Hub Energy is ceasing to trade.

[Deleted User]

Read paragraph 2 of this link:

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/docs/2021/01/decision_on_a_lrsp_claim_by_scottishpower_290121.pdf

SoLRs can claim under the Consumer Levy (not all do) for all credit balances that they are honouring plus some of the costs associated with the takeover of the failed supplier’s customers. An allowance is made for the fact that the SoLR may be gaining a large number of new customers. These costs are then shared by ALL energy suppliers and ultimately result in higher bills for everyone.

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications/ofgem-safety-net-protects-consumers-cash

I should add that Ofgem has become concerned about the mounting cost of failed suppliers and it is consulting at the moment on how much suppliers can hold in the form of credit balances.

Gerry1

greenguppie said:

QrizB said:

Dr_Crypto said:

To be honest I haven’t checked for a few years now so I’m sure I can get something cheaper. Do you have to wait before starting a switch or could I start one now? 

...

Try https://switch.which.co.uk/ ...as neither of these sites get kickbacks from the energy companies.

Where have you seen that stated? How do you think they fund the service?

I often see those 2 sites advised on these forms, but do not understand why?

I can't speak for others on these forums, but Citizens Advice and 'Which? Switch' are the two sites that I always suggest that readers should go to first.  The reason is quite simple: they show ALL suppliers by default, not just those that pay commission.  In contrast, the commercial sites invariably steer consumers to suppliers who pay commission, and those tariffs are usually more expensive.  They are often misleading, e.g Uswitch hides the cheapest tariffs if you don't click the 'Filter' button.  That's highly misleading because the cheap deals have already been filtered out: the button should say UNfilter, or 'Show the the Whole of the Market'.  Sadly MSE's CEC is a big offender: you have to avoid umpteen elephant traps to decline siren offers of Autoswitch etc to fight your way through to the Whole Market listings.

greenguppie said:

QrizB said:

Dr_Crypto said:

To be honest I haven’t checked for a few years now so I’m sure I can get something cheaper. Do you have to wait before starting a switch or could I start one now? 

...

Try https://switch.which.co.uk/ ...as neither of these sites get kickbacks from the energy companies.

All suppliers pay commission to comparison sites that switch you.
But unlike some other comparison sites, Which? does not provide the customer with any cashback by sharing that commission.

Better to use an Ofgem accredited comparison site, and one which searches the whole of market, and preferably one that offers cashback if you switch through them.

Nope.  Guess who pays that commission?  YOU do, because the tariffs that pay commission are more expensive.  The problem is that the whole system is flawed: to get the best deal you have to be a freeloader, i.e. you are effectively being subsidised by the punters who fail to spot the Whole Market button.  But there's no easy solution.  If Ofgem intervenes (cf. the price cap or the insurance market where existing customers now have to be offered the same deals as new ones) then the Law of Unintended Consequences kicks in and the cheap deals disappear when everyone ends up paying much the same.

There's a very interesting article here:

A “parasite market”: A competitive market of energy price comparison websites reduces consumer welfare

greenguppie said:

Under the Ofgem confidence code, you can be assured that when viewing the whole of market data, the results are impartial will not be influenced by any commission the site may receive from certain suppliers.

The BIG catch is that many (most?) people won't spot the well hidden 'Filter' button or whatever it's called and will see only the expensive results.

greenguppie said:

That is possibly the reason the Which? site is NOT accredited.

I understand that the 'Which? Switch' site uses Energylinx, which IS accredited.  The difference is that 'Which? Switch' shows the cheap deals by default; unlike Energylinx, it does not filter them out.  (Similarly, MSE-CEC is not accredited, but it uses data from MoneySupermarket which is accredited.) 

greenguppie said:

What can sometimes be confusing is that the CA site sometimes also includes details of exclusive tariffs:  tariffs that are not available direct from the supplier but rather through a third party site, such as a different comparison site.

They are not available from CA site, because as I said, they do not cater for switching  to any supplier via them but oddly they also do not state where they can be obtained from either.
(to be fair, there is a warning on the site that this may be the case)

Would you prefer to pay more because the CA had censored the cheapest exclusive tariffs, i.e. the ones exclusive to other comparison sites?  If CA reveal the name of an exclusive tariff you can probably soon find it using your favourite search engine, or just spend a few minutes comparing with the likely commercial sites such as Uswitch and Energylinx.

It's questionable whether Ofgem's decision to allow PCWs to have exclusive deals was a wise one, but censoring CA's results is certainly not the answer.

greenguppie

Dolor said:

Read paragraph 2 of this link:

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/docs/2021/01/decision_on_a_lrsp_claim_by_scottishpower_290121.pdf

SoLRs can claim under the Consumer Levy (not all do) for all credit balances that they are honouring plus some of the costs associated with the takeover of the failed supplier’s customers. An allowance is made for the fact that the SoLR may be gaining a large number of new customers. These costs are then shared by ALL energy suppliers and ultimately result in higher bills for everyone.

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications/ofgem-safety-net-protects-consumers-cash

I should add that Ofgem has become concerned about the mounting cost of failed suppliers and it is consulting at the moment on how much suppliers can hold in the form of credit balances.

Yes, I appreciate all that.

But it does not necessarily relate to Hub Energy ceasing to supply, or Eon Next being appointed as the SoLR. i.e the subject matter of this particular thread

As you say: "SoLRs can claim under the Consumer Levy (not all do) ..."

The first link you have provided relates to SP who were appointed SoLR for Extra Energy.
They made clear in their original bid that they intended to claim, in particular a claim for the cost of credit balances for domestic customers only.

The second link relates to Ofgems rules on protecting 'consumers' credit balances. I think this term refers to domestic customers.

If you look at the original Ofgem notification that Hub Ebergy were ceasing to trade,
they said initially that only domestic customers credit balances would be protected.
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications/ofgem-protects-customers-failed-supplier-hub-energy

Since then, Eon Next have been appointed SoLR in this instance and have promised to extend that protection to non-domestic customers. So I think it will turn out the Eon Next will turn out be be one of the "not all do" supplers with regards to the possibility of claiming under the Consumer Levy as SoLR for Hub Energy.

bristolleedsfan

My own opinion is that it would be prudent for former Hub Energy customers to focus 100% on decision to be made whether to stay with Eon Next and change to a fixed rate tariff as soon as able to or switch to a cheaper supplier which might lead to another SOLR situation within 6 months depending on who is chosen .....