So this £200 loan will be mandatory - crazy!

Yep, it seems this £200 loan will be mandatory. Crazy! 

(P.S. impressively prompt reply)
And seems people are concerned (one of my most liked tweets)...


  1. I completely agree with you (although you worded it more politely). While I think the intention is good this is already sounding like another half baked scheme that sounds good until you look at the details.

  2. I had the same thought myself following the announcement i.e. how do I opt out.

  3. What about people who die or emigrate before paying back the loan?

  4. I'm simply refusing to take a loan. No-one can force a credit agreement on to me.

    And does the loan get tied to the property or the person? If I buy a house with a loan attached to it then I'll be requiring the seller to clear the loan before I buy the house.

  5. From what I can gather its not quite like a normal loan. Everyone gets a £200 bill credit, then for the next 5 years everyone gets a levy of £40 added to their bill.

    So if your a first time energy customer in 2023(eg leaving home, or leaving student accommodation where all bills are included) you still pay the £40 per year even though you never got the £200.

    Conversely if you get the £200 this year and then cease to be an energy customer (say you move into accommodation where all bills are included, say a care home) you never need to repay the £200

  6. It's a £200 incentive to go "off grid". Not sure it's worth it.

    Presumably this will also be consistent whether one has an electric only supply or dual fuel.

    It could be interesting to see what would happen if you're currently on a capped tariff and swap just one of the supplies to another supplier. Could you get 2 discounts? Then swap back so you only pay £200 back instead of the £400 you received...

    The other issue I have with this is that I'm on a fixed rate until July 2023, so my fuel costs won't be going up. So a rebate will simply be an interest free loan for something I don't need.

    Presumably this will require some form of legislation as my contract doesn't allow for variation.

  7. It's a very badly thought-out mess. With scant detail.

    I am a professional landlord with 18 properties in the UK.

    Will the £40 surcharge/debt repayment be

    (a) charged as a lump sum of £40 to whomsoever is the energy bill payer on a specific date each year, e.g. 1st October every year?; or

    (b) charged pro-rata at a rate of £40 divided by 12 months = £3.33 per calendar month ?

    If (a) then every property of mine which is empty on a 1st October will cost me an extra £40. Why should I pay a £40 charge for a debt taken out by one of my former tenants and which is nothing to do with me? If I were unlucky and happened to have six properties empty on 1st October then I would be charged £240 to pay off other people's debts and I would receive nothing return. I doubt this is legal.

    If (a) is to be the case then no Landlord will want an empty property on 1st October for the next five years. In that scenario a Landlord (or home owner/occupier) will always want to ensure that someone else is the bill payer on 1st October each year.

    If (b) then this is more palatable. But it is still unethical (and illegal?) to force me to pay off a debt accrued by one of my former tenants.

    A number of years ago the water companies tried to make Landlords liable for debts accrued by delinquent tenants. They failed. And rightly so.

  8. Looks like Martin Lewis is changing his mind:


    I thought it was odd he was supporting such a crazy thing last week.

  9. The scheme itself is a scam really, they will know bill payers will increase so its in effect a interest bearing loan given to the wider population the interest been the extra people paying it back. It does nothing for the poorest in society, instead what was needed was either a increase in warm home discount, or a social tariff. Plus I think longer term a rethink on getting solar panels on every home with a much more aggressive strategy.


Comments are moderated purely to filter out obvious spam, but it means they may not show immediately.

ISO8601 is wasted

Why did we even bother? Why create ISO8601? A new API, new this year, as an industry standard, has JSON fields like this "nextAccessTim...