On Monday, 10 December 2018 17:08:40 UTC, wrote:
plainly it does not prove that it's been out of whack for a long period.


I don't think you understand balance of probabilities. The meter has probably been in the house 50+ years and I know for a fact it hasn't been touched in the 11 years I've been in the house. So, on the balance of probabilities, it is reasonable top assume that the meter could have been misreading for all those years and so I should win. Unless you can think of what evidence the electricity board can put up to prove that it has only been misreading for a very short time? I can't think of anything.

wrote in message
...
On Monday, 10 December 2018 16:21:21 UTC, me wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2018 10:14:58 UTC, tabby wrote:

how do you propose to prove when it went out of calibration?


It'll be like any civil case, it goes on the balance of probabilities. So
I'll make my claim for 10 years' backdated money they owe me and it'll be
for them to prove that it was calibrated correctly in those 10 years if
they don't want to pay out. And how will they do that? They can't because
they've never done a no load test to see if the meter disc still rotates.
I win!

no, with zero evidence for your position

That isnt the case. He has the evidence
that the meter rotates with no load.

you the plaintiff lose.

Wrong, as always. The only dispute is how long its been doing that.

wrote:

On Monday, 10 December 2018 17:06:17 UTC, harry wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2018 16:48:34 UTC, tabby wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2018 16:21:21 UTC, me wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2018 10:14:58 UTC, tabby wrote:

how do you propose to prove when it went out of calibration?


It'll be like any civil case, it goes on the balance of
probabilities. So I'll make my claim for 10 years' backdated money
they owe me and it'll be for them to prove that it was calibrated
correctly in those 10 years if they don't want to pay out. And how
will they do that? They can't because they've never done a no load
test to see if the meter disc still rotates. I win!

no, with zero evidence for your position you the plaintiff lose.


NT

Drivel.
I used to help install meters as an apprentice in the Electricity Board.
An assessment is made.

feel free to tell us how you'd assess when it went out of calibration.

The assessment a judge (in common with any reasonable person) would make
is that it was quite possible the meter was out of calibration from
installation, and since not particular time since then is *more* likely,
and since no event to change the calibration can be identified, an error
from original calibration is most likely on the balance of
probabilities. Unless the electricity company can show any reason to
suppose that the problem is more recent, which seems unlikely to me
unless a whole group of meters has tended to go wrong after a certain
number of years. And they really wouldn't want to admit that, even if
it were true.

--

Roger Hayter

On Monday, 10 December 2018 20:01:52 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:

Unless the electricity company can show any reason to
suppose that the problem is more recent, which seems unlikely to me


I agree, though I wouldn't put it past them to claim that my very recent flickering lights problem is somehow meter related and therefore they're equally only very recently liable. They'd have to prove that of course.

On Monday, 10 December 2018 18:06:35 UTC, me wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2018 17:08:40 UTC, tabby wrote:
plainly it does not prove that it's been out of whack for a long period..


I don't think you understand balance of probabilities. The meter has probably been in the house 50+ years and I know for a fact it hasn't been touched in the 11 years I've been in the house. So, on the balance of probabilities, it is reasonable top assume that the meter could have been misreading for all those years

so far so good - it could have.

and so I should win.

nonsequitur

Unless you can think of what evidence the electricity board can put up to prove that it has only been misreading for a very short time? I can't think of anything.

you don't think they have experts that will offer some opinion?

On Monday, 10 December 2018 19:30:32 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:

The only dispute is how long its been doing that.

lol, I'm glad you worked that out eventually.

On Monday, 10 December 2018 20:27:56 UTC, me wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2018 20:01:52 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:

Unless the electricity company can show any reason to
suppose that the problem is more recent, which seems unlikely to me


I agree, though I wouldn't put it past them to claim that my very recent flickering lights problem is somehow meter related and therefore they're equally only very recently liable. They'd have to prove that of course.

not really, they just need to give one of their expert's opinions. Who do you think the balance of probability favours, an experienced expert or you?


NT

wrote in message
...
On Monday, 10 December 2018 18:06:35 UTC, me wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2018 17:08:40 UTC, tabby wrote:
plainly it does not prove that it's been out of whack for a long
period.


I don't think you understand balance of probabilities. The meter has
probably been in the house 50+ years and I know for a fact it hasn't been
touched in the 11 years I've been in the house. So, on the balance of
probabilities, it is reasonable top assume that the meter could have been
misreading for all those years

so far so good - it could have.

and so I should win.

nonsequitur

Unless you can think of what evidence the electricity board can put up to
prove that it has only been misreading for a very short time? I can't
think of anything.

you don't think they have experts that will offer some opinion?

But they arent very likely to allow them to admit
publicly that their meters can fail like that at any
time or that it may well have always been like that.

They are much more likely to realise that if they accept
that its been like that for as long as it has been his meter,
that that will be much cheaper than getting everyone
turning off their CU to see if the meter still rotates and
fronting up in court to get paid what they are owed.

On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 05:40:22 -0800 (PST), me
wrote:

Quick update, might be useful for future readers with the same problem.

I turned all the electricity of at the consumer unit and pulled out and forcefully reseated the main 100A supply fuse on the provider side of the meter several times. So far no more flickering lights so fingers crossed.

By the way this was prompted by comments above so thanks to those people.

Only thing now is I noticed my meter disc is still very slowly rotating even when all electricity is off! Do the problems never end?

What wattage would that imply?
--
Dave W

On Monday, 10 December 2018 21:45:46 UTC, Dave W wrote:

What wattage would that imply?
--

Not sure yet as I'll have to stand there for ages to let the disc spin a few times, time it, and extrapolate that over a year (or 10!).

But, my annual bill is only around £300. So let's say the "unused" quantity equates to 1/10 of my total electricity usage or £30, then over 10 years they'd only be liable for £300. I doubt they'd even pony up for a brief to go to court for that sort of claim. Unless they want to make a point of course.

In article d6e96210-f681-437e-b300-68a67525e6c9
@googlegroups.com, says...


Not sure yet as I'll have to stand there for ages to let the disc spin a few times, time it, and extrapolate that over a year (or 10!).

But, my annual bill is only around £300. So let's say the "unused" quantity equates to 1/10 of my total electricity usage or £30, then over 10 years they'd only be liable for £300. I doubt they'd even pony up for a brief to go to court for that sort of claim. Unless they want to make a point of course.

There is a flaw in your calculations. Your bill comprises two
parts: the standing charge and the unit charge.

You would have to pay the standing charge no matter how much
or little electricity was used, so your deduction can oonly be
calculated on the unit charge.

--

Terry

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 13:57:34 -0800 (PST), me
wrote:

On Monday, 10 December 2018 21:45:46 UTC, Dave W wrote:

What wattage would that imply?
--

Not sure yet as I'll have to stand there for ages to let the disc spin a few times, time it, and extrapolate that over a year (or 10!).

But, my annual bill is only around £300. So let's say the "unused" quantity equates to 1/10 of my total electricity usage or £30, then over 10 years they'd only be liable for £300. I doubt they'd even pony up for a brief to go to court for that sort of claim. Unless they want to make a point of course.

According to this forum
https://www.lemonfool.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=2177
there should be a label saying 166 2/3 revs/kwh or 200 revs/kwh. If
it's going to take a year for you to measure it, you will only have to
make a tiny extra payment.
--
Dave W

On Tuesday, 11 December 2018 21:16:31 UTC, Dave W wrote:

According to this forum
https://www.lemonfool.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=2177
there should be a label saying 166 2/3 revs/kwh or 200 revs/kwh.


Thanks for the link, some useful info there.

Interestingly the suppliers solution to seeing if the customer is due a repayment for the meter reading wrongly is to wait another year with the new meter fitted and see if there's a difference from previous year/s! Really bloody scientific. Because we all know that everyone uses exactly the same amount of electricity year on year don't we? Bloody mugs!