Intelligent Octopus Go works like a dream.

[andyvee]

Wow, quite a thread.

Just to confirm my modus operandi of IOG. I did, most of the time leave it set to 100% by 05:30. This didnt start any early charging sessions, if it did I would reduce the % needed so that the charging started at 23:30. We have 2 EV's a 33kWh one and 64 kWh, the charge required differing significantly between the two. I have asked Octopus to consider making the car registration have another option of 100kWh battery, that would then make it breeze for the kWh to add rather than a %.
On Sunday mornings my usage pattern resulted in a charge being needed starting at 07:00 which usually resulted in a charging session being granted upto 11:30. Octopus do NOT give you all that is requested. The 50kWh or thereabouts needed to charge the car could not and were not dispensed in this time. Furthermore when an EV has stopped charging as sometimes did occur if the i3 was charging on a Sunday, normal peak rate price was charged at the end of the current 30 minute period. During these extra sessions, I have configured my system to charge the house batteries, run the immersion, we do washing and tumble drying too. Often for good measure the Sunday Roast is also under way.
Looking at the T&C's I cannot see anything in there that my true mode of operation contravenes. Octopus when they contacted me due to Andyvee informing them of my comments, they said they had 'noticed unusual charging practices' and went on to lecture me about gaming the system. As some of you will know, I record and analyse all of my energy use, now fully automated with Home Assistant. I checked on my data and for the life of me, I cant see any 'unusual' practices taking place. I asked the person at Octopus if they could highlight exactly what my unusual practice is, the first response was that they wouldnt disclose it because that would tell me exactly what they were looking for. How they expect me to correct what I'm doing wrong if they tell me beggars belief. I have made more requests for the information and I'm about to make a Formal freedom Of Information request regarding this matter.
I have in addition requested an explanation about their monitoring because we really know that not the case, they couldn't notice anything there, it was purely down to Andyvee discussing my account with Octopus. I am going take this aspect much further with Octopus and possibly the Ombudsman, I feel there's potentially some GDPR and other infringements here.
I still don't see how I could be accused of 'gaming' the system, my Sunday morning charge is a legitimate charge request and within T&C's

J

I did not discuss your account with Octopus.

I asked Octopus if leaving set to Add 100% regardless of how much charge you need was gaming the system or not, as someone was posting in the MG4 forums that Octopus had told them it was the correct thing to do. And was adamant that it was endorsed by Octopus.

I have no visibility or knowledge of your Octopus account, or even what your name is.

But you are posting your referral link on every post you make which no doubt identifies you as an individual to Octopus.

Can't see what GDPR implications there are, you are publishing a unique identifier yourself?

As for the not denying you charge, the only time you do not get the charge you request is if there is not enough time between plugging in and the schedule end time to achieve that amount of charge at a flat out 7kW.

We have 2 EV's a 33kWh one and 64 kWh, the charge required differing significantly between the two

And which EV did you declare to Octopus when you onboarded to IOG?

That will determine what 100% charge equates to - 33kWh or 64kWh?

 

[tsedge]

I can see how telling someone from Octopus that someone is posting on the MG4 forum about this would trigger them to look and make contact if they can identify the user.

To me, all of this highlights yet further how it isn't clear how the service should be used and what is allowed and what isn't and how that is enforced.

 

[johnb80]

I did not discuss your account with Octopus.

Of course you didnt it was just an amazing coincidence wasnt it.

I asked Octopus if leaving set to Add 100% regardless of how much charge you need was gaming the system or not, as someone was posting in the MG4 forums that Octopus had told them it was the correct thing to do. And was adamant that it was endorsed by Octopus.

Which isnt quite true.

I have no visibility or knowledge of your Octopus account, or even what your name is.

But you are posting your referral link on every post you make which no doubt identifies you as an individual to Octopus.

Yep, it does

Can't see what GDPR implications there are, you are publishing a unique identifier yourself?

Well maybe it will become clear when my action is completed. You havent infringed GDPR.

As for the not denying you charge, the only time you do not get the charge you request is if there is not enough time between plugging in and the schedule end time to achieve that amount of charge at a flat out 7kW.

RTelly? Try requesting 60% charge on a Sunday morning by say, 14:00, guess what, you cant select 14:00, it's greyed out. So, I disagree with you.

And which EV did you declare to Octopus when you onboarded to IOG?

That will determine what 100% charge equates to - 33kWh or 64kWh?

64 kW obviously

I can see how telling someone from Octopus that someone is posting on the MG4 forum about this would trigger them to look and make contact if they can identify the user.

And the rest

To me, all of this highlights yet further how it isn't clear how the service should be used and what is allowed and what isn't and how that is enforced.

Agreed and nothing is apparent on my usage that infringes T&C's

 

[Tight Git]

@andyvee - I thought that if you had a given schedule from 18.00 to 04.00 and the car became full at 20.15 then the period from 20.30 to 23.30 would be at the higher rate and not 7p/kWh, as Octopus would know the car isn't charging?

 

[andyvee]

I can see how telling someone from Octopus that someone is posting on the MG4 forum about this would trigger them to look and make contact if they can identify the user.

If they thought that the information being posted as being endorsed by Octopus was not correct, I would expect them to.

Which isnt quite true.

Really? In what way?

 

[johnb80]

Really? In what way?

I dont recall stating it was endorsed by Octopus only saying they wernt bothered about which is my experience. In the early days of IOG on the i3 group many of us had issues and Octopus just said turn off intelligent and leave 100% set otherwise.

 

[andyvee]

I dont recall stating it was endorsed by Octopus

Just leave it set at 100%, it will work fine.

100% agree, I have had conversations with the techie's at Octopus and they confirmed all of what I have stated

That sounds to me like you are stating Octopus are stating to leave set at Add 100%

In the early days of IOG on the i3 group many of us had issues and Octopus just said turn off intelligent and leave 100% set otherwise.

But the i3 was the BMW EV integration with a charge TO target and a vehicle API connection so knows the SoC and therefore how much charge to schedule (when it works, which is outside of the users control), not an EVSE integration with a charge to Add target where the expectation is the user sets how much charge they require to Add. A fundamental difference that means the scenarios are not comparable.

I thought that if you had a given schedule from 18.00 to 04.00 and the car became full at 20.15 then the period from 20.30 to 23.30 would be at the higher rate and not 7p/kWh, as Octopus would know the car isn't charging?

Not with Zappi or Wallbox integrations. Hence why it is wildly open to gaming.

And if you have set the amount of charge you require correctly this situation doesn't occur anyway. As it wouldn't be scheduling 10hrs of charging when you only require just over 2 hours.

It's fundamental to how the tariff works that EVSE integrated users specify reasonably accurately how much charge they need, and when they need the car to be charged by.

Not Add 100% by 4am. That's gaming.

Try requesting 60% charge on a Sunday morning by say, 14:00,

Thats because it's an overnight EV charging tariff. If you plug in in the morning and Octopus can't deliver what you need by 11am then you have to Bump Charge after 11am. That's by design. Plug in the previous evening and use the tariff as it is designed to be used. It isn't an endless supply of cheap leccy at times of your choosing so you can heat the hot tub or whatever at the same time.

There is a reason you can only choose end times between 04:00-11:00 - to prevent abuse and daytime charging to gain additional off peak during the day.

 

[johnb80]

That sounds to me like you are stating Octopus are stating to leave set at Add 100%

Exactly, thats YOUR interpretation.

But the i3 was the BMW EV integration with a charge TO target and a vehicle API connection so knows the SoC and therefore how much charge to schedule (when it works, which is outside of the users control), not an EVSE integration with a charge to Add target where the expectation is the user sets how much charge they require to Add. A fundamental difference that means the scenarios are not comparable.

Agreed BUT Octopus did advise to go against T&C's and said they weren't worried about it not complying with 1 Intelligent charge per month.

 

[Stuart Wright]

I have to say that I think anyone on IOG setting a charge amount to +100% now isn't acting in good faith. I mean if you drain your EV battery to 0% on a daily basis, it's battery is going to be seriously degraded. So I don't think there is a legitimate use case where someone is taking 100% of their EV battery capacity on a nightly (or even regular) basis.

 

[andyvee]

To me, all of this highlights yet further how it isn't clear how the service should be used and what is allowed and what isn't and how that is enforced.

I agree.

Octopus could do a much better job of communicating how to use, and the limitations of 11am end time, the fact it is an overnight EV tariff etc.

Most of this information is available, but in different sources - the requirement to specify how much charge is in the Ts&C's. The limitations on end times are in other collateral such as FAQs. Same as the requirement to Bump charge if the amount of charge you require cannot be delivered due to the time window you have allowed (given the 11am cutoff). A statement that it is an overnight EV charging tariff is on the main IOG web page.

Nowhere is all of this info clearly explained in one place.

It is really simple - charge overnight. Set how much charge you require and what time you will be unplugging the car. If you do that, it works as designed and the only possible thing that could catch you out is if you are genuinely charging 42kWh or more regularly and fall foul of the acceptable usage clause. But you would have to be doing some serious mileage to require more than 125 miles charge per day every day.

 

[johnb80]

I have to say that I think anyone on IOG setting a charge amount to +100% now isn't acting in good faith. I mean if you drain your EV battery to 0% on a daily basis, it's battery is going to be seriously degraded. So I don't think there is a legitimate use case where someone is taking 100% of their EV battery capacity on a nightly (or even regular) basis.

You do make a good point, however, in terms of fairness the guy round the corner with his Taycan needing 80kWh and his neighbour with a Outlander PHEV requiring 12 kWh to achieve 100% how can you differentiate between them. Individual customer demands can be massively different.

It is really simple - charge overnight. Set how much charge you require and what time you will be unplugging the car. If you do that, it works as designed and the only possible thing that could catch you out is if you are genuinely charging 42kWh or more regularly and fall foul of the acceptable usage clause. But you would have to be doing some serious mileage to require more than 125 miles charge per day every day.

THIS is about the simplest explanation of IOG that Ive seen and it should be adopted by Octopus.

The 42kW isnt a fair use clause is it? I thought that was from the 6 hrs@ 7kW? some people may have 22 kW 3 phase charging in which case, that would become 132 kWh?

 

[tsedge]

Not with Zappi or Wallbox integrations. Hence why it is wildly open to gaming.

Ok, but I still don't understand: surely this is for Octopus to change the integration? Is there any good reason why it doesn't work this way for Zappi and Wallbox already?

At the moment it sounds like Octopus's own limitations are causing this problem.

 

[andyvee]

with his Taycan needing 80kWh

Needing 80kWh every day? That's about 240 miles. So 1500 miles per week? 75k miles pa?

That would fall foul of acceptable use of the tariff. If they did need that much.

Or did you mean scheduling 80kWh per day regardless of how much they actually need?

Which takes us all the way back to the beginning. Do not leave set to Add 100%. Set how much charge you actually need.

PHEVs arent really relevant with such small batteries, and are likely needing 100% every day anyway as they will be empty. That's not a problem.

The 42kW isnt a fair use clause is it?

Correct - it is 6hrs multiplied by the maximum charge rate of your vehicle/charger combo.

Which for 90%+ will be 7kW.

I doubt there are many domestic 11 or 22kW EVSE in the UK. And it is a domestic tariff.

surely this is for Octopus to change the integration?

They have already said they are going to due to the gaming.

A change to the billing would stop some of it - if the car has stopped charging, don't bill it as off peak anymore.

But that would still allow people to force additional hours early evening by requesting way more charge than they need. Until the car is full.

 

[tsedge]

They have already said they are going to due to the gaming.

A change to the billing would stop some of it - if the car has stopped charging, don't bill it as off peak anymore.

But that would still allow people to force additional hours early evening by requesting way more charge than they need. Until the car is full.

Yes, that's clear. So basically they screwed up by not replicating the Ohme integration approach.

 

[tkmaxx5]

Been reading this thread with a certain amount of....er....'interest'...!

One thing that confuses me is the suggestion that the Zappi integration is more at risk of 'gaming' than the Ohme integration? Don't both setups allow the same mis-use (ie asking the Ohme to deliver 100%, or 80% or whatever every time regardless of how much you actually need?

 

[Tight Git]

Last week I got home early afternoon with 7% remaining on my SE SR and requested an add 100% by 4am - I normally add approximately 10% to allow time to complete a balance charge (so I'm not gaming!).

I was allocated slots early afternoon and evening with the charge set to finish at 4am. At 11.30 I overrode the schedule by starting a bump charge as I wanted to see how long it took to complete the balance charge. It actually completed at 4.30 so it looks like 10% extra isn't sufficient to complete the balance charge. The balance charge took an hour to complete which is longer than I have seen before.

I guess in future if I add an extra 20% to the charge to add it isn't classed as gaming!

 

[andyvee]

So basically they screwed up by not replicating the Ohme integration approach.

In short, yes. Ohme have a much more mature charging app though in terms of specifying how much you need in %, and in some cases linked to the car API so is specifying a charge to xx% exactly the same as a vehicle integration.

There are loopholes with the Ohme integration though. Like no restrictions on schedule end times. So You could plug in at 8am and specify 4pm finish and get lots of off peak all day - which you can't do with any integration.

 

[tsedge]

Been reading this thread with a certain amount of....er....'interest'...!

One thing that confuses me is the suggestion that the Zappi integration is more at risk of 'gaming' than the Ohme integration? Don't both setups allow the same mis-use (ie asking the Ohme to deliver 100%, or 80% or whatever every time regardless of how much you actually need?

My understanding now is the billing with Ohme means that you stop getting the cheap rate outside the core hours when the car charging stops: apparently with Zappi and Wallbox you get it for all the slots booked, whether you need it or not for the car.

In short, yes. Ohme have a much more mature charging app though in terms of specifying how much you need in %, and in some cases linked to the car API so is specifying a charge to xx% exactly the same as a vehicle integration.

There are loopholes with the Ohme integration though. Like no restrictions on schedule end times. So You could plug in at 8am and specify 4pm finish and get lots of off peak all day - which you can't do with any integration.

Yes, my mother-in-law has the Ohme and is on IOG and I'd forgotten that was how it works - however, she is a good case in point.

We got the basic app working and she leaves it alone, she would not be comfortable changing the target charge to add and we never set up the integration with her Motability Leaf because it was too much for her to go through.

So she is essentially doing what I do, as I expect are many others, although I highly doubt Octopus would be bothered by her usage.

 

[tkmaxx5]

My understanding now is the billing with Ohme means that you stop getting the cheap rate outside the core hours when the car charging stops: apparently with Zappi and Wallbox you get it for all the slots booked, whether you need it or not for the car.

Ok that makes a bit of sense...but in reality if you plug in with 30% at, say 5pm and ask to add 100% by 6am presumably Ohme / Octopus start charging right away so it's likely your peak evening use would be at the lower rate. Once the car stops charging (say it reaches 100% by 3am) you would still be in the off peak window anyway?

 

[andyvee]

Don't both setups allow the same mis-use

The billing is different. With Zappi/Wallbox, Octopus bill all the allocated charge slots at off peak, regardless of if the car is actively charging or not. They don't seem to utilise the telemetry from the Zappi of when charging ACTUALLY took place to determine if it was off-peak. Octopus are controlling the scheduling and the Zappi/Wallbox directly.

Ohme is only billed at off peak IF the car is actively charging. Ohme are in control of the scheduling within the parameters specified by Octopus of when to charge. When you unplug (which is important with Ohme to unplug every morning within 3hrs of the schedule end time or a new session starts) the charge session data is sent to Octopus and used for the billing. Hence why there is no visibility of the allocated charge slots via the Octopus GraphQL API, it is retrospective from the Ohme charge session data.