• Hi Woz and Hi Marc,
    Wow Woz.... I think I can confirm that you are definitely OCD...LOL
    I can really see that you've put in a load of time and effort into your spreadsheet ⌛
    I also use the calorific conversation that is shown on the statement/bill to predict and back check the gas calculations. So my prediction is usually very close indeed.
    The facts in this case are irrefutable (in my opinion) and that is that the figure charged for the membership fee does not comply with any method of working out....(either a straight £8.00 per month or when calculated as a daily rate) If it was one or the other then I would have my explanation. However it doesn't....so therefore it's simply a mistake that requires investigation and explanation.
    Gray4276
    2
  • Hi Woz and Hi Marc,
    Wow Woz.... I think I can confirm that you are definitely OCD...LOL
    I can really see that you've put in a load of time and effort into your spreadsheet ⌛
    I also use the calorific conversation that is shown on the statement/bill to predict and back check the gas calculations. So my prediction is usually very close indeed.
    The facts in this case are irrefutable (in my opinion) and that is that the figure charged for the membership fee does not comply with any method of working out....(either a straight £8.00 per month or when calculated as a daily rate) If it was one or the other then I would have my explanation. However it doesn't....so therefore it's simply a mistake that requires investigation and explanation.
    Gray4276


  • Hi @Gray4276
    Just to let you know that our Member services team are still looking into this issue for you.
    As soon as I've got more info I will of course post back here!
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

    ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
    4
  • Hi @Gray4276
    Just to let you know that our Member services team are still looking into this issue for you.
    As soon as I've got more info I will of course post back here!
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

    ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​


  • Gray I agree and just to clarify I wasn't arguing that you were wrong about the charges being incorrect, there was an unintended conflation of posts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gray4276 View Post
    Hi Woz and Hi Marc,
    Wow Woz.... I think I can confirm that you are definitely OCD...LOL
    I can really see that you've put in a load of time and effort into your spreadsheet ⌛
    I also use the calorific conversation that is shown on the statement/bill to predict and back check the gas calculations. So my prediction is usually very close indeed.
    The facts in this case are irrefutable (in my opinion) and that is that the figure charged for the membership fee does not comply with any method of working out....(either a straight £8.00 per month or when calculated as a daily rate) If it was one or the other then I would have my explanation. However it doesn't....so therefore it's simply a mistake that requires investigation and explanation.
    2
  • Gray I agree and just to clarify I wasn't arguing that you were wrong about the charges being incorrect, there was an unintended conflation of posts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gray4276 View Post
    Hi Woz and Hi Marc,
    Wow Woz.... I think I can confirm that you are definitely OCD...LOL
    I can really see that you've put in a load of time and effort into your spreadsheet ⌛
    I also use the calorific conversation that is shown on the statement/bill to predict and back check the gas calculations. So my prediction is usually very close indeed.
    The facts in this case are irrefutable (in my opinion) and that is that the figure charged for the membership fee does not comply with any method of working out....(either a straight £8.00 per month or when calculated as a daily rate) If it was one or the other then I would have my explanation. However it doesn't....so therefore it's simply a mistake that requires investigation and explanation.


  • Hi Woz......no problem m8.... it's nice to find someone else with the same mindset as me 📝 📈 📊 ✔
    Gray4276
    1
  • Hi Woz......no problem m8.... it's nice to find someone else with the same mindset as me 📝 📈 📊 ✔
    Gray4276


  • I also use the calorific conversation that is shown on the statement/bill to predict and back check the gas calculations. So my prediction is usually very close indeed.

    Yes Gray4276, when you put this calc etc into a spread sheet and you understand your usage, that the Mfee is charged monthly and the dual discount is returned daily then forecasting is close to accurate. The calorific calc has to be amended when the bill arrives and has only a minor affect. Ah but then I guess all those linked formulas subject to that mid month statement amendments causes more work..
    ​My calc warts en all.
    av pd Units x Correction Factor x Calorific Value x Metric Conversion x Conversion Factor / Tariff wth VAT av pd
    1.55 48.00 1.02264 39.10 2.83 3.6 3.3910 31.43282887
    49.08672 1919.290752 5431.592828 1508.8 5116.26 £ 51.16
    48 x 2.83 x 1.02264 x 39.1 ÷ 3.6 = 1508.8 KW
    1
  • I also use the calorific conversation that is shown on the statement/bill to predict and back check the gas calculations. So my prediction is usually very close indeed.

    Yes Gray4276, when you put this calc etc into a spread sheet and you understand your usage, that the Mfee is charged monthly and the dual discount is returned daily then forecasting is close to accurate. The calorific calc has to be amended when the bill arrives and has only a minor affect. Ah but then I guess all those linked formulas subject to that mid month statement amendments causes more work..
    ​My calc warts en all.
    av pd Units x Correction Factor x Calorific Value x Metric Conversion x Conversion Factor / Tariff wth VAT av pd
    1.55 48.00 1.02264 39.10 2.83 3.6 3.3910 31.43282887
    49.08672 1919.290752 5431.592828 1508.8 5116.26 £ 51.16
    48 x 2.83 x 1.02264 x 39.1 ÷ 3.6 = 1508.8 KW


  • It started as as simple spreadsheet, and just like Topsy it grow'd and grow'd..and grow'd...work in progress I think I might start again..
    Name:  toprows (1).jpg
Views: 118
Size:  84.4 KB
    Last edited by woz; 03-04-19 at 13:29.
    1
  • It started as as simple spreadsheet, and just like Topsy it grow'd and grow'd..and grow'd...work in progress I think I might start again..
    Name:  toprows (1).jpg
Views: 118
Size:  84.4 KB


  • Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    It started as as simple spreadsheet, and just like Topsy it grow'd and grow'd..and grow'd...work in progress I think I might start again..
    Name:  toprows (1).jpg
Views: 118
Size:  84.4 KB
    Blimey woz thats a lot of work. I just read the bill....
    2
  • Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    It started as as simple spreadsheet, and just like Topsy it grow'd and grow'd..and grow'd...work in progress I think I might start again..
    Name:  toprows (1).jpg
Views: 118
Size:  84.4 KB
    Blimey woz thats a lot of work. I just read the bill....


  • Ha ha ha Brilliant - but not a lot of work for the wozerator its a hobby like solving how the universe was formed
    2
  • Ha ha ha Brilliant - but not a lot of work for the wozerator its a hobby like solving how the universe was formed


  • Quote Originally Posted by Jon1 View Post
    Blimey woz thats a lot of work. I just read the bill....
    😂😂😂😂😂😂😂. I do a “manual” spreadsheet 😂, ie pen and paper, but it does work, but Jesus Wept Wozeeta 🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀, mines about four columns 🤣🤣🤣🤣
    Peace is always beautiful.

    WALT WHITMAN
    1
  • Quote Originally Posted by Jon1 View Post
    Blimey woz thats a lot of work. I just read the bill....
    😂😂😂😂😂😂😂. I do a “manual” spreadsheet 😂, ie pen and paper, but it does work, but Jesus Wept Wozeeta 🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀, mines about four columns 🤣🤣🤣🤣
    Peace is always beautiful.

    WALT WHITMAN


  • Quote Originally Posted by Strutt G View Post
    Ha ha ha Brilliant - but not a lot of work for the wozerator its a hobby like solving how the universe was formed
    Loving the “Wozerator” Strutt 👍👏 (all these names we give you, Woz 😉🙃)
    Peace is always beautiful.

    WALT WHITMAN
    2
  • Quote Originally Posted by Strutt G View Post
    Ha ha ha Brilliant - but not a lot of work for the wozerator its a hobby like solving how the universe was formed
    Loving the “Wozerator” Strutt 👍👏 (all these names we give you, Woz 😉🙃)
    Peace is always beautiful.

    WALT WHITMAN


  • Hey @Gray4276
    Just a quick one from me to let you know we're not ignoring you!
    Our team are still checking this out. It's looking..... complicated. I'll give you the answer ASAP and keep you in the loop
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

    ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
    2
  • Hey @Gray4276
    Just a quick one from me to let you know we're not ignoring you!
    Our team are still checking this out. It's looking..... complicated. I'll give you the answer ASAP and keep you in the loop
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

    ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​


  • Hey Woz,
    I was right.....your level of OCD certainly trumps mine LOL
    My spreadsheet seems to be a much "simpler" item which only really requires the gas conversation factor to be applied, and the Membership Fee input and the Dual Fuel discount applied.......obviously with the appropriate number of days for the "current" billing period.
    I bow in awe of your level of dedication to you application of the spreadsheet. ☑️
    ​Keep it up m8 I'm gonna do the same.
    Gray4276
    1
  • Hey Woz,
    I was right.....your level of OCD certainly trumps mine LOL
    My spreadsheet seems to be a much "simpler" item which only really requires the gas conversation factor to be applied, and the Membership Fee input and the Dual Fuel discount applied.......obviously with the appropriate number of days for the "current" billing period.
    I bow in awe of your level of dedication to you application of the spreadsheet. ☑️
    ​Keep it up m8 I'm gonna do the same.
    Gray4276


  • haha
    I’m not OCD honestly!(well ok just a bit). It was the pre vat wot made it so complicated, I wanted to be able to look at the pre vat prices of all the sections so I could immediately see where I was going wrong, but it transpires the answer was everywhere!
    I’ve started so I’ll finish....in too deep now!
    I want the formula used by the billing software ...
    Last edited by woz; 03-04-19 at 21:03.
    1
  • haha
    I’m not OCD honestly!(well ok just a bit). It was the pre vat wot made it so complicated, I wanted to be able to look at the pre vat prices of all the sections so I could immediately see where I was going wrong, but it transpires the answer was everywhere!
    I’ve started so I’ll finish....in too deep now!
    I want the formula used by the billing software ...


  • Hi Woz,
    In my original "query" regarding this, I did ask for confirmation of the "process" used by PP in the billing software....I'm sure that this info will be forthcoming and you/we can upgrade our spreadsheets accordingly. 📈 📉 📊
    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    haha
    I’m not OCD honestly!(well ok just a bit). It was the pre vat wot made it so complicated, I wanted to be able to look at the pre vat prices of all the sections so I could immediately see where I was going wrong, but it transpires the answer was everywhere!
    I’ve started so I’ll finish....in too deep now!
    I want the formula used by the billing software ...
    Gray4276
    0
  • Hi Woz,
    In my original "query" regarding this, I did ask for confirmation of the "process" used by PP in the billing software....I'm sure that this info will be forthcoming and you/we can upgrade our spreadsheets accordingly. 📈 📉 📊
    Quote Originally Posted by woz View Post
    haha
    I’m not OCD honestly!(well ok just a bit). It was the pre vat wot made it so complicated, I wanted to be able to look at the pre vat prices of all the sections so I could immediately see where I was going wrong, but it transpires the answer was everywhere!
    I’ve started so I’ll finish....in too deep now!
    I want the formula used by the billing software ...
    Gray4276


  • ​Hi @Gray4276
    This is a real head-scratcher.
    I've just been discussing this with some of the team, and this issue is going to need more work and investigation.
    It looks like something is wrong, but it's not consistently wrong, so we'll need to keep going.
    When there's more news I will of course update the community
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

    ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
    1
  • ​Hi @Gray4276
    This is a real head-scratcher.
    I've just been discussing this with some of the team, and this issue is going to need more work and investigation.
    It looks like something is wrong, but it's not consistently wrong, so we'll need to keep going.
    When there's more news I will of course update the community
    Community Manager - Pure Planet

    ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​


  • Hi Marc......looking forward to the outcome. Every glitch conquered is another step towards perfection.
    All responsible PP members should bring any issues to the attention of the team and the Community to ensure that PP can constantly improve their systems to provide a great value for money service.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    ​Hi @Gray4276
    This is a real head-scratcher.
    I've just been discussing this with some of the team, and this issue is going to need more work and investigation.
    It looks like something is wrong, but it's not consistently wrong, so we'll need to keep going.
    When there's more news I will of course update the community
    Gray4276
    0
  • Hi Marc......looking forward to the outcome. Every glitch conquered is another step towards perfection.
    All responsible PP members should bring any issues to the attention of the team and the Community to ensure that PP can constantly improve their systems to provide a great value for money service.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    ​Hi @Gray4276
    This is a real head-scratcher.
    I've just been discussing this with some of the team, and this issue is going to need more work and investigation.
    It looks like something is wrong, but it's not consistently wrong, so we'll need to keep going.
    When there's more news I will of course update the community
    Gray4276


  • Hi Stephenrand,

    Thanks for your reply.....sorry I've been slow to appreciate your input..... the figure that appears on your statement is the figure that I expected to see. According to me, that is the correct figure that should be applied on the statement. £ 7.62 + VAT equates to £8.00.
    Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    Hi there

    Certainly looks like an error - my bill last week showed membership fee of £7.62, which 5% vat turns into £8.001
    - - - Updated - - -

    Hi Duppy,

    With regards to your reply from PP.....have you had any more input regarding the reason for the application of 3 extra days ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Duppy View Post
    I have received a reply on Wattbot about the incorrect membership fee, apparently there is a glitch which is causing 3 extra days to be added, the billing team is working on it to find out what has happened and any extra charge refunded or credited.
    Gray4276
    0
  • Hi Stephenrand,

    Thanks for your reply.....sorry I've been slow to appreciate your input..... the figure that appears on your statement is the figure that I expected to see. According to me, that is the correct figure that should be applied on the statement. £ 7.62 + VAT equates to £8.00.
    Quote Originally Posted by stephenrand View Post
    Hi there

    Certainly looks like an error - my bill last week showed membership fee of £7.62, which 5% vat turns into £8.001
    - - - Updated - - -

    Hi Duppy,

    With regards to your reply from PP.....have you had any more input regarding the reason for the application of 3 extra days ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Duppy View Post
    I have received a reply on Wattbot about the incorrect membership fee, apparently there is a glitch which is causing 3 extra days to be added, the billing team is working on it to find out what has happened and any extra charge refunded or credited.
    Gray4276


  • What you really meant to say was "no one at Pure Planet actually understands how it's calculated and the original software writer has gone off to join a commune while he (or she) recovers..."
    ​Like I said, alopecia....
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    ​Hi @Gray4276
    This is a real head-scratcher.
    I've just been discussing this with some of the team, and this issue is going to need more work and investigation.
    It looks like something is wrong, but it's not consistently wrong, so we'll need to keep going.
    When there's more news I will of course update the community
    0
  • What you really meant to say was "no one at Pure Planet actually understands how it's calculated and the original software writer has gone off to join a commune while he (or she) recovers..."
    ​Like I said, alopecia....
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    ​Hi @Gray4276
    This is a real head-scratcher.
    I've just been discussing this with some of the team, and this issue is going to need more work and investigation.
    It looks like something is wrong, but it's not consistently wrong, so we'll need to keep going.
    When there's more news I will of course update the community


  • Hi Duppy,

    With regards to your reply from PP.....have you had any more input regarding the reason for the application of 3 extra days ??
    ​[/QUOTE]

    Hi Gray4276,
    No, I haven't received any update on the extra days membership fee paid. I can only assume that the team are still working on the glitch.I might give it a few more days before contacting the team again, at least the messages are still active in Wattbot
    0
  • Hi Duppy,

    With regards to your reply from PP.....have you had any more input regarding the reason for the application of 3 extra days ??
    ​[/QUOTE]

    Hi Gray4276,
    No, I haven't received any update on the extra days membership fee paid. I can only assume that the team are still working on the glitch.I might give it a few more days before contacting the team again, at least the messages are still active in Wattbot


  • On a more serious note... @Marc please take the time to read this through...I'll try and keep it short...

    ​Disclaimer this is my opinion and not fact...yet

    I can't find my original post but I picked this problem up about a year ago. It was obvious that no one at PP was able to satisfactorily explain the exact algorithm used to calculate the monthly fee and after much head scratching I decided (perhaps wrongly) that it was calculated on an average month (365 or 366 divided by 12) basis and adjusted by single whole days depending on the length of the billing period. I couldn't understand the rationale behind this decision other than the fee was quoted monthly. It's the only way I could get the bill to reconcile and it was too complex (for my small brain) to put into a spreadsheet so I decided to tolerate the almost predictable error (around 10p per fee per month.)
    You also have to bear in mind the length of the billing period varies according to the billing date which may transcend over a different length month end
    If that's not bad enough for the average person to try to understand, there is the added complexity of what happens when there is a price change, which affects each person differently depending on where in the month their billing date is. It then becomes almost impossible.
    (later edit and if half days are involved that's even worse)

    This whole thing could have been avoided from the start by billing the days individually to sufficient decimal places, were the software able to calculate to sufficient decimal places which it probably can't, but that left another problem which may (I say may because I don't know) have been a regulatory issue, and which is that PP's terms state a MONTHLY membership fee, (not that it's made clear what a month is) but that would mean 31 days was charged the same monthly fee as 28, something I believe PP were not going to countenance.

    To solve this once and for all is, on the face of it, easy. It needs a single line in the T&C's to say that the monthly fee is based on a daily rate calculated on an annual basis assuming 365 or 366 days in a year, so different length months would differ slightly in price (and not be based on a calendar month), and then the rate could truly be calculated on a daily basis.

    Not only would this make the whole thing far more transparent and predictable (The statements after all should for transparency cover a whole number of days), but the added advantage would be that any price change on any day could be easily calculated in any billing period or back bill.

    For example:
    if the rate was quoted at £8.50/month = £102 inc vat = £97.142857ex vat/365= 26.614p/day plus vat (or worked backwards 26.614x365 = £97.14 + vat at 5% = £101.997 or £102
    similarly
    if the rate was £8.0/month = £96 inc vat = £91. 42857/365= 25.049p/day plus vat (or worked backwards 25.049x365 = £91.43 + vat at 5% = £96
    example
    31 day period, 4 days at 26.614=1.06456, Plus 27 days at 25.049=6.76323....total £7.83 or £8.22 inc vat

    So problem solved with an extra decimal place or 2 and easily calculable bills even if there is a price rise
    and if PP want to round down by one decimal place it will cost them almost nothing over the course of a year (try it for yourself)

    There is a more serious point to all this, billing should be transparent, the way the monthly fee is calculated may well be correct over a year (no idea I cba testing it as it's too complicated with two price changes so far) but what I am sure of is that an average customer doesn't have a cat-in-hells chance (cats don't do hell or mine don't so I have no idea why I said that) of knowing if it's correct or it isn't because of the non-transparent way it's calculated, and in my book that's not good enough.
    P.S.
    I'm not really surprised that you found it too complex to explain the error, it's probably related to where in the month the billing cycle falls.
    I'd like your billing people to read this and reply (when you have more info).

    I hope I'm not completely off-track with my thoughts....the algorithm has not been forthcoming yet.
    P.P.S
    I've noticed an inverse relationship between my post length and my credibility... sorry failed to keep it short..
    2
  • On a more serious note... @Marc please take the time to read this through...I'll try and keep it short...

    ​Disclaimer this is my opinion and not fact...yet

    I can't find my original post but I picked this problem up about a year ago. It was obvious that no one at PP was able to satisfactorily explain the exact algorithm used to calculate the monthly fee and after much head scratching I decided (perhaps wrongly) that it was calculated on an average month (365 or 366 divided by 12) basis and adjusted by single whole days depending on the length of the billing period. I couldn't understand the rationale behind this decision other than the fee was quoted monthly. It's the only way I could get the bill to reconcile and it was too complex (for my small brain) to put into a spreadsheet so I decided to tolerate the almost predictable error (around 10p per fee per month.)
    You also have to bear in mind the length of the billing period varies according to the billing date which may transcend over a different length month end
    If that's not bad enough for the average person to try to understand, there is the added complexity of what happens when there is a price change, which affects each person differently depending on where in the month their billing date is. It then becomes almost impossible.
    (later edit and if half days are involved that's even worse)

    This whole thing could have been avoided from the start by billing the days individually to sufficient decimal places, were the software able to calculate to sufficient decimal places which it probably can't, but that left another problem which may (I say may because I don't know) have been a regulatory issue, and which is that PP's terms state a MONTHLY membership fee, (not that it's made clear what a month is) but that would mean 31 days was charged the same monthly fee as 28, something I believe PP were not going to countenance.

    To solve this once and for all is, on the face of it, easy. It needs a single line in the T&C's to say that the monthly fee is based on a daily rate calculated on an annual basis assuming 365 or 366 days in a year, so different length months would differ slightly in price (and not be based on a calendar month), and then the rate could truly be calculated on a daily basis.

    Not only would this make the whole thing far more transparent and predictable (The statements after all should for transparency cover a whole number of days), but the added advantage would be that any price change on any day could be easily calculated in any billing period or back bill.

    For example:
    if the rate was quoted at £8.50/month = £102 inc vat = £97.142857ex vat/365= 26.614p/day plus vat (or worked backwards 26.614x365 = £97.14 + vat at 5% = £101.997 or £102
    similarly
    if the rate was £8.0/month = £96 inc vat = £91. 42857/365= 25.049p/day plus vat (or worked backwards 25.049x365 = £91.43 + vat at 5% = £96
    example
    31 day period, 4 days at 26.614=1.06456, Plus 27 days at 25.049=6.76323....total £7.83 or £8.22 inc vat

    So problem solved with an extra decimal place or 2 and easily calculable bills even if there is a price rise
    and if PP want to round down by one decimal place it will cost them almost nothing over the course of a year (try it for yourself)

    There is a more serious point to all this, billing should be transparent, the way the monthly fee is calculated may well be correct over a year (no idea I cba testing it as it's too complicated with two price changes so far) but what I am sure of is that an average customer doesn't have a cat-in-hells chance (cats don't do hell or mine don't so I have no idea why I said that) of knowing if it's correct or it isn't because of the non-transparent way it's calculated, and in my book that's not good enough.
    P.S.
    I'm not really surprised that you found it too complex to explain the error, it's probably related to where in the month the billing cycle falls.
    I'd like your billing people to read this and reply (when you have more info).

    I hope I'm not completely off-track with my thoughts....the algorithm has not been forthcoming yet.
    P.P.S
    I've noticed an inverse relationship between my post length and my credibility... sorry failed to keep it short..