To think this rebate announced today is a total con

[Viviennemary]

So this so called rebate has to be paid back. It isnt exactly a rebate then is it?

Heard on radio today, everyone is in the pipeline for the 200£ payout even if you huff & puff by sending silly emails to your provider it won’t make a shred of difference. Payable back over 5yrs

Am I the only one who will admit to being grateful for the help.
I'm glad so many posters are clearly so well off all they can do is moan. Just have a bit of tact for those of us that desperately need the help.

The problem is there is no saying bills will come down so if bills are still double in 3 or 5years you will be struggling with that and the arrears. Granted if it goes way down then it will be positive but it could go either way.

Yes I understand that I will have to pay it back at £3 a month. This thread has just really upset me in its insensitivity.

I don't want a forced loan at all. It's a ridiculous idea that it's not even an opt-in/opt-out system! They can keep their fucking loan, it's pointless to me and doesn't help anything at all. I'd rather they GAVE the money to people that need it the most. I will struggle to meet the new cost of living but I can live with it. Other people will be struggling to even pay it back. I'd rather he had just given it away to those that need it. Or y'know, invest in renewables and nuclear power and not have sold off the gas stock to other countries so we weren't relying on Norway to tell gas to us. If we hadn't been operating on a stupid 'just in time' model and had storage then we wouldn't have been hit nearly as hard.

One thing that does bother me is if people do struggle to pay it back, will it be marked against you as a bad credit score?

Thats a good point Nohypocrate

@Nohypocrate

Am I the only one who will admit to being grateful for the help. I'm glad so many posters are clearly so well off all they can do is moan. Just have a bit of tact for those of us that desperately need the help.

I'm also appreciative of the £200 in the run up to winter but apparently that makes me an "alright Jack" Covid has kicked the arse out of my business and I've been attempting to live on a pittance for coming up two years. Maybe some people don't want it and that's fine, but I'm sure there's millions of us who will welcome it.

[quote userxx]@PreparationPreparationPrep If it was done through UC I wouldn't receive it and I will definitely be needing it, as will most of the people I know. There wont be many people building up credit through summer like usual so any extra help is more than welcome.[/quote]
That's a fair point - there are lots of people who are struggling but not enough to qualify for UC. So they should issue vouchers - and people can choose to claim or not claim. But council tax bands doesn't make sense.

People who perceive what is in effect an interest-free loan of £200 repayable over five years as some sort of dangerous assault on your finances, there is nothing to stop you putting £200 cash in envelope this year and taking £40 per year out over the following five years, if you want to nullify the effect of the whole thing.

This is so so badly thought through.

Firstly assuming most consumers will switch energy suppliers two or three times during 5 year payback period then the administrative cost of tracking and transferring this £200 debt will be close to £200 anyway.

Secondly as another poster pointed out if energy prices stay high or go even higher then consumers will have to pay both the higher prices and the additional £40 per year.

Thirdly if energy prices fall then it would be a massive incentive for the entry of new small energy suppliers (and as we have seen which are vulnerable to fail) who could then undercut existing suppliers as they wouldn't have to charge the £40 debt repayment because the new supplier never took the £200 per customer loan from the Government.

Fourthly you could have a chaotic system where consumers are paying for the energy supplies to one company but still have the £40 repayment to another company.

It is really set up to be a complete mess from the start, unnecessarily complicated and only packaged as a "loan" so that Rishi can deny to the Tory faithful that he is spending more on "benefits" or using taxpayer money in subsidies.

@Nohypocrate

One thing that does bother me is if people do struggle to pay it back, will it be marked against you as a bad credit score?

This is what worries me. It's like forcing people into debt. It might only be £40 a year but for those of us who might struggle with bills as it is, the £40 payback on top of the hiked price of energy will push some people into further debt.

@Nohypocrate that's another thing that worries me the credit history thing. I've worked damn hard to claw out of a bad one caused by ex and other things outside my control, it's good to excellent at the moment and I wanna keep it that way!

I don't read the thread as insensitive at all I see it as people who DO NOT need this help understanding that there are those of us that REALLY DO and this nonsense is not helping us!

I'm glad they can see (most of them) beyond whether they're ok or not and are considering how this affects the worse off

If they made it vouchers for everyone that would be slightly more fair but it's daft to give help to those who really don't need it.

But I think I said upthread that what REALLY should have happened is this govt telling the energy companies they're taking the piss and to fuck off with this shite!

@RandomLondoner that's perhaps an option for those that don't need it on an individual basis but it means that the money they get isn't available to provide help to the worst off and the worse off can't do as you suggest.

The poorest and worst off are often the ones in poorly insulated, hard and expensive to heat homes!

It's a total Fucking mess!

@Nohypocrate

Am I the only one who will admit to being grateful for the help. I'm glad so many posters are clearly so well off all they can do is moan. Just have a bit of tact for those of us that desperately need the help.

But I would wish for you to have more help, and help that you did not have to repay. I think people who really need help should be helped more, and people who don't need the help should not get it.

The timing of this is quite cynical, ahead of the local elections - giving with one hand and taking away with the other.

IMO I am not 'moaning' - I am genuinely frustrated that the level of help is quite low and poorly targeted.

@Nohypocrate

Am I the only one who will admit to being grateful for the help. I'm glad so many posters are clearly so well off all they can do is moan. Just have a bit of tact for those of us that desperately need the help.

I would prefer people who need it get even more help than we get it when we don’t need help. I won’t be keeping mine

I'm definitely no fan of Brady, Baker, and co. but I'm with them on the need to scale back the too ambitious (and totally unaffordable) for now Green Deal stuff.

I care passionately about the environment but we're simply not ready to drop fossil fuel. And we're not even doing that.

The only difference is, instead of using our own natural resources (coal and gas - boosting jobs and employment opportunities) we're importing it from abroad...from potentially unstable regions. Far more expensive - we're largely at the mercy of overseas price hikes - but also it's actually less environmentally friendly because of the carbon footprint of importing.

We need to be like America is this regard. Be more self sufficient.

Also we should never ever ever again get rid of most of our stored reserves.

@Nohypocrate

Am I the only one who will admit to being grateful for the help. I'm glad so many posters are clearly so well off all they can do is moan. Just have a bit of tact for those of us that desperately need the help.

But it’s not help - it’s the government getting people who can least afford it into compulsory debt. It’s disingenuous at the very least and at worst another example of the contempt they now show with alacrity.

Nohypocrate

Am I the only one who will admit to being grateful for the help.
I'm glad so many posters are clearly so well off all they can do is moan. Just have a bit of tact for those of us that desperately need the help.

The thing is it's widely acknowledged that the prices are likely to be going up again in October (by Sunak as well). This is very much like bailing out banks and turning private debt into public debt
Why can't we do what France is doing?

@mytwocats

Like I said moan if they do something moan if they don’t. it’s a softener for a lot of people.

No - it’s a loan that they have to pay back.

It’s all being given to the provider & they tack it on to the bill 40£ per yr or 3£ a month it’s 3 loaves of bread

Sorry, not read all the thread but, my supplier will give me £200 at some point, what is stopping me giving it straight back to them?

@MyMoneyIsAllSpent

Sorry, not read all the thread but, my supplier will give me £200 at some point, what is stopping me giving it straight back to them?

Because even if you give it back then you will still be charged £40 a year by your supplier for the next 5 years. If you change supplier or could get messy especially if your new supplier is set up after October 2022 and never gave out the "loans".

It's not really a loan is basically we'll knock £200 off your bill this year but add £40 to your bills each year for the next 5 years.

It's overly and unnecessarily complicated and a bad idea.

People already die from damp and cold houses in the UK and now more will die. Isn’t that simple maths?

The whole thing is fucking idiotic, especially the plan for recovering the money.

In 2023 we'll all just have £40 added to our bills. Everyone, regardless of whether they actually got the £200 discount. So someone currently living with their parents won't get the £200 but in 2023 will have to pay £40 back. And vice versa, someone who gets it now but isn't responsible for paying a electricity bill in 2023 won't have to pay it back.

Fucking insane.

@1dayatatime

This is so so badly thought through.

Firstly assuming most consumers will switch energy suppliers two or three times during 5 year payback period then the administrative cost of tracking and transferring this £200 debt will be close to £200 anyway.

Secondly as another poster pointed out if energy prices stay high or go even higher then consumers will have to pay both the higher prices and the additional £40 per year.

Thirdly if energy prices fall then it would be a massive incentive for the entry of new small energy suppliers (and as we have seen which are vulnerable to fail) who could then undercut existing suppliers as they wouldn't have to charge the £40 debt repayment because the new supplier never took the £200 per customer loan from the Government.

Fourthly you could have a chaotic system where consumers are paying for the energy supplies to one company but still have the £40 repayment to another company.

It is really set up to be a complete mess from the start, unnecessarily complicated and only packaged as a "loan" so that Rishi can deny to the Tory faithful that he is spending more on "benefits" or using taxpayer money in subsidies.

Firstly There is no debt. All electricity suppliers will credit all their customers £200 in October, and all suppliers will increase their prices by £40/year (or £3.33/month) on their bills from April 2023. You can switch suppliers as often as you want - it will make no difference and will not cause them any extra admin.

Secondly Correct. Nobody knows what prices will be from April 2023. Nobody knows what new schemes the government may introduce. They might even write off what they have advanced to the energy companies so the £40/year is never charged to consumers.

Thirdly Any new suppliers will have to charge the £40/year and pass it on the government.

Fourthly This will never happen. If you take the £200 credit from company A then switch to company B, it is company B who will add £40/year to their electricity prices. The government will lend £200 to company A and collect £200 from company B.