Neon Reef - any views?

GingerTim

ivanleo said:

"Omni Energy Limited, MA Energy Limited, Zebra Power Limited, and Ampoweruk Ltd have today announced they are ceasing to trade."

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications/ofgem-protects-customers-omni-energy-limited-ma-energy-limited-zebra-power-limited-and-ampoweruk-ltd

Surely NR must have cleared the 300k or else they'd be on that list?

Keep an eye on this page which lists the companies in default and whether they've cleared it - NR's acronym is OREG: https://www.bmreports.com/bmrs/?q=balancing/creditdefaultnotice

[Deleted User]

@liku Martin maintains that it is perfectly reasonable to ask a supplier to justify in detail any large increase in direct debit, and negotiate. Furthermore Ofgem says you are perfectly entitled to claim a credit at any time. I can send you the Ofgem link if you want that says that. 

[Deleted User]

@GingerTim Yes, good info, but it’s a bit annoying when the supplier codes they use bear no relation to the actual name, like Neon Reef = OREG. 

I only know that, because that is the code that is used on the supplier reference database, where you check who your official supplier is on file. 

BigBlueSky

Deleted_User said:

@GingerTim Yes, good info, but it’s a bit annoying when the supplier codes they use bear no relation to the actual name, like Neon Reef = OREG. 

I only know that, because that is the code that is used on the supplier reference database, where you check who your official supplier is on file. 

From reading this thread over the last few months Neon Reef used to be named Oregon Energy (which is why they use the code OREG).  I had forgotten this initially though when looking at that page.

MWT

Deleted_User said:

@GingerTim Yes, good info, but it’s a bit annoying when the supplier codes they use bear no relation to the actual name, like Neon Reef = OREG.

This comes from using a 'Supplier in a box' solution for setting up the business, if you check Companies House you'll see that the original name was 'OREGON ENERGY LIMITED' until it was changed on 28/03/19.

[Deleted User]

Ah, right, so was it one of a whole tranche of names based on American states, all set up by a maverick energy consultant whose names escapes me? Allegedly. 

MWT

Exactly... allegedly

GingerTim

BigBlueSky said:

Deleted_User said:

@GingerTim Yes, good info, but it’s a bit annoying when the supplier codes they use bear no relation to the actual name, like Neon Reef = OREG. 

I only know that, because that is the code that is used on the supplier reference database, where you check who your official supplier is on file. 

From reading this thread over the last few months Neon Reef used to be named Oregon Energy (which is why they use the code OREG).  I had forgotten this initially though when looking at that page.

Of course! Thanks for the reminder, that makes much more sense now.

Liku

Deleted_User said:

@liku Martin maintains that it is perfectly reasonable to ask a supplier to justify in detail any large increase in direct debit, and negotiate. Furthermore Ofgem says you are perfectly entitled to claim a credit at any time. I can send you the Ofgem link if you want that says that. 

Ok thanks. She is trying to claim the credit and stop them increasing it but if they continue to act like this it might be helpful to pass it on. 

Telegraph_Sam

Liku said:

Deleted_User said:

@liku Martin maintains that it is perfectly reasonable to ask a supplier to justify in detail any large increase in direct debit, and negotiate. Furthermore Ofgem says you are perfectly entitled to claim a credit at any time. I can send you the Ofgem link if you want that says that. 

Ok thanks. She is trying to claim the credit and stop them increasing it but if they continue to act like this it might be helpful to pass it on. 

This point crops up habitually in this and other threads and always seems to be a grey area:

If one's account is in credit and not about to go into obvious massive debit, what right has the supplier to force through D/D's which will raise the credit balance unnecessarily?  On the pretext that winter is coming and "we (not you) think that this is what your coming expenditure will be, and we demand that this should be financed by you up front". "And if you don't agree we will switch you onto our SV tariff". The underlying motivation being to access working capital as cheaply as possible and this doesn't come much cheaper than from customers. It is all very well for Ofgem & co to demand justification, negotiate and claim a refund but in my limited experience suppliers don't generally share this point of view and will prove to be obstructive. It would be fairer if there was some generally recognised and accepted enforceable  "procedure" under which the customer could demand that his account should be kept within a zero +/- 5% [5% being an arbitrary figure selected by me] range.