Energy retailer ordered to cut $1697 power bill

A woman who was handed a $1697 power bill has had it reduced by 40 per cent after she complained to Utilities Disputes.

The woman said she moved into her home in May 2011 and called the power company to set up an account. But from May until September, she did not receive a bill.

She started trying to contact the retailer to ask for one, worried about how big it would be when it finally arrived.

Unable to resolve the issue, she complained to the office of the Utilities Disputes Commissioner, Nanette Moreau.

Moreau’s team contacted the retailer, which then created an account for the property, read the meter and sent out a back bill for $1697.72.

An investigation revealed her property address was incorrectly recorded on the electricity registry – a database of all installation control points (ICPs) in New Zealand.

The commissioner recommended that the bill be reduced by 40 per cent, with a $150 customer service payment added.

The assessment of the complaint found the retailer should have recognised the address was incorrect earlier because the customer called at least 10 times, the retailer had five switch requests rejected before it requested the correct ICP and address combination and another retailer asked for the correct ICP and address combination.

‘‘Poor customer service is the second most common issue raised with our free and independent complaints service,’’ Moreau said. She said many complaints could be avoided with better communication and information. ‘‘Customers want to receive clear and accurate information. They want their questions answered, their complaint acknowledged, and they sometimes want to talk on a phone to a real person.’’

Half the customer service complaints to Utilities Disputes in 2018 were about how the complaint itself was handled or not handled; 27 per cent were about the information provided; and 18 were about attitude.

‘‘If people have a concern, they want to be listened to and treated fairly. When complaints are recognised early and responded to helpfully, everyone wins,’’ Moreau said.

In another case, a customer asked for electricity to be connected to his house but the request was not logged. A month later he tried again and was sent a quote.

He asked questions about the quote but the distributor didn’t respond, and the quote expired. When he asked for another quote, the cost had risen by $4000. Utilities Disputes found the distributor had provided poor customer service and was responsible for the delay. It recommended the distributor pay $1978.