Octopus Energy botches smart meter installation
Electricity meter changes must be properly registered with the responsible grid operator. If the operator makes a mistake, the customer is at a disadvantage.
This is an article from our magazine section Caution, customer!, which first appeared in c't 11/2025 on May 15, 2025.
Martin B. wanted to use a modern, dynamic electricity tariff for his household. He concluded an electricity supply contract with Octopus Energy at the beginning of 2024. Part of the contract was the free installation of a smart meter at the customer's home. After all, this is needed to be able to bill consumption at the applicable price to the nearest quarter of an hour.
The old meter was therefore removed on June 19, 2024, and a smart meter was installed instead. The next day, he asked Octopus what would happen next and when his tariff would be changed. He immediately received the unenlightening information that there were currently delays in registering the devices in the system due to the change of provider in the energy supplier's backend. The change of billing method always takes a while in coordination with the distribution network operators, even without this situation, as complex market communication is necessary there. However, there is no disadvantage for the customer as they are supplied at a favorable transition tariff until the changeover.
Empfohlener redaktioneller Inhalt
Mit Ihrer Zustimmung wird hier ein externer Podcast (Podigee GmbH) geladen.
Ich bin damit einverstanden, dass mir externe Inhalte angezeigt werden. Damit können personenbezogene Daten an Drittplattformen (Podigee GmbH) übermittelt werden. Mehr dazu in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.
Martin B. was now waiting for his static tariff to be switched to a dynamic tariff, which would allow him to benefit from low electricity prices on the Leipzig exchange at certain times. But nothing happened. On August 8, he followed up because meanwhile he had received a meter reading card from the grid operator. The following day, however, he was only told that they were in the process of clarifying the matter with his installation partner and would get in touch as soon as they got back to him.
But no one got back to him. On August 24, Martin M. asked again and was now told: “It turns out that there may have been problems with the automatic transmission. The network operator has already received an email from us about this.” Of course, they were working “flat out” to process his case as quickly as possible.
One month later, Martin M. enquired again about the tariff change. This time, in an email dated September 25, he was told that the process could unfortunately not be accelerated because it was outside Octopus' direct sphere of influence. However, they were in direct contact with the responsible party and were doing their utmost to complete the changeover as quickly as possible.
Nothing happened in the following month either and at the end of October, when the customer asked again, they were told: “We have made another request to the responsible department and are waiting to hear back.”
Videos by heise
Waiting for Octopus
On November 18, Octopus Energy actually contacted the customer about their tariff. But not to finally inform him of the switch to the desired dynamic tariff. Instead, he was told that the fixed price in the transition tariff was now coming to an end and that the basic price would increase at the start of the new year, while the price per kilowatt-hour would fall. He was asked to report his current meter reading via the customer portal on January 1 if possible.
However, the old meter was stored in the customer portal, along with absurd meter readings. And on January 13, an email from Octopus fluttered into the customer's mailbox stating that his electricity supply would end on June 18, 2024. The number of the old meter was given. A final bill could only be issued once the grid operator had confirmed the status of the old meter on the date stated.
Now it became more and more abstruse for the customer, which he listed to the provider by e-mail on January 28: In the customer account, he was listed as “not in supply”. The meter readings from the date of the replacement in June of the previous year were also no longer plausible. On February 4, Octopus replied that they were now checking what was going on with the contract that was no longer active.
Again, nothing happened. On March 5, Martin B. contacted the energy supplier with an urgent complaint. His customer account had been blocked, although he still had a paid-in credit balance of almost 1,500 euros. There was no longer a budget billing plan and the monthly installments were no longer being debited. At the same time, the frustrated customer posted a negative review of the company on a review portal.
(Image:Â Martin B.)
Long excuses
On March 10, someone from the company's evaluation team got in touch and explained at length to the customer what difficulties there were with the software for registering the installed smart meters with the network operator. Of course, none of this information helped the customer. At least, he was offered compensation in the form of an additional 150 euro credit note.
At least it was now clear that something had gone very wrong with the meter change and had still not been rectified. Martin B. gratefully accepted the credit note offered, but above all wanted to know how the electricity supply would continue. On March 12, he received the final bill until June 18, 2024, and a credit note of 200 euros.
Because of the new meter, they would have to wait for the subcontractor. If he wanted to continue to be supplied, the customer would have to conclude a new contract with the old meter number. The change would then be entered retrospectively. On March 13, Martin B. pointed out the existing contract and that he would have to be reimbursed for any additional costs if he were to fall into the basic supply due to the energy company's negligence.
Time and again we receive emails from readers complaining about poor service, unfair warranty conditions and exorbitant repair prices. Some of these complaints are obviously unjustified because the customers have somewhat exaggerated expectations. On closer analysis, much of it turns out to be the everyday behavior of overly calculating companies in the IT sector.
Sometimes, however, we also receive reports of downright hair-raising cases that make it clear how some companies treat their customers. In our "Caution, customer!" section, we report on such aberrations, injustices and dubious business practices. As a customer, you will find out what you can expect or sometimes even fear from the company in question before you make a purchase. And perhaps our reports will also prompt one or two providers to behave in a more customer-friendly and accommodating manner in future.
If you would like to share such a bad experience with us, please send a brief description of your experience in chronological order to: vorsichtkunde@ct.de.
Outdated news
On March 19, the customer then received an apparently automated email with the following “news” about supposed progress: The system problems at the service provider had now been resolved, and every effort was now being made to implement the last remaining necessary measures “quickly and smoothly”. And on April 3, he was again informed by an employee that there had been no contract since June 18 of the previous year and that “a technical barrier had been put in place” as the network operator had sent the deregistration.
Martin B. had already drawn the attention of the c't editorial team to his issues on March 10. So on April 7, we asked the Octopus Energy press office why the new meter had still not been properly registered with the network operator after almost a year and endless correspondence.
Just one week later, Martin B. received a call from an Octopus manager who apologized for everything and promised a comprehensive solution to all previous issues. Above all, this meant proper registration of the meter from June 2024, proper billing for the period since then and, of course, the continuation of his contract.
On 28 April, we received a reply from Octopus CEO Bastian Gierull: Mr. B.'s case is emblematic of a structural issue. The smart meter rollout in Germany has been politically desired for over a decade, but in practice it is massively overregulated, technically complicated and characterized by market failure, the manager complained. There is a lack of infrastructure, competent service providers and clear standards in many places.
Many providers in the smart meter market are overwhelmed with the implementation. This is why his company has brought all relevant processes and expertise relating to the smart meter rollout in-house since February 2025. At the same time, the company is “continuing to work at full speed on the follow-up of those cases where problems arose in the course of the earlier partnerships and the first installations”.
After an odyssey of almost a year, things turned out well for Martin B.. But only because c't got involved. Unfortunately, the liberalized energy market is full of companies that don't seem to have a good grasp of the business. Would you buy burnt bread rolls from a baker just because he complains about not being able to master the technology of his oven properly? As complex as smart meters may be, if you can't do it, you just don't do it.
(mho)
