Reflect - November 2023

Our cases from July-September also highlighted growing payment difficulties. EWOV received 313 credit cases related to payment difficulty this quarter, up 109% from last quarter (150 cases). Cases included both problems with access to payment difficulty entitlements and growing arrears.

Our cases highlight a range of reasons for these entitlement errors. These included validation problems due to mismatch in name or address between a retailer’s system and Centrelink systems; a mismatch within a retailer’s system; or by the expiry of a healthcare card or other concession card or moving address, which requires a consumer to have their concession reapplied to the bill.

Consumers who contacted EWOV regarding arrears arising from payment difficulty were often prompted by a recent bill, which was higher than expected, an unaffordable payment plan, or a combination of these issues. Many reported vulnerable circumstances including a loss of income or a period of hospitalisation, while some indicated as refugees they had little support or ability to work. In some cases, providers helped consumers to apply for a Utility Relief Grant (URG), however some consumers flagged they had no income to contribute to a payment plan while the URG was processed.

Cases from the July-September quarter also highlight consumers encountering difficulty accessing customer service centres, or reporting their provider offering a poor explanation of changes or increases to their bill. Customer service issues relating to failure to inform/respond and poor service more generally emerged in our top ten sub issues for the quarter. These complaints include questions or concerns about the provider’s failure to consult or inform the customer or the provider’s lack of response – including cases where the customer sent correspondence to the provider or where the customer was promised a call from a manager but has not received contact.

We received 151 customer service complaints relating to a provider failing to inform or respond promptly to a complaint or issue, up 61% from 94 cases last quarter. Cases indicate these kinds of complaints stem from a range of issues including high bills, tariff changes, billing errors, or meter replacements, but consumers call EWOV due to difficulties reaching call centres for an explanation of these issues.

We received 135 customer service complaints relating to poor service, up 221% from 42 last quarter. There are a range of underlying reasons for these cases, many of which stem from high bills or billing related issues, but again consumers were often driven to call EWOV due to difficulties getting through to the service centre due to long phone wait times.

The use of distributed storage and demand response has also been identified as a key component of the renewables-based grid – which is likely to expose some consumers to unexpected actions by providers. Case studies indicate consumers may not fully understand how retailers will utilise consumer’s batteries through Virtual Power Plants - contracts can be highly conditional but the terms vary greatly between providers, resulting in consumer frustration and expectations not being met. Effective and comprehensible information needs to be provided to consumers about how and when devices will be accessed, and robust protections and access to redress for adverse outcomes will be essential to build consumer support and trust in these arrangements.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Failure to provide clear information around Virtual Power Plant use of battery – in jurisdiction

Gary* contacted EWOV with a complaint about his retailer and a Virtual Power Plant (VPP) agreement he had struck. The VPP agreement entailed selling energy from Gary’s battery into the grid once the spot market price exceeded a standard feed in tariff rate, when his battery was full and when the VPP software “deems it appropriate according to [your] household's energy usage patterns”. When the VPP discharged from Gary’s battery, he was paid a Trading Credit in lieu of this feed in tariff, at the spot market price.

Gary raised a number of issues in his complaint. First, the VPP provider drew his battery down to 15% by 8pm each night, requiring him to draw from the grid directly at a higher price. Second, Gary advised he had been paid very little in trading credits, well exceeding the cost to recharge his battery after these discharge events. While Gary was provided access to the VPP software forecasting discharge events, the provider did not give him information about how and when they had utilised his battery to export into the grid, and without this information, Gary was unable to determine whether he has received the correct benefit. Third, Gary had repeatedly tried to call the VPP to discuss the issue and was unable to get through.

Through an EWOV Assisted Referral the retailer agreed an error had been made, but was unable to document exactly when the VPP software had accessed Gary’s battery to discharge to the grid, or provide a true reconciliation of how much energy had been discharged to the grid at what value. The retailer provided Gary a $400 customer service gesture and EWOV was able to confirm Gary was not left out of pocket.

*Name has been changed for privacy

The uptake of EVs presents a significant opportunity to help reduce emissions, particularly where vehicles can be used as a home battery or feed excess energy back into the grid[7]. Consumers can reduce their energy bills charging their EV when there is excess renewable energy in the grid and either using this during evening peak period or even feeding this back to the grid for a premium feed in tariff. However, innovative (and often complex) tariffs create the potential for new problems for consumers. EWOV has already seen examples of consumer complaints around EV tariffs, however there are a range of other kinds of issues that currently sit outside our jurisdiction.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Issue with innovative EV tariff, submeter and backbill

Jerry* called EWOV in 2019 with a complaint about his retailer regarding a higher than expected bill. Jerry signed a contract for an Electric Vehicle plan of $1 per day for electric vehicle charging. Jerry confirmed that to access this rate, he paid $431 for installation of active stream digital submeter. His electrician advised he would return to install an antenna, as the smart meter didn’t have reception in the basement. The electrician did not return, so Jerry is receiving bills for the un-discounted amount. Jerry’s retailer advised it would look into it and place his account on hold while it investigated. However, Jerry received a back bill from August 2018 for $5,700. Jerry has a direct debit set up for the account, which was scheduled to come out of is bank account on the 16 January 2020 but Jerry advises he does not have $5,700 available in that account. Jerry has also flagged did not believe the retailer could issue a backbill for more than nine months.

Resolution following EWOV assisted referral:

Jerry’s retailer confirmed there were errors in applying the $1.00 a day Electric Vehicle charge to customers’ accounts. The retailer has confirmed they are manually adjusting the billing each quarter and have applied a manual adjustment of $4373.51 credit to the account. The retailer advised they were working with the meter provider to remove the sub meter on site and once removed will discuss plans available to the customer. Jerry was happy to keep liaising with the retailer case manager to resolve their concerns moving forward and adjust any future billing up until the sub meter is removed, and advised he was satisfied with the outcome.

*Name has been changed for privacy