Hmmm

[simont]

My electricity supplier, on the bills they send me, annotate every meter reading as ‘read by you’ or ‘read by us’, presumably so that if the readings are ever non-monotonic or otherwise unbelievable they know which ones to question.

Last week they stuck a card through my door telling me that they'd tried to read my meter but I hadn't been in (since, just like every other company in the multiverse that visits people at home in the course of its business, they invariably attempt to do so at the most likely times of day for the occupants to be out at work). My previous supplier's suggested fallback procedure in this situation was for me to read the meter myself and give them the readings either by phone or through their website. This lot prefer me to fill in the meter readings on the card itself, and to leave the card in my window so they can see it when they call back.

So I did that, and today I got the resulting bill. The meter readings are exactly the ones I wrote on the card, but they're annotated ‘read by us’! I wonder if that meter reading is now tagged as trustworthy in their database despite them not having laid eyes on the actual meter at any point.

Comments

[pm215]

My supplier's annotations are "estimated" and "actual", which seems a more useful thing to track (so your estimation algorithm can recalibrate itself when it sees an 'actual' reading and not for the results of its own estimations.)

[simont]

Oh yes, I think it tracks actual guesses as well. It's just that real readings are also distinguished into by-employee and by-householder.

I suspect, however, that they do that distinction by treating everything brought back by a person in a van as by-employee, irrespective of whether the person in the van saw the meter or just saw a card left in the window.

[skorpionuk.livejournal.com]

Hello, random comment since I saw you pop up on Elise's LJ: playing cards makes me think of you :-)

How are you, anyway? Haven't spoken to you in ages!

[simont]

Hello! It has been a while, hasn't it? As far as I can remember it must have been damerell, lnr and mobbsy's joint birthday party in 2005 when I last managed to catch sight of you.

I'm largely OK, I think, thank you. How're you?

[skorpionuk.livejournal.com]

Yikes! That is a while. I'm ok as well, thanks.

I should have added that the card-playing thing is because I play cards with someone you used to go to school with :-)

[simont]

That'd be altered_state, presumably? (Seems a more plausible guess than tombee.) Yes, I found out last year that he knew people I knew. Small world, as ever.

[skorpionuk.livejournal.com]

Yes indeed :-)
I don't know Tombee, but maybe I should make Benjy aware of his LJ existence, then.

This connection amuses me even more than the one where Unilever IT started using PuTTy.

[simont]

You work for Unilever? My grandfather worked there all his life! :-)

(I don't think Tom has much of an LJ existence, actually, these days. He popped up a few years ago and startled me, but seems to have abandoned his LJ since then as far as I can tell.)

[skorpionuk.livejournal.com]

I don't anymore... I was there from 2001-3. But my FIL used to be a research chemist at PSL!