Energy suppliers are increasingly charging customers with solar panels extra fees. Where one energy supplier charges an extra fee, based on the amount of delivered back power, another increased the standing charge and yet another abolished the loyalty bonus at the end of a contract. This must stop, writes Vereniging Eigen Huis in response to the investigation by the Authority Consumer & Market (ACM) from which the above conclusions were drawn.

No comparison.

Vereniging Eigen Huis is sounding the alarm because this situation is “highly undesirable. ACM already confirmed following the investigation that consumers cannot possibly compare energy contracts in this way. ‘Clear rules and better protection for consumers are desperately needed,’ we read on the website of Vereniging Eigen Huis. ‘Energy suppliers should be obliged to pass on extra costs for solar panel owners in the same way’.

Fixed amount per kWh.

Good to know is that later this month the House of Representatives will discuss a proposal from the VVD in which this party advocates a simple, unambiguous and transparent way to make feed-in tariffs transparent. VVD Member of Parliament Silvio Erkens submitted the proposal and suggests an optional solution: “This could be done, for example, by charging a fixed amount per KWh and making this transparent on the energy bill in a simple way. This also makes it easier to calculate the payback period.”

Opening up contracts.

Erkens calls the proliferation of charges “chaotic scenes for households with solar panels. He writes in the proposal, “For example, households with solar panels cannot always enter into a fixed energy contract and contracts are broken open by energy suppliers to add solar feed-in charges.” He argues that consumers should be allowed to assume that contracts will not be adjusted during the term. So that an energy supplier can only charge feed-in costs for solar panels on new contracts.

Additional costs reasonable.

Despite causing a lot of confusion, the additional charges are not unreasonable. ACM examined the charges at Budget Energie, Vattenfall, Eneco and Engie. Based on the higher costs incurred by consumers with solar panels, the feed-in charges are reasonable and based on actual costs, the regulator concluded. Previously, they divided these costs among all customers, but say it is fairer to have them paid by those with solar panels. ACM checked with these energy companies to see if the tariffs for those without solar panels were actually reduced, and they were.

Read the call for better energy contracts from Homeowner’s Association