Energy Ombudsman Reviews 

I found the Energy Ombudsman process frustrating and largely unhelpful. Despite recognising that there was a failure in billing transparency, I felt the overall decision placed too much responsibility on the customer and did not properly address the wider issues. It often felt like the process was working more in favour of the energy company than the consumer. Definitely not the independent resolution service I expected.

Absolutely crap service in my opinion I wouldn't recommend them. I was awarded £150 compensation and then I found it after I accepted it it was going to the network which is octopus energy which I really was cross about because that bill is in dispute until yesterday which have now managed to swear I would octopus but the Ombudsman didn't actually care I couldn't read the details because I'm dyslexic. And as I said I would never use the Ombudsman again not the energy one. I know they did put it would go to the network but in my opinion that was not clearly displayed.

It would have been better if the Ombudsman had asked me if the corrective work done by EDF was completed satisfactorily.
I have experienced nine months of frustration with EDF over faulty smart meters, they visited on the 15th September and presumed everything was fixed but it isn't

Total waste of time.Would not recommend anyone going to them.Did nothing to help me except cause more stress.
Gave extension after extension to EDF and now been told "its fixed".
They gave EDF five extensions and just kept telling me it wasn't EDF'S fault.

The case officer grasped the issue quickly and accurately. He explained the process clearly. Each step was clearly signposted and reached well within timescales.

I found them to be very friendly, polite and professional at all levels of the investigation and remained completely neutral.

Nick Waters is one of the most decent, most thorough, empathetic and professional people with whom I have ever had the pleasure of communicating; I really hope his bosses at the Energy Ombudsman recognise precisely what an asset they have in this individual. All in all, a very happy and easy experience dealing with the Energy Ombudsman - and I'm very pleased I approached them: thank you very much!

I found the Ombudsman service nothing to be scared of,
or to be nervous about using.
If you tell the truth and the Ombudsman feels you have
a case which deserves looking into, you will be welcomed and given an explanation about the next stage.
The outcome will depend on the evidence produced,
and final verdict will be unbiased.

Went through the process with them

Utilita broke the law by not notifying me of their intention to attend my house with a warrant
even though the law says they have to

Appantly the letter saying they are going to court for the warrant is enough

absolute dreadful ! ... Would not recommend them at all

Further action to follow

Unfortunately people think that the ombudsman will be able to help them. But the truth is they don’t really have any power when it comes to the energy companies. To be fair the service is a total waste of time. I was awarded compensation with no sign of it at all. So really what is the point. When it comes to energy disputes your on your own.

Poor level of communication and a failure to understand the complaint. In the end the matter was resolved but took longer than necessary due to a failure by the ombudsman agent to fully understand the nature of the dispute.

we were kept up to date with progress and advised of the findings and outcome in a constructive manner.

My case officer was extremely helpful and communicative, explaining clearly every step of the process.

I am really impressed by the very efficient and helpful way my complaint was handled. I did not get everything I wanted but the process was fair and my case handler outstandingly good.

I am still awaiting the outcome of my case, so I cannot yet comment on the final decision or whether my complaint has been upheld. However, my experience of the process so far has been positive.The case handler has communicated with me by email, which is my preferred method of communication. Frequent phone calls and missed calls can be stressful for me, so I appreciated this approach. The process and next steps were explained clearly, and I felt able to engage with the case at my own pace.As someone with Irlen Syndrome, accessibility is important to me, and there is still room for improvement in some areas of the online experience. However, I have found the communication professional and respectful so far.I will reserve judgment on the overall outcome until the investigation is complete.

The caseworkers were brilliant.

Holding a gun to my head like a B-movie gangster, the Ombudsman offered a final solution to my complaint; a take it or leave it statement that handed Scottish Power a free hit to mark their own homework and for me to shut up and scuttle away. The final decision included information, clearly private, but from an individual that was not me and bore no relation to the content of my case. In spite of Scottish power continuing to harass me after the ombudsman's decision (They requested I contact customer service to resolve an outstanding debt of 13p. Yes... 13p!!!), this is of no interest to the Ombudsman and they simply want to close the case and for me to move on, whether dissatisfied or not. If such treatment were to be dealt out to an elderly person unable to navigate the online muddle, or a mentally unstable person unable to deal with the ignorance of the correspondence, people could potentially die.

FORMAL COMPLAINT AND OBJECTION TO THE DECISION

I strongly disagree with the decision made in relation to my complaint against Positive Energy.

I had a one-year gas contract for my business premises. From the beginning, the gas meter installed at my shop was clearly faulty. The meter appeared to be second-hand, the display was not functioning properly, and the numbers on the screen could not be read.

Throughout the one-year contract, we repeatedly contacted the company by both telephone and email. We raised the same issue approximately 15–20 times and repeatedly explained that the gas meter was not working correctly. We have retained the emails, correspondence and other evidence confirming these complaints.

We also repeatedly requested that the faulty meter be removed because we were unable to use it properly and did not want to continue with it. Instead of resolving the problem, we were faced with a charge of £680 plus VAT for removing the meter.

Our one-year contract has now ended. We believe that we have been seriously disadvantaged by the situation and that the company failed to provide an appropriate and functioning metering service despite being notified repeatedly throughout the contract.

What is particularly concerning is the decision made by the Energy Ombudsman. We are the party who has suffered the financial loss and inconvenience, yet the outcome appears to favour the company despite the substantial evidence we have provided.

We have evidence of our repeated complaints and requests for the faulty meter to be dealt with. We therefore request that the decision is properly reviewed and that all of the evidence, including our previous emails and records of contact, is fully considered.

We do not believe it is reasonable for us to be responsible for a £680 + VAT removal charge when we repeatedly reported that the meter was faulty and requested its removal during the contract.

Please treat this as a formal objection and request for review. We would also like a clear explanation of how the decision was reached and how the evidence we provided was taken into account.

We reserve the right to pursue the matter through any further appropriate complaint, regulatory or legal channels available to us.

Yours faithfully,

The whole process was so simple. After sending copies of all correspondence sent to Scottish Power outlining their disgusting service, having no replies whatsoever, after sending letters to their complaints dept, followed by a letter to the Managing Director, followed by a letter sent to the CEO. The Ombudsman handled everything perfectly without me having to contact them again. The result was a written apology from Scottish Power, plus compensation. I cannot recommend the Ombudsman enough. If you have a problem with an energy company, then contact the Ombudsman. They are very professional at what they do, and the service is first class. It's amazing how you suddenly get results once they get involved. I think that I would have eventually ended up in court if they hadn't stepped in.

EDF billed a small two-up two-down house for nearly £4,000 when £96.94 was owed, then passed it to debt collectors without checking who owed it. They admitted that in writing. I took it to the Energy Ombudsman.

The decision upheld my complaint about EDF's debt recovery, which I accept. The rest of the decision didn't hold together.

It got the date I bought the property wrong by a full year. On that timeline EDF would have referred the debt to collectors before I owned the house, which is impossible. That error went to the heart of the case.

It found the meter readings were not at fault, while accepting the opening reading had been changed from 10,907 to 109. That one change is what created the false debt.

It found customer service was not at fault, while EDF's handling of my complaint was first reviewed by the same person I was complaining about.

I asked for a review. The Coach's reply accepted the original decision had the wrong dates, that EDF could have investigated further, and that the readings should have been checked before the debt went to collectors. It still changed nothing. When I asked for a final review, I was told there was no significant error of fact, despite those dates having already been accepted as wrong.

Written questions I sent went unanswered while the deadline to accept kept running. It took my MP getting involved to get any response at all.

The award was £150 and an apology, for being chased for nearly £4,000 I never owed.

If you use the Energy Ombudsman, check every date and fact in the decision. Once it's made, getting them to correct it is close to impossible.