Posts Tagged ‘home’

Government faces heat on fuel poverty

Tuesday, June 9th, 2009

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/jun/10/fuel-poverty-energy

Select committee claims ministers are failing millions of vulnerable families and demands urgent action on fuel poverty

The government was today urged to offer more help to the millions of families in fuel poverty due to rising energy prices.

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs select committee said ministers had failed to meet statutory obligations to end fuel poverty and called on them to set up an action plan to help people struggling with energy bills as a matter of urgency.

It warned the resources available for tackling fuel poverty were “inadequate and getting worse”. Anyone spending at least 10% of their income on heating and lighting their home is deemed to be living in fuel poverty. In a series of recommendations, the select committee called for the winter fuel payment to be no longer given to people paying higher-rate tax. Instead it wants the money to fund energy efficiency programmes aimed at helping the fuel poor and vulnerable households.

It also called on the government to consolidate its range of energy efficiency programmes into one comprehensive scheme to upgrade all homes in England, with the improvements delivered by local authorities.

Committee chairman Michael Jack, said: “We need action and clarity – not further consultation – to tackle the three elements that drive fuel poverty: prices, income and energy efficiency levels.

“The government must act swiftly to bring forward practical measures before next winter, using technologies that are already well understood, to help the millions of households that remain in fuel poverty.”

The committee said the Warm Front programme, the government’s main scheme to help vulnerable households cut their energy bills, should have its budget increased and that it should be extended to include all hard-to-treat properties.

It recommended a central budget be created into which energy companies pay their carbon emissions reduction target contributions, so the cash could be pooled with money from other programmes to fund home upgrades.

Energy regulator Ofgem should be ordered to ensure energy companies tell customers about social tariffs and who is eligible for them, to help increase competition for certain customers, such as those who use pre-payment meters, it said.

Jonathan Stearn, energy expert for Consumer Focus, said it was “outrageous” that there were still more than 5 million vulnerable households struggling to afford to heat and power their homes.

He added: “The government’s energy efficiency schemes are simply not up to scratch. Immediate investment is needed in a radical and co-ordinated action plan if we are to lift millions of the poorest pensioners, families and disabled people out of fuel poverty and cut carbon emissions.”

Michelle Mitchell, charity director for Age Concern and Help the Aged, said: “The report sounds a loud wake-up call for the government, whose strategy to tackle fuel poverty is miles away from reaching its targets.

“Ministers should immediately set out to implement the committee’s recommendations, reviewing the Warm Front Scheme and producing a new ‘road map’ to bring home a more ambitious energy efficiency plan.

“Focusing the winter fuel payment on fuel-poor households could give an edge to the government’s strategy to tackle fuel poverty, as long as the system required to implement it is simple and workable.”

Campaigners say the number of householders in fuel poverty has been one of Labour’s greatest failures. In March last year, its own advisers, the Fuel Poverty Advisory Group, said the government appeared to have given up trying to hit its legally binding target to reduce fuel poverty. The group criticised ministers for cutting the grants programme aimed at those in fuel poverty by a quarter during the comprehensive spending review.

This, it said, was despite the Treasury receiving significantly higher VAT receipts on the back of gas and electricity prices which have doubled in recent years.

  • Energy bills
  • Household bills
  • Poverty
  • Consumer affairs
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Mortgage protection could become mis-selling scandal

Tuesday, June 9th, 2009

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jun/09/mortgage-insurance-warning

Don’t cut protection in face of rising unemployment, regulator tells insurers

City watchdog Lord Turner attacked insurers today for threatening to water down unemployment protection on mortgages, warning he would investigate any attempt to push through price rises due to the recession.

The chairman of the Financial Services Authority warned the industry it risked repeating the mistakes of past scandals such as the mis-selling of endowment mortgages.

Concern has grown that insurers plan to increase prices for customers with mortgage payment protection insurance and restrict the scope of policies to reduce payout costs, ahead of an expected surge in unemployment in the second half of the year.

He told an audience of insurance executives at a conference organised by the Association of British Insurers that the industry would provoke an angry response from customers, which the regulator would need to take seriously.

“Whilst it is natural for the industry to respond to changes in risk, this raises issues with both unfair contract terms, disclosure and our ‘treating customers fairly’ principles,” he said.

“How many consumers would have taken up this cover if they had known that at the very time they needed the protection the most, the price of it could significantly increase or the amount of cover decrease?

“This is an area where insurers must expect us to intervene to address poor consumer outcomes. And more than that they must think strategically about the impact of their actions on the sector’s reputation.”

The warning is understood to follow moves by the Post Office to raise prices on its mortgage protection policies that cover payments during periods of unemployment or after accidents and during long-term sickness. In April the Post Office gave 30 days notice that it also planned to reduce the level of cover from a maximum £2,500 a month to £1,500. Claimants will also have to wait for 90 days after stopping work before they receive any money. The delay was previously 30 days.

Turner said he was aware the number of people with the insurance had fallen in recent years. In 2005 there were 2.5m policies covering just over a fifth of the 11.6m mortgages in the UK. By 2007 MPPI policies had fallen to 1.2m and 700,000 in 2008.

He said: “While mortgage payment protection insurance has not previously been a major focus of our concerns, it may become one in an economic downturn. As the likelihood of unemployment-related claims increases, some insurers are responding by increasing premiums or reducing cover for existing policyholders.”

The FSA and the Competition Commission have spent the last four years investigating accusations of profiteering by lenders that sell payment protection insurance on loans and credit cards. Last year the commission ruled that selling practices were so bad that it banned the sale of the most profitable product until at least a fortnight after the purchase of a credit card or loan. The industry appealed, but was unsuccessful.

Turner said he would not hesitate to repeat the enforcement measures on insurers that contravened rules on the sale of mortgage payment protection.

He said: “The recent problems may have been primarily in the banking industry and that is where the most significant changes are needed, but in an era of heightened public expectations that the FSA will identify and prevent major problems from recurring, we need to reinforce our capability across all high impact firms.

“And we need to respond to people’s expectations that we will be more forceful in pursuing enforcement against reckless or abusive practices which cause customers harm.

“We certainly need to ensure that our responses are proportionate and are focused on what matters: that they are outcome focused. And we will also continue to look for market solutions where they are available, such as in addressing contract certainty and commission disclosure.”

  • Regulators
  • Insurance industry
  • Mortgages
  • Insurance
  • Payment protection insurance
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Mobility aid sales under fire

Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009

Consumer body says complaints are up 8% on same period last year

The government body Consumer Direct today issued a fresh warning about the “sharp practices” of some companies and operators selling mobility scooters and orthopaedic aids, following a sharp rise in consumer complaints.

The advice service, managed by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT), received more than 1,500 complaints about mobility aid purchases in the first four months of this year, up 8% on the same period last year. Many complaints related to defective products and customer service issues, while almost a quarter were about sales and business practices. The latter included allegations that traders have duped consumers by making misleading claims.

Callers complained about salespeople engaging in high-pressure sales tactics, spending several hours in their homes, and in some cases falsely claiming to be working for social services, the Department for Work and Pensions or the NHS.

Michele Shambrook, operations manager for Consumer Direct, said: “Mobility aids like these can provide welcome independence and relief to the sick, elderly and disabled, but prospective buyers need to guard against the tactics of some rogue operators.”

She said many of these products were sold to people in their own homes where they could be particularly vulnerable to high-pressure selling techniques. “It’s worth remembering that if you agree to buy something in the home that you later regret, you will have cancellation rights,” she added.

A spokesman for Consumer Direct said the rise in complaints was probably linked to a corresponding surge in sales.

New laws that came into force in October 2008 in most cases give consumers seven days to cancel contracts entered into in the home. Other regulations introduced in May last year prohibit traders from treating consumers unfairly, misleading them through acts or omissions, or subjecting them to aggressive practices such as high-pressure selling techniques. Traders are also required to leave premises when asked. Breach of the new regulations is an offence punishable by up to two years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.

A number of mobility aid companies are being investigated by local authority Trading Standards services.

Prospective buyers are advised to consider using companies that are members of the British Healthcare Trades Association (BHTA), a trade body working towards official OFT approval of its consumer code of practice. BHTA member companies offer consumers safeguards that go beyond those required by consumer protection law, including access to a free independent redress scheme should things go wrong.

  • Consumer affairs
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Work: Women of an uncertain age

Friday, May 22nd, 2009

Two women reveal how age crept into their working lives: one having to prove sceptics wrong by setting up her own business; the other coping with an office of twentysomethings

Whether it’s in the workplace or a labour ward, prejudice and discrimination can be part and parcel of daily life for women of a ­”certain age”.

Elizabeth Adeney, a 66-year-old who runs a manufacturing business in Suffolk found herself in this week’s opinion columns after disclosing she is eight month’s pregnant and set to become the oldest woman in Britain to give birth.

So as a new report warns that older workers are more at risk of losing their jobs in this recession, we asked two working women how they rise above the banter, innuendo and skepticism.

Simeone Salik, 66 started her own company two years ago when her husband retired. “Some people like to work; others can’t wait to stop. I belong to the first category. And I wasn’t about to let a small thing like my age stop me when I spotted a great business opportunity not long after my 65th birthday,” she said.

“After leaving school at 18, I had a job and helped to support my then boyfriend – now my husband of 46 years – through university by working as assistant to the PR for Liberty’s of Regent Street and then with one of the first standalone PR agencies, Leslie Frewin. I then worked in the PR department of Masius & Wynne Williams, a large advertising agency, until my children began to arrive. All this was in the 1960s, when women stayed at home to look after their children and it was more unusual to leave them while you worked.

“My husband, an optometrist with several practices by now, was very involved in the administration and running of his business, so I was able to help him after work and at the weekends and learned how a business should be run properly – minimum expenses and maximum profitability, with good customer relations and after-sales service.

“But when the first of our three daughters went to university, I realised that very soon we would be ‘empty-nesters’ and encouraged my husband to sell his business and work from our home in his professional capacity. I became the receptionist and dispenser.

“As his retirement age loomed, I once again wanted a project and, more by luck than judgment, found a plot of land and we built our retirement bungalow. This took us three years to accomplish. After leaving ordering the curtains until the very end, I realised that there was a real gap in the market for temporary, inexpensive blinds, and asked a designer called Janice Dalton if she wanted to go into business with me to fill the gap. My husband, who had never wanted me to work before, was very supportive but my family was sceptical – after all, I was just their mother and at 65 probably not in the 21st century at all. What did I know?

“It took us more than 18 months to set up our business and after an introduction to Dominic Lawrence, who was sourcing the blinds from the far east, we asked him to join us as an equal partner.

“We built a website and even did our own video, with Dom shooting, Janice demonstrating and lots of laughter. We launched the website in November 2008, and to our surprise, started little by little to get orders from around the UK and even from the Irish Republic and Spain.

“One of the things I had learned from working with my husband was that if you keep your costs down you don’t have to borrow from the bank and, in fact, our set up costs were funded three ways from our individual savings or earnings. We spent no more than £3,500 each and the stock was ordered with a 60-day payment deferment.

“All this time the ‘credit crunch’ was becoming more and more real and suddenly banks, which had formerly been the rock of our society, were failing. We could not have launched a business at a worse time.

“However, our blinds, which are cheap, instant and temporary, are just the job for a recessionary period. My PR seemed to be working well and we had some really nice mentions in both newspapers and magazines.

“One Manchester paper called us ‘idea of the week’ and the Dragons’ Den production team in Manchester, who must have seen the story, contacted us to suggest we fill in an application form. At first we thought it a crazy idea, but after much discussion decided to send the form in.

“We were asked to go to pitch and have a screen test at the BBC studios in London and eventually after quite a few weeks, were asked to go to ­Pinewood to appear in the Den. Dom, to his credit, insisted that we rehearsed, rehearsed and researched so that we would be ready to field any questions.

“On the day, I didn’t feel too nervous. At my age, all I was worried about was making a fool of myself and giving my family ammunition to laugh at me forever more. We pitched for over an hour and were really happy when James Caan and Duncan Bannatyne decided to give us investment.

“They have guided us on a weekly basis and have helped us, by involvement with their other investments, with our distribution and the admin.

“By association with them, Blindsinabox is now a ‘real’ company and my eight grandchildren think I am a really ‘cool’ grandmother, especially when teachers in their schools tell them that they have bought the blind, and is it their grandmother they have seen on the TV?

“It has changed my life and I would recommend anyone who thinks they are too old to change or to start a new career to go for it. You will never regret it and will learn lots of new things, like using your BlackBerry to text your family: “C U 2NITE. SPK L8TR”.

Carol Cooke, 57 is a public accountability manager for the BBC.

“Last week I opened an email from a young woman inviting us to celebrate what she called ‘a significant’ birthday, by eating the chocolate cake on her desk. She was 25. As I mooched over, I realised I was the oldest woman in the office. I was surrounded by babies – I wanted to tie pelican bibs round their necks, and warn them about choking on crumbs.

“The Pensions Act decrees that I can’t retire at 60 but have to keep going a bit longer. I enjoy work but when I sit down at my computer, I am surrounded by people barely out of their babygrows, whose voices are still breaking, and whose chosen daytime drink is fizzy pop.

“Being the oldest woman in the office is odd. How did it happen? Was I not paying attention? One moment I was one of the kids, going out after work and drinking a lot. The next minute I am quietly responsible, find it difficult to function after three glasses of wine the night before, don’t want to go to clubs – even if I could find one without my glasses – and look forward to an evening self-medicating on Desperate Housewives.

“My terms of reference are different. I complimented one young woman on the flower in her hair. She explained she was ‘channelling Katy Perry’. I gave a knowing laugh and rushed off to ask the child sitting at the next desk for guidance.

“Then there’s exercise. What does the oldest woman in the office do when people are putting on running shoes and tiny T-shirts? And if I am prepared to put on shorts and just accept I look tubby, I get half way round the run and then collapse. I love the three-gate route – at least you get a break while someone opens the damn things.

“It’s not just the running kit. I have a penchant for clothes with bits of glitter, but conclude that if everyone around me looks as if they are back-packing round Europe during their lunch hour, then glittery tops are passé. The backpack look is popular but you have to possess flawless skin and swinging blonde hair to look good in tones of grey and khaki.

“When I wrote about my ‘oldest women’ problems on a BBC webpage, I received some great responses. One woman pointed out that ‘the traditional cauliflower head perm of our mother’s generation has been replaced by the blonde bob which tops the spreading torso’. Yep.

“Another woman classed herself as a ‘transitional woman’ but found the thought of the transition to being retired and, keeping your nose out of things, too difficult to imagine.

“So yes, I’m on Facebook, and listen to music via YouTube, but choosing the right clothes, and knowing what the fresh-faced babies working the urban guerrilla-look are talking about is something the Pensions Act forgot. And that’s a major omission.”

  • Discrimination at work
  • Work & careers
  • Older people
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Insurance price hike is daylight robbery

Friday, May 15th, 2009

Home insurers want to raise rates by 20% – but with a few simple steps you can cut your costs, says Patrick Collinson

The warning letter arrived from Halifax Home Insurance a fortnight ago. It said my new annual premium for building and contents cover would be £553.67 – an 18% increase on the £467.84 I paid last year – and that it would be introducing an excess of £250 for water-related claims.

After years of flat, or falling, home insurance premiums, the industry is pushing through big increases,­ fearful of the impact burglaries and the recession­ will have on claims.

But there is no reason to accept an insurer raiding your wallet even before the burglars get there. The home insurance industry is notorious­ for ripping off “loyal” customers with annual increases that bear no relation to underlying costs. Here are three ways to beat them at their own game.

• Obtain a quote from one of the many comparison sites such as moneysupermarket.com or confused.com.

• Go back to your existing firm as a “new customer” – discounts are huge.

• Cut out overinsured areas.

I did all three and am paying no more than last year – with extra cover.

My first stop was confused.com and moneysupermarket.com. They found two cheaper quotes – £509 from Liverpool Victoria­ and £512 from the AA.

As it was a saving of just £40, I thought I’d go back to Halifax and see what I could knock off its quote. Intriguingly, just before my renewal date, it offered a £50 “thank you” if I returned to them (if you haven’t got it, the promotional code is NF97).

I hadn’t actually left, but clearly they were getting nervous. I rang Halifax a day after my policy had expired and did not mention either that I was very recently a customer, or that they had already quoted me £553.67. I opted for fully comprehensive at £543.72 – with the £50 cashback it dropped to £493.72. I cut it further by lopping out cover for one of the bicycles that almost never leaves the home. Result? £467.72 – or 12p less than last year, but that’s only part of the saving.

On a like-for-like basis, with a quote that included only the more limited cover I had last year, the price would have been around £360 – I could have cut my costs by a quarter. But I decided to include “home emergency” cover for an extra £50. I currently pay HomeServe £89.96 for a separate policy – and since it’s the same company Halifax uses, it was a no-brainer.

I also added in personal belongings and legal insurance. The renewal quote said I could add in personal belongings for an extra £85.37. But on the phone, the saleswoman quoted £33. So I took it – feeling angry that they tried to over-charge in the first place. Before accepting the final quote, I checked out Tesco. I had received an email promising a 45% discount for new online customers. But it came back with a quote of £658.35 for its “Tesco Finest” policy, which broadly equates with the Halifax. As that includes the 45% discount, one can only assume that Tesco’s standard prices are rather steep.

What conclusions should one draw? Prices seem set at whatever insurance companies can get away with. The ­special offer deals are barely worth bothering with, and existing customers are there to be fleeced. If that sounds a little tough, consider­ what happened to Jo Symons and her husband, Ray. Year after year they accepted the premiums Prudential charged for their three-bed home. When the bill hit £1,125, the couple, from Kingston upon Thames in Surrey, looked for a new insurer using moneysupermarket.com. Halifax offered near-identical cover for just £150.96 – a massive saving of £974.

“I was flabbergasted. It’s astonishing we were paying so much and missing out on such a good alternative,”­ says Symons, who will be spending the money saved on a family holiday in Crete.

The phrase “shop around” is overused by financial commentators, but it is never truer when said about home insurance.

p.collinson@guardian.co.uk


How much should you pay?

We asked moneysupermarket.com to give us an indication of which providers are cheapest around the country for buildings and contents cover, with an excess of £100, on a three-bed household:

London

Property in W4, market value £196,000

Sheilas’ Wheels £130.02

esure £134.80

direct choice £161.06*

Churchill £164.85

autonet home insurance £172.57

* Excess £50

Leeds

Property in LS18, market value £147,000

Churchill £112.35

1stQuote £114.82

Sheilas’ Wheels £123.39

esure £124.98

Swinton £126.02

Manchester

Property in M20, market value £156,000

Churchill £148.05

direct choice £153.26

AXA £154.25

Cover Direct £155.20

autonet home insurance £157.82

Bristol

Property in BS2, market value £206,000

Budget £122.18

AXA £142.72

direct choice £143.72

Swinton £148.20

Cover Direct £148.41

Edinburgh

Property in EH4, market value £200,000

Churchill £106.05

1stQuote £108.71

insure.co.uk £112.63

homequotedirect £114.69

Sheilas’ Wheels £116.04

Source: moneysupermarket.com. Information correct as of 12 May 2009

  • Home insurance
  • Insurance
  • Property
  • Consumer affairs
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Ryanair deserts passengers in the desert

Friday, May 15th, 2009

Passengers stranded in Morocco were refused compensation by the airline after it claimed it had notified them of the change by email – less than 24-hours earlier

How would you feel if you turned up at the airport to fly home after a holiday abroad only to find that the airline had, at the last minute and without telling you, brought forward the flight by an hour, and the plane had left?

What, then, if you subsequently had to spend £450 and endure a night in the departure lounge at Gatwick airport, just to get home – and were later denied­ the promised compensation after­ the airline argued it shouldn’t have to pay it because it had sent a warning email 22 hours before the plane was due to leave?

This was the experience of Glasgow-based postgrad student Elizabeth Reilly who along with 20 other passengers watched in dismay as the plane she was booked on departed Marrakech airport, in Morocco, flew off without her.

Sadly there are no prizes for guessing the airline involved. It was Ryanair.

Reilly’s unfortunate story started when she arrived at Marrakech airport at the end of March to fly back to Luton airport. Despite turning up an hour and a half before the allotted departure time of 10am, the board showed the plane was in fact leaving at 9am – and the gates were closed. It later emerged that Ryanair had changed the flight time 22 hours earlier, only notifying passengers … by email.

“There were 20 of us all in the same boat. Needless to say no one from Ryanair was on hand – it was left to a local agent who, after a long wait, rang Ryanair’s head office. We were told the flights had been changed and we should make alternative arrangements and submit a claim for compensation when we got home.”

Reilly says the left-behind passengers started scrabbling to get on alternative flights. After a long wait she was able to get on an evening easyJet flight to Gatwick at a cost of £345. Having missed her connecting flight to Glasgow, she was forced to spend an uncomfortable night in the terminal, and to buy another flight the next day, at a further cost of £92. “As soon as I got home I sent off my claim expecting to be reimbursed, but was told that because Ryanair had notified the passengers of the change, no compensation would be paid. The idea that people who were on holiday should be responsible to check their home emails every hour is crazy – especially in a place like Marrakech where finding the internet is not the easiest. Ironically, I had checked them the night before, but there was no message then. They could have easily phoned or texted me on the mobile number I gave when I made the booking, but they didn’t,” says the trainee psychotherapist.

She says the flight time change may have been because the UK clocks had gone forward the previous­ day.

“I’m a frequent flyer but never have I taken a flight where the departure/take-off time was changed as a result of a time change at the destination. Flights always go by the local time of departure – all other flights travelling to the UK – Air Maroc, EeasyjJet and Thomson – were not affected by this change. They were happy to just abandon us to our fate,” she says.

A spokesman for Ryanair said the passengers had been sent a text warning them of the time change, but claimed Reilly had failed to supply a mobile number at the time of booking – something that is hotly denied by the student.

But after Guardian Money intervened, Ryanair performed a rare U-turn, and has agreed to pay her compensation. A spokesman said: “An IT systems error [meant] a small number of passengers failed to receive our initial­ schedule change email.

“Our customer care agent was unaware of our IT systems error when replying to this passenger, and therefore denied compensation. However, as our system failed to contact this passenger our customer service team will now contact her to bring this matter to a close. Ryanair apologises to this passenger for any inconvenience caused and asks passengers to ensure they correctly enter their mobile phone number during the booking process so that Ryanair can inform them of any changes to their flight schedule.”

Since then, Reilly has been offered­ €400 (£360) she was due under the EU?compensation rules. Ryanair also offered to pay her the extra ­expenses that came out of missing its flight.

If Ryanair had refused to pay compensation, passengers would have been advised to take the airline to the Irish small claims court at courts.ie to enforce their rights to compensation under the EU air passenger rules.

Or they could lodge claims with euclaim.co.uk, but this is a private company that will take a slice of whatever compensation it achieves.

  • Consumer affairs
  • Travel insurance
  • Insurance
  • Ryanair
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Smart meters for all homes

Monday, May 11th, 2009

Suppliers and customers will save up to £3.6bn over 20 years as electricity is used more efficiently and estimated bills eliminated

Every home in the UK must be fitted with a “smart meter” by 2020 to reduce energy use and eliminate estimated bills, under plans revealed by the government today.

The new meters track real-time energy usage and send data about consumption in households and small businesses direct to utility companies. They could save suppliers and customers £2.5-£3.6bn over the next 20 years, according to the government, but will cost more than double this to install.

Launching a new consultation today on how the smart meters should be introduced, the Department for Energy and Climate Change (Decc) claimed the compulsory scheme will be the biggest electricity and gas smart metering project in the world.

Ed Miliband, the energy and climate change secretary, said: “The meters most of us have in our homes were designed for a different age, before climate change. Now we need to get smarter with our energy. This is a big project affecting 26 million homes, and several million businesses, so it’s important we design a system that brings best value to everyone involved.”

The cost of replacing today’s meters by the end of 2020 is expected to reach £8.11bn under the government’s preferred plan, with utility companies paying for new equipment and installation. Although they may pass on that cost to consumers through higher tariffs, the Energy Retail Association — which represents the major electricity and gas companies — said that smart meters will be “cost-neutral” to customers because of savings to its members through the abolition of meter reading and bill estimation costs.

Smart meters will not only see the end of meter readers and estimated bills, but could make it easier for utilities to offer sophisticated Economy 7-style tariffs based on what time of day energy is used. Such “demand management” could theoretically smooth out electricity demand , reducing the number of energy-wasting power stations currently on standby to cope with sudden peaks in demand. EDF said in a statement that smart meters will enable it to offer new pricing structures to support energy efficiency.

Three plans are under consideration for how the smart meters should be introduced. The first sees utilities take on all aspects of smart metering including installations and data management, a second — the government’s preferred model — has energy suppliers responsible for installation and maintenance, but with a third party handling the energy data and communication. A third “fully centralised” scenario envisages setting up a new organisation, separate from government and the utilities, to oversee the installation of the smart meters and data management. That new agency would be coordinated nationally, with regional franchises installing the equipment.

Phil Bentley, managing director of British Gas, said: “Smart meters will lead to the single greatest revolution in energy use since British Gas converted all the nation’s homes to natural gas in the 1970s. We have the largest smart meter trial in the country, and we know this technology has helped put our customers back in control of their energy usage, helping them use less energy, cut carbon emissions and save money.

“Smart meters will also ensure our homes are as energy efficient as possible, and they will open the gateway to new technologies for renewable electricity generation in the home — and the ’smart grid’ of the future.”

Garry Felgate, chief executive of the Energy Retail Association, said: “We’re delighted that the government has finally announced its commitment to enable energy companies to put smart meters in every home. Quite simply keeping your existing meters is like sending a telegram instead of installing wireless broadband. However, we are still waiting for more detail on the meters themselves and the timetable for the project.”

The exact features of the smart meters will be decided during the consultation over the next three months. The government’s proposals say that, in addition to sending data to utilities, the meters should be ready to work with real-time displays — wireless screens showing energy use that can be placed in a living room or around the house.

Smart meters should also be able to “dynamically” manage the electricity used by domestic appliances. This could mean switching off refrigerators for a few minutes at times of high demand, or charging up electric vehicles at night when demand is low. A government report last year suggested such technology, which would smooth out national peaks and troughs in electricity use, could save 2 million tonnes of CO2 a year.

Smart meter trials are already under way around the country through energy companies including British Gas and Npower, and smaller suppliers such as First Utility already supply smart meters as standard. The first smart meters installed under the government’s new plans are expected to arrive in homes and businesses in 2012.

  • Energy
  • Energy efficiency
  • Carbon emissions
  • Energy bills
  • Household bills
  • Consumer affairs
  • Home improvements
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Britons rely on inheritance to help fund retirement

Tuesday, May 5th, 2009

• 31% of Britons hope a windfall will pay for their retirement
• Falling markets and house prices endanger potential funds

Nearly one in three British adults is planning to fund their retirement with an inheritance that could easily fail to materialise, according to research published today by Friends Provident.

More than half of Britons admit being ill prepared for retirement, and 31% expect to solve the problem by inheriting money and property from their parents and other relatives. Of those who are relying on an inheritance to help fund their retirement, 36% expect it to fund more than half their income.?

Despite falling house prices and a turbulent stockmarket, 44% of adults are unconcerned about the effect of the recession on their retirement savings or potential inheritance. They still expect to be left a bequest worth an average of £64,000, although only 14% of adults have actually discussed inheritance with their families and are clear about how much they will receive.

The findings are backed by similar research released by the Equity Release Solicitors’ Alliance (ERSA), which found that only 12% of adults surveyed had discussed the future of the family home should a relative pass away, and that 50% are unaware of the value of the estate being left behind.

Worryingly, 30% of all UK pensioners die intestate each year, meaning their estate will be distributed by the government according to the rules of intestacy. Of those questioned by ERSA, 45% believed incorrectly that if they died intestate all their assets would be left to their surviving spouse.

Futures in jeopardy

The danger of relying on an inheritance to fund retirement is exacerbated by increased life expectancy resulting in many families having two generations of retirees. The research showed that 20% of people aged 66 or over also have parents who are still living, and spending.

Martin Palmer, head of corporate pensions marketing at Friends Provident, said: “People may still hope that an inheritance will fund their retirement years, but our research shows this can no longer be relied upon. And with more than half of Britons admitting to not saving enough for their retirement, their future comfort is in jeopardy.

“With an overreliance on property, the credit crunch has wiped thousands of pounds off the value of imminent inheritances, and a lack of communication within families around inheritance could also cause a reality or expectation gap.”

Palmer’s comments are backed up by figures from equity release firms, which show older homeowners are drawing increasingly large amounts from the value of their homes to repay debt and fund their own retirement.

Last week, a trade body for equity release firms said there had been a 16% increase in the average equity release loan size over the first quarter of this year compared to the same period in 2008, from £41,718 to £48,287. This indicates that at a time when property values have fallen customers are borrowing a greater percentage of their property’s value.

This may in part be explained by the existence of debt that runs beyond the end of a borrower’s working life. Last month, research by specialist equity release adviser Key Retirement Solutions showed a 39% increase in older homeowners using equity release to repay mortgage debt.

Its figures, based on 3,826 people aged 65 or over who released equity from their home with Key last year, showed the 70 and over age group carried the greatest burden of mortgage debt with loans averaging £48,442, compared to the 65-69 age group with average mortgage debt of £34,27.

• Resurrect your retirement prospects with our Rescue your pension series, and find out how much you will have in retirement with our pension calculator

  • Family finances
  • Consumer affairs
  • Savings
  • Investments
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Britons rely on inheritance to help fund retirement

Tuesday, May 5th, 2009

• 31% of Britons hope a windfall will pay for their retirement
• Falling markets and house prices endanger potential funds

Nearly one in three British adults is planning to fund their retirement with an inheritance that could easily fail to materialise, according to research published today by Friends Provident.

More than half of Britons admit being ill prepared for retirement, and 31% expect to solve the problem by inheriting money and property from their parents and other relatives. Of those who are relying on an inheritance to help fund their retirement, 36% expect it to fund more than half their income.?

Despite falling house prices and a turbulent stockmarket, 44% of adults are unconcerned about the effect of the recession on their retirement savings or potential inheritance. They still expect to be left a bequest worth an average of £64,000, although only 14% of adults have actually discussed inheritance with their families and are clear about how much they will receive.

The findings are backed by similar research released by the Equity Release Solicitors’ Alliance (ERSA), which found that only 12% of adults surveyed had discussed the future of the family home should a relative pass away, and that 50% are unaware of the value of the estate being left behind.

Worryingly, 30% of all UK pensioners die intestate each year, meaning their estate will be distributed by the government according to the rules of intestacy. Of those questioned by ERSA, 45% believed incorrectly that if they died intestate all their assets would be left to their surviving spouse.

Futures in jeopardy

The danger of relying on an inheritance to fund retirement is exacerbated by increased life expectancy resulting in many families having two generations of retirees. The research showed that 20% of people aged 66 or over also have parents who are still living, and spending.

Martin Palmer, head of corporate pensions marketing at Friends Provident, said: “People may still hope that an inheritance will fund their retirement years, but our research shows this can no longer be relied upon. And with more than half of Britons admitting to not saving enough for their retirement, their future comfort is in jeopardy.

“With an overreliance on property, the credit crunch has wiped thousands of pounds off the value of imminent inheritances, and a lack of communication within families around inheritance could also cause a reality or expectation gap.”

Palmer’s comments are backed up by figures from equity release firms, which show older homeowners are drawing increasingly large amounts from the value of their homes to repay debt and fund their own retirement.

Last week, a trade body for equity release firms said there had been a 16% increase in the average equity release loan size over the first quarter of this year compared to the same period in 2008, from £41,718 to £48,287. This indicates that at a time when property values have fallen customers are borrowing a greater percentage of their property’s value.

This may in part be explained by the existence of debt that runs beyond the end of a borrower’s working life. Last month, research by specialist equity release adviser Key Retirement Solutions showed a 39% increase in older homeowners using equity release to repay mortgage debt.

Its figures, based on 3,826 people aged 65 or over who released equity from their home with Key last year, showed the 70 and over age group carried the greatest burden of mortgage debt with loans averaging £48,442, compared to the 65-69 age group with average mortgage debt of £34,27.

• Resurrect your retirement prospects with our Rescue your pension series, and find out how much you will have in retirement with our pension calculator

  • Family finances
  • Consumer affairs
  • Savings
  • Investments
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Ten of the best … ways to cut the cost of pet ownership

Wednesday, April 29th, 2009

It’s tough times for pets too, as more and more are being abandoned by their cash-strapped owners. Hilary Osborne offers some tips on holding down the cost of caring for our furry friends

The recession is proving bad news for many pets. According to the RSPCA, a squeeze on household budgets has led to an upturn in abandoned animals with more than 30 pets a day being dumped by their owners.

While some people will find their budgets no longer stretch to accommodate a pet, there are ways to reduce the cost of caring for your furry friend.

1. Buy food in bulk

Cut the cost of pet food by as much as 50% by buying in bulk. Generally speaking, the bigger the package of food you can buy the cheaper it will be. At Sainsbury’s, for example, a 1kg bag of Iams cat food costs £4.98, while a 3kg bag weighs in at £13.38. Go online to Pet-supermarket.co.uk and you can order 15kg for £45.76 – that’s just £3.05 a kilo. It’s a similar deal with fish food. At Sainsbury’s 100g of Tetra Pond Floating Foodsticks costs £2.41. At Pet-supermarket 3kg of the food is on offer at £27.99 – that’s 93p per 100g. Even when the sticks are full price, at £42.99 for 3kg, that works out at £1.43 a 100g. (Use discount codes on Petsupermarket and you can cut the cost of a big shop by more.) Do look out for special offers, though, as sometimes these make it cheaper to buy smaller packs of food.

2. Choose a mongrel

If you haven’t yet got a pet but want one, don’t choose one that costs a fortune to buy and care for. A pedigree animal will not only cost more up front than one of less certain heritage, it could be more expensive to care for if it is breed that is prone to ill health too. Research done by Sainsbury’s Bank a couple of years ago suggested it could cost up to a third more a year to care for a pedigree pet than a moggy or mongrel. More recently, the bank has also compared the cost of treatment of various breeds of cats and dogs. It found rottweiler owners spend 60% more than owners of west highland whites on treatment, paying an average of £441 a time compared with £271. If you want a pure breed pet, you might want to find one that is cheap to treat.

3. Don’t rush to go to the vet

Clearly, if your dog has been run over you shouldn’t hang around, but minor ailments sometimes cure themselves. You wouldn’t visit the doctor at the first sign of a runny nose, so why seek expensive help as soon as your cat or dog sneezes? Research done by More Than suggests unnecessary emergency vet appointments cost UK pet owners £118m a year, made up of vets’ fees, travel costs and lost annual leave.

4. … but keep jabs up to date

Paying to get your pet vaccinated against nasty illnesses means a hit on your wallet every year, but not doing so could prove a false economy. If your animal falls ill with something it could have been vaccinated against and you don’t have insurance, you could end up paying far more than the price of the jabs. And even if you do have insurance, some policies will refuse to pay out if an illness could have been prevented with vaccination.

5. Go online for cheaper medication

Instead of buying lotions and potions from the vet, order them online. Websites like Bestpet.co.uk sell prescription and non-prescription medicines for up to 50% less than the price you will usually pay. The flea treatment Frontline For Cats, for example, costs £18 on the site – at least £10 less than at most vets, and p&p is free. Another site, Petremedies.co.uk, offers vouchers for £3 off purchases of £20 or more if you subscribe to its mailing list.

6. Buy pet insurance

One of the most expensive parts of having a pet can be caring for it if it falls ill or has an accident. According to figures from the RSPCA, almost 50% of UK pets will require treatment at some point this year at an average cost of £220. Pet insurance covers you against some of the costs of emergency trips to the vet, as well as offering a pay out if your pet needs ongoing treatment. Many policies also include legal expenses if your pet causes injury to a third party – for example, should your dog bite the postman – the cost of advertising if you lose your pet and the cost of a reward for its return. It’s an extra cost each month, or year – depending on how you choose to pay for your policy – but could save you hundreds of pounds in the long run.

7. … and shop around for it

Premiums are based on the type of pet you have, its age, where you live and other factors that will determine how likely it is to get lost or fall ill. But there can be a massive difference in how much you are charged. For example, Animal Friends quotes £76.34 a year to cover a one-year-old moggy living in Holmfirth in Yorkshire, while M&S quotes £91.68 for the same pet. As with other types of insurance, you could be able to cut your premiums by taking on a bigger excess. The best way to compare deals is to use a comparison site like ours. But make sure you read the small print as the cheapest policy might not offer the best deal. Some policies cover an ailment for 12 months only, or limit the amount they will pay out. If your pet is prescribed medication for the rest of its life, you could be picking up the tab when the cover runs out, so it may be worth paying slightly more for a policy that offers ongoing cover.

8. Form a cat-sitting circle, or get a house-sitter

The cost of getting someone in to feed your pet while you’re away can be sky-high, with some cat-sitters charging £15 a day to feed and spend “quality time” with your pet. Instead, find friends and neighbours who also have pets and help each other out. If you are going on a longer holiday, consider getting a housesitter in. Using a professional service such as Homesitters.co.uk will probably only be cheaper than kennels if you have more than one animal, but they will make your home looked lived in and so less attractive to burglars.

9. Buy toys and bedding from the charity shop

You don’t need to buy expensive toys for your pet. Sad-looking toys at carboot sales or in charity shops are a cheap alternative to expensive pet toys. Similarly, rather than buying purpose-made blankets and towels for pets, buy secondhand items or recycle your own. Your dog is unlikely to object to being dried down with a greying, fraying bath towel you no longer want hanging in your bathroom.

10. Have your pet spayed/neutered

Make sure you don’t end up with more mouths to feed by taking steps to prevent your animal reproducing. (Obviously, this is one for larger pets, not the likes of goldfish.) If you are on a low income, you might be able to get a subsidy. Cats Protection offers financial assistance with neutering to cat owners who are full-time students or on means-tested benefits, while the Blue Cross offers subsidised treatment for pets whose owners are on benefits, extending beyond neutering and spaying.

  • Family finances
  • Pet insurance
  • Consumer affairs
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds