Skip to main content
Solved

Off-peak energy price calculation consistently wrong

  • January 19, 2026
  • 3 replies
  • 35 views

For the past 3 months my bill (Economy 10) has been wrong when it comes to Off-peak energy. Peak energy and Standing Charge are spot on but Off-peak is out by a few pence. Like this:

Off-peak energy use 1694.781 kWh at 22.06p £373.95
Peak energy use 261.497 kWh at 27.14p £70.97
Standing charge 30 days at 59.00p a day £17.70

The Off-peak should be £373.87.  There must be a glitch in their software because two specific figures when multiplied gives only one answer!  Anyone else noticed this?

My emails to OVO haven’t changed anything so my hope is that a Mod here has access to someone who can actually identify and fix this issue.

Best answer by Firedog

Yes, these little differences are really annoying for old pedants like me. I think you’ll find, though, that while unit prices are usually quoted with only four significant digits, in calculations they are used with (at least) six. Suppliers fix their prices in various ways, but I think OVO decide on an ex-VAT price with six significant digits. The quoted prices with and without VAT are then quoted after rounding to four digits. Your first example uses a unit price of 22.06p, but it’s possible that the actual unit price is £0.220648.

An apparent ‘error’ of up to .005p would account for the 8p difference you calculated in the cost of 1695 units. So long as this rounding is applied consistently, accumulated errors will really be negligible. If you’re really keen to get to the bottom of this, you could perhaps use your browser’s developer tools to look at the myriad resources used to present the Billing details page. Here’s an example, showing just my electricity standing charge calculation for the month so far:
  

 "electricityCharges": [
{
"sprn": "110000****018",
"standing": {
"netCharge": {
"pounds": "8.45"
},
"rates": [
{
"rate": {
"pence": "46.92"
},
"endDate": "2026-01-18",
"cost": {
"pounds": "8.4456"
},
"startDate": "2026-01-01",
"days": 18
}
]
},

You’ll see that a calculated value of 18 x 46.92/100 = 8.4456 is presented as 8.45. I’m sure you’ll agree that this is all quite reasonable.

3 replies

Firedog
Super User
Forum|alt.badge.img+7
  • Super User
  • Solved
  • January 19, 2026

Yes, these little differences are really annoying for old pedants like me. I think you’ll find, though, that while unit prices are usually quoted with only four significant digits, in calculations they are used with (at least) six. Suppliers fix their prices in various ways, but I think OVO decide on an ex-VAT price with six significant digits. The quoted prices with and without VAT are then quoted after rounding to four digits. Your first example uses a unit price of 22.06p, but it’s possible that the actual unit price is £0.220648.

An apparent ‘error’ of up to .005p would account for the 8p difference you calculated in the cost of 1695 units. So long as this rounding is applied consistently, accumulated errors will really be negligible. If you’re really keen to get to the bottom of this, you could perhaps use your browser’s developer tools to look at the myriad resources used to present the Billing details page. Here’s an example, showing just my electricity standing charge calculation for the month so far:
  

 "electricityCharges": [
{
"sprn": "110000****018",
"standing": {
"netCharge": {
"pounds": "8.45"
},
"rates": [
{
"rate": {
"pence": "46.92"
},
"endDate": "2026-01-18",
"cost": {
"pounds": "8.4456"
},
"startDate": "2026-01-01",
"days": 18
}
]
},

You’ll see that a calculated value of 18 x 46.92/100 = 8.4456 is presented as 8.45. I’m sure you’ll agree that this is all quite reasonable.


  • Author
  • Rank 4
  • January 19, 2026

Hi Firedog and thanks for the above.  It does seem odd to me that this only began 3 bills ago and that Off-peak is the only part of the bill affected.  But your explanation is good so I’ll leave it at that.


Ben_OVO
Community Manager
Forum|alt.badge.img+4
  • Community Manager
  • January 20, 2026

Hi there ​@andykelp and thanks for your post.

 

Thanks ​@Firedog for your detailed reply here, great stuff. ​@andykelp keep an eye on things, if anything gets more out of line there could be an issue somewhere, but this is unlikely.