and that will show the same Kilowatt hours and will show the reduction for the Energy Price Guarantee.''

[GSimpson]

[QUOTE=JoeSoap;19900] See here for an explanation.

Thank you for the EONext quote, Joe. I'm just wondering why they "must" do it this way. As I suggested, perhaps they "must" do it this way to confuse their customers even further.

[Tommysgirl]

@GSimpson
I agree, it is confusing. The only explanation I can think of is: that the reduction amount they give customers to reduce our bills is what they can claim back from the government under the Energy Price Guarantee, but I am not certain.

[meldrewreborn]

@Tommysgirl

The reduction due to the EPG has to be accounted for properly in order for the company to be reimbursed by the Government. Because perhaps 15% of customers are on a variety of fixed price tariffs where the reduction due to the EPG can be a wide variety of different figures, this will have been the adopted solution.

You will have read that Liz Truss managed only 44 days in office before she resigned, well that's about the same length of time since the EPG was announced, for implementation 3 weeks later, and the detail was not fully identified at that time. Its not designed to confuse, but its new and we're all getting used to it. But don't worry we'll have another new scheme in about 5 month's time!!

[Andy65]

[QUOTE=GSimpson;19903]

Originally Posted by JoeSoap

See here for an explanation.

Thank you for the EONext quote, Joe. I'm just wondering why they "must" do it this way. As I suggested, perhaps they "must" do it this way to confuse their customers even further.

It's because whoever was in charge spent the afternoon listening to Frank Sinatra.

[JoeSoap]

[QUOTE=GSimpson;19903]

Originally Posted by JoeSoap

See here for an explanation.

Thank you for the EONext quote, Joe. I'm just wondering why they "must" do it this way. As I suggested, perhaps they "must" do it this way to confuse their customers even further.

The way I see it is they were required to reduce your tariff rate by 17p. They have shown this clearly on your bill and I can’t see where the confusion lies.

I’m a bit confused by @Andy65’s reply though, I must admit. I know there’s a joke there and I’ve been Googling Frank Sinatra but can’t find a clue.

[meldrewreborn]

@JoeSoap
I did it MY WAY

[JoeSoap]

Originally Posted by meldrewreborn

@JoeSoap
I did it MY WAY

Doh!!! I knew I’d be disappointed in myself for not getting it.