Easy energy bill mistake that could see you paying hundreds of pounds more
Energy bills remain high for millions of households with the Ofgem price cap set at £1,849 a year.
1
This is the average amount a household on a dual-fuel tariff paying by direct debit is having to fork out.
So it pays to cut costs where possible.
Make one simple mistake and you could end up paying out hundreds of pounds more on your electricity than you should be though.
Economy 7 and 10 tariffs charge you two different rates for electricity based on the time of day.
You are usually offered a cheaper rate for seven or 10 hours during the night and a more expensive one during the day time.
However, if you're on one of these tariffs and don't make the most of the off-peak rates, you could end up paying more than if you were on a standard tariff.
Natalie Mathie, energy expert at Uswitch, said the simple error could end up costing you £219 more a year under the current price cap.
She explained: "One major UK energy provider charges 34p per kWh for electricity to its standard customers, on average.
"Its night rate for Economy 7 tariff customers is just over 16p per kWh, compared with more than 42p during the day — which is around a fifth (21%) more expensive than the unit rate on a standard tariff.
"But the average UK household uses 2,700kWh of electricity a year, so if they used this all at an Economy 7 day rate of 42p it would cost them £1,138 – compared with only £919 on a standard deal."
From TV to energy... tips to save you money on 7 bills that are going up in April
Of course, the likelihood of someone being on an Economy 7 or 10 tariff and using all their electricity during peak hours is unlikely.
But, in any case, it's worth checking if you're on one of the tariffs using the bulk of your energy during peak times and could save money switching to a standard tariff.
You can also quickly find out if you're on an Economy 7 or 10 tariff by checking your bill.
If you're considering switching from an Economy 7 tariff to a standard tariff, get in touch with your energy firm.
If you're not happy with the rates they're offering you on the new standard tariff, you can always shop around and go with another supplier.
What are Economy 7 or 10 tariffs?
Economy 7 or 10 tariffs charge you different rates of electricity based on the time of day.
Economy 7 tariffs are more common than Economy 10, with cheaper rates for Economy 7 tariffs usually running from midnight to 7am.
The main advantage to them is that you can save money on your overall energy bill if you use more electricity during off-peak hours.
For example, if you need to charge an electric car or a storage heater, which is an electric appliance that stores heat generated during off-peak hours and releases it during the day.
They are also mainly designed for households that generate all their power from electricity rather than electricity and gas.
To sign up to an Economy 7 tariff, you'll need a smart meter or a dedicated Economy 7 meter installed in your home.
If you think you might be suited to an Economy 7 or 10 tariff, make sure you shop around for the best deals and rates.
You can do this through price comparison websites like Go Compare and Uswitch.
It's worth bearing in mind, some older Economy 7 meters are set to stop working from later this summer.
Any that use the "Radio Teleswitch Service" (RTS) to transmit and receive data will become defunct from July 1.
If you think you have an RTS meter, contact your supplier to find out when it can be upgraded, most likely to a smart meter.
Some RTS meters have a transmitter or separate teleswitch box next to your electricity meter.
How to save money on your energy bills
The quickest and surest way of saving money on your energy bills is reducing how much energy you actually use.
This means dialling down your thermostat by one or two degrees, or switching halogen lightbulbs for LED ones, which the Energy Saving Trust says saves you around £1-£4 per year per light bulb.
Beware of appliances that guzzle through energy as well, including tumble dryers which are notoriously expensive to run.
In the current market, you could save money by switching from a standard variable energy tariff to a fixed tariff too.
Fixed tariffs charge you the same unit rate for gas and electricity over the contract term rather than standard variable tariffs where the unit rates fluctuate based on the price cap.
Whether you'll save money opting for a fixed tariff really depends as you pay different amounts based on where you live and your usage.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
Councils slammed for charging ‘fat tax' on burials of larger coffins
Grieving families of obese and overweight people may be stumping up a 'fat tax' when they die in the form of additional burial charges, funeral directors have warned. Some local authorities across the UK now demand extra charges to bury larger coffins, known in the industry as "bariatric burials", with additional costs ranging from under £100 to more than a £1,000 in some areas. A survey of its members by the National Society of Allied and Independent Funeral Directors (SAIF) found a quarter of funeral directors now say their local authority charges extra for larger coffins. "The majority of respondents (125 out of 165) indicated that their local cemetery and cremation authority does not charge extra for the burial of large or bariatric coffins. However, a significant minority (40 respondents) reported extra charges," the SAIF said. Speaking to The Independent, Ross Hickton, managing director of Hickton Family Funeral directors in the West Midlands, and who is also the national president of SAIF, said the extra charges were discriminatory. He said: "Obviously families have paid council tax, income tax their entire lives, and now to be slammed with another tax if their loved one is overweight or oversized isn't really fair. He added: "I would call it a fat tax because at the end of the day, people are having to pay extra fees due to their size." The survey was commissioned by SAIF when concerns were raised over Wolverhampton council after it suggested it would implement a 20% extra charge on bariatric burials due to a growing demand for larger graves in cemeteries and graveyards. However, the council has since backtracked on that proposal. Matthew Crawley, chief executive at the Institute of Cemetery and Crematorium Management rejected the idea that additional charges were any kind of "tax" and said local authorities largely "take a measured and reasonable approach in charging for additional space required". "Suitable cemetery land is and has been in crisis for over 20 years, therefore burial space is at a premium,' he said. 'Historically graves in a Victorian cemetery may have been 3'5" wide, and this has increased to 4'5"-5' steadily over several years, suggesting that cemeteries are adapting to requirements rather than applying a 'tax' of any kind." Wolverhampton council has also stoked controversy after its councillors reportedly decided to introduce a new dedicated section for larger graves at the city's Danescourt Cemetery in Tettenhall in May this year. Mr Hickton said: "They've indicated they may open a separate section for bariatric and large coffins in cemeteries. It's a separate section which is penalising and stigmatising. It is absolutely nuts." A City of Wolverhampton Council spokesperson told The Independent: 'No formal decision was ever taken on plans to charge more for larger burial plots. 'This is a common practice taken by councils around the country where higher charges cover the costs of providing a larger plot. 'However, while under consideration, we have decided not to proceed with the plans.'
The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
ATP players handed record £13.5m profit-sharing bonus
Men's tennis players will pocket a record $18.3m (£13.5m) in profit-sharing bonuses from the 2024 season as the ATP stepped up its efforts to forge a more sustainable and financially aligned future for the sport. The bonus amount, a 177 per cent increase on the previous season's payout, will be distributed to players based on performance at the nine ATP 1000 tournaments, which rank just below the four Grand Slams in prestige. "This is exactly what profit sharing was designed to do: ensure that players and tournaments share equally in the sport's financial upside," ATP Chairman Andrea Gaudenzi said on Thursday. "The $18.3m is a huge milestone. For us, it's proof that strengthening the premium product and aligning interests creates value. "We're proud to be strengthening our partnership and building a stronger, more sustainable ATP Tour." The profit-sharing plan, introduced in 2022, splits profits generated at ATP Masters 1000 events - above onsite base prize money - equally between players and tournaments and is a cornerstone of the tour's OneVision strategic plan. Profit-sharing helped push ATP player compensation to a record $261m (£192.7m) for the 2024 season for a total of $378m (£279.2m) when combined with Grand Slam prize money. The men's elite body added that it was on track to deliver more compensation records, including $28.5m (£21m) in Challenger Tour prize money and a $3m (£2.2m) ATP 500 bonus pool. The expansion of most of the Masters events to 96-player draws had increased earning opportunities for players, widening the number of those able to make a sustainable living from the sport, the ATP added. It said there was a "wave of infrastructure investment" as Madrid, Rome, Cincinnati, Shanghai and Paris, among other venues, had upgraded facilities to enhance the experience for players and spectators.
The Guardian
2 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Thames Water says new Abingdon reservoir could cost bill payers up to £7.5bn
Struggling Thames Water has said a new reservoir in Oxfordshire could cost more than three times the original budget, pushing the eventual cost to be covered by water bill payers to as much as £7.5bn. In a blow to government plans for an expansion in the number of reservoirs across south-east England, the heavily indebted utility said a review of the Abingdon project had sent the estimated cost of construction from £2.2bn to between £5.5bn and £7.5bn. Only last year, Thames told the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) that its assessment of likely costs was 'robust'. But the company has now told regulators that further tests, including of the ground and local waterways, had shown the final bill would be more than twice, and possibly three times, the current forecast. If the reservoir goes ahead, customers will pick up the tab. About half the costs are due to be recovered from Thames Water's 16 million customers across London and the south-east, with Affinity Water and Southern Water customers sharing the rest. Thames customers already face a 35% increase in bills over the next five years under a settlement by the sector regulator Ofwat, while those with Affinity face a 26% lift and with Southern the rise is 53%. The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has pledged to build nine major reservoirs – the country's first in 30 years – in her determination to take on 'the blockers' opposing construction projects and renew the UK's ageing infrastructure. In an article published in the Guardian this week, she said the government wanted to 'break down the planning system to get Britain building'. Ministers have backed the scheme, which will be capable of holding 150bn litres of water in an area the size of Gatwick airport, after assessments found Thames will need to find an extra 1bn litres of water every day by 2050. Regulators have accepted that Thames Water would be unable to reduce leaks or redirect watercourses to mitigate this extra usage as part of a 50-year plan. Last year, the Abingdon reservoir was designated as a nationally significant infrastructure project and fast-tracked through planning approval without a public inquiry. The move prompted local campaigners to challenge the decision in the high court, but the appeal was rejected last month. Derek Stork, the chair of the Group Against Reservoir Development, said Thames must have known 10 months ago when it responded to a Defra request for more financial details that its costs had risen steeply. Stork, a retired former head of technology at the Atomic Energy Authority, said Thames must also have been informed of the rising costs when it defended the civil action earlier this summer brought by local residents and the countryside charity CPRE. 'We predicted this would happen, but even I am astonished by the increase to £7.5bn,' he said. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion The reservoir has proved controversial after Thames Water said it would need to build walls up to 25 metres high to contain the mass of water inside. Local streams that run across the land will also need to be redirected close to homes in nearby villages, increasing the likelihood of local flooding, it is claimed. Most reservoirs are built in natural valleys or on substantial areas of clay, which are in short supply in the south-east of England. Thames Water said the reservoir remained a priority project despite the increase in costs. Nevil Muncaster, the firm's strategic water resources director, said: ''[Today] we published our Gate Three report for our proposed reservoir in Oxfordshire, in line with the regulatory process that we are following for its design and development. 'The report marks a critical milestone in our development of the reservoir. It reflects the extensive work we have done to evolve our proposed design and better understand what it will take to deliver it. 'Working through the development process, we are applying lessons from other major projects in the UK, wherever we are able. This has included providing an update on what we expect the reservoir to cost as early as possible and well before construction, when it becomes difficult to adapt to revisions. 'The reservoir is a critical piece of infrastructure for meeting future water demand in the south-east and remains one of the preferred options in our water resource management plan which sets out our strategy to protect water supply for the next 50 years and beyond.'' Thames has submitted the review amid a desperate struggle to avoid collapse. It has amassed a £20bn debt pile and a deal with private equity firm KKR to inject £4bn of funds to keep the company afloat was abandoned in June. The company's creditors have put forward a rescue plan contingent on regulators agreeing to waive hundreds of millions of pounds in sewage pollution fines. This week it emerged that Steve Reed, the environment secretary, has appointed City insolvency advisers to prepare for the company's potential collapse into a special administration regime (SAR) – a form of temporary nationalisation. It was also reported that if that situation arises, the Hong Kong infrastructure company CKI is a frontline contender to buy the company out of an SAR.
