Charged More for Using Less Electricity

Wow..that is incredible! I would be mad if I was one that tried to cut back that much and wound up getting charged more. I understand you mentioned it was properties not being used very much, but would it apply to someone that had really cut back their usage? Wow!

Yep,I heard this on the news this morning...but what sort of a level of low usage are they going to be penalising ? Would an elderly person living frugally all alone be about to fall foul of this,or is it,as they mentioned,holiday homes and such that would be standing unused for long periods that would mostly be affected?

I'm not certain how they are justifying this. What are these people supposed to do, cut the line to their house when they are not using it?

it is but big corporations try to squeeze the little man for every penny he has plus the price of everything is sky rocketing!

It sounds to me like a money gimick. I can understand charging say a little flat fee every month for it sitting dormant, but at the same time it's not fair. You don't own a property that isn't using much electricity are you? How much will they charge or does it depend on the property?

Well i would definitely say that this is just insane ! Why should someone be charged for the things/service that they are not using. Besides i would say that if you'll have so much excess of electricity why not pass on that to us ! We in india face upto 5-6 hours of power cut every day (since 7 years)and the government is still sleeping. Lucky for you guys , you just have to pay for not using it ! We dont even get electricity after paying for it :(

I think now a days the cost of electricity is getting more higher. I think one of the solution for the electricity is using solar lanterns and solar home system. I think you should check if there is any electricity leakage at home. If still having high bills, I would suggest you to check with the concerned person to know what had happened. I think there should not be charge for homes that does not consume electricity.

This makes perfect sense to me. It is the same with water where I live. The water still has to be provided, the equipment has to be regularly maintained and the service has to be monitored and of course this takes people to do the work and time and money. The less water we use still costs our council the same amount of money including increases, so the less we use, the more it costs them. There are 2 alternatives to charging us more; first, we use more water and pay the same rate or secondly, they cut our water off all together saving them heaps and forcing us to install rainwater tanks. Should your electricity board turn the electricity off and not provide the service to those users? If you don't want to pay for the service, go without.

It seems most likely to me that the company wants to send out a charge for administrative services. They still have to go over you in the registry, run maintenance, and so on-- if you aren't paying them for anything else, they should at least be paid for the time and effort that goes into that.

That's just taking electricity saving and throw it out the window. It really doesn't make any sense, unless of course it is only done in those cases you mentioned. I guess you'll just have to wait and see.