I've been doing desk audits — bills and tariffs only — for most of my clients. A few colleagues insist that you have to do a physical site visit on every account. Is a site visit really necessary, or is it overkill for a billing audit?
Site visits — are they necessary for every audit?
It depends on the account size and complexity. For a small commercial account under $5,000/month, a desk audit is usually sufficient — rate classification, tax exemptions, and demand charges can all be checked from the bills and tariff. But for industrial accounts over $20,000/month or accounts with complex metering, a site visit is essential. You need to physically verify the meter configuration, transformer ownership, service voltage, and whether the customer's operations match what the billing data shows. I've found CT ratio errors that were invisible on paper but obvious when I looked at the meter nameplate.
Terry makes a good point about scaling the effort to the account size. I'd add that site visits also build client confidence. When a client sees you physically inspecting their meters and electrical equipment, they perceive more value than a report generated entirely from a desk. For large or complex accounts, the site visit often reveals findings that desk analysis alone would miss — things like meters serving spaces that have been reconfigured, equipment that's been removed but is still on the bill, or operational patterns that explain unusual billing data.
I do site visits on anything over $10,000/month. Under that, desk audit. The exception is any account where I suspect a metering error — those always get a site visit because you can't verify CT ratios from a bill.
Good framework. I'll start doing site visits on the larger accounts. For my Pittsburgh clients, most are within driving distance anyway so the time investment is minimal.