Supplier Failure - Advice re Supplier of Last Resort (SoLR) process not fit for purpose

QrizB

When your supplier failed was your gas & electricity cut off until you had contracted with a new supplier?

And did you lose most of your credit balance, receiving only pennies on the pound like a typical unsecured creditor?

If the answer to both those questions is "no", the SoLR process is working and is fit for purpose.

CSI_Yorkshire

SB, you're now just quoting random and unconnected statistics that don't actually support your argument.  You can't just hide that behind the word 'suppose' and think it is any sort of evidence.

"Suppose that 200,000 customers all got forced onto a 70% more expensive tariff and were held there against their will for 2 years...".  What sort of nonsense situation is that?

And from the Forbes report that you are 'leaving us with':

"Once the transfer is complete, each customer is free to move supplier if they wish although, at present, they are unlikely to find a cheaper tariff than their nominated supplier’s ‘deemed’ tariff".

[Deleted User]

CSI_Yorkshire said:

SB, you're now just quoting random and unconnected statistics that don't actually support your argument.  You can't just hide that behind the word 'suppose' and think it is any sort of evidence.

"Suppose that 200,000 customers all got forced onto a 70% more expensive tariff and were held there against their will for 2 years...".  What sort of nonsense situation is that?

And from the Forbes report that you are 'leaving us with':

"Once the transfer is complete, each customer is free to move supplier if they wish although, at present, they are unlikely to find a cheaper tariff than their nominated supplier’s ‘deemed’ tariff".

Just to add to your post, the SoLR doesn’t have freedom to set a tariff at will:

Over the past 18 months, most deemed tariffs have been at the Ofgem Capped rate. 

(source: Ofgem SoLR Guidance 2016)

I confess that I am struggling to understand what the issue is. The whole point of the SoLR process is to keep the lights on with no interruption in supply. The Ofgem levy was introduced a few years ago to protect credit balances. In the main, any problems have been down to poor account management by the failed supplier.

CSI_Yorkshire

[Deleted User] said:

CSI_Yorkshire said:

SB, you're now just quoting random and unconnected statistics that don't actually support your argument.  You can't just hide that behind the word 'suppose' and think it is any sort of evidence.

"Suppose that 200,000 customers all got forced onto a 70% more expensive tariff and were held there against their will for 2 years...".  What sort of nonsense situation is that?

And from the Forbes report that you are 'leaving us with':

"Once the transfer is complete, each customer is free to move supplier if they wish although, at present, they are unlikely to find a cheaper tariff than their nominated supplier’s ‘deemed’ tariff".

Just to add to your post, the SoLR doesn’t have freedom to set a tariff at will:

Over the past 18 months, most deemed tariffs have been at the Ofgem Capped rate. 

(source: Ofgem SoLR Guidance 2016)

I confess that I am struggling to understand what the issue is. The whole point of the SoLR process is to keep the lights on with no interruption in supply. The Ofgem levy was introduced a few years ago to protect credit balances. In the main, any problems have been down to poor account management by the failed supplier.

The OP couldn't swich when they wanted to (after their old supplier failed) because the SoLR process hadn't fully completed and they weren't yet registered with the new supplier.  That's all.

PowerDev

My calculations are not hiding behind anything. 

You obviously dont understand what was going on while wholesale prices were increasing.

As I explained originally Supplier D as SoLR set the proposed rate for the Failed Supplier C customers at nearly the same as the Standard Variable Retail Tariff they were offering their own customers as at the time of Supplier C failure in September 2021; around 21.67p/kWh. Which is of course acceptable to OFGEM as the deemed contract rate as at that time.  It is a Variable tariff; the SoLR are allowed to increase the rate as time goes on and Wholesale prices increase further.   And the deemed contract rate increased to the cap at 35p/kWh.    

Thus immediately switching away from Supplier D SoLR in September 2021 to a fixed tariff at around the same rate (in fact 20.5p/kWh) was highly beneficial but goes against OFGEMs advice to stay with the SoLR until the failed Supplier C Administration, principally the recovery of customer credit to the SoLR, is complete. 
Including funding of any customer credit shortfall either by the SoLR or via extra DNO DUoS charging across the whole Supplier (and thus Customer) base.

Mstty

IMO - One reason the advice was there was to protect the less savvy energy users. Those that didn't keep on top of energy, didn't record usage. Staying put gave everyone time to adjust and calculate final readings/bill etc

I personally don't see it as some sort of conspiracy trap. Those savvy enough could do what you did and know what they owed to who and when and have the stored evidence if required.

For the normal energy user this isn't really something they would be able to do with a degree of certainty and comfort. (Proved by lots of posts we received in this forum)

Put another way your thoughts are not gaining much traction here.

PowerDev

And the Supply to your house can only be disconnected if you are seriously in arrears with your supplier. 
And certainly not because your Supplier fails.

It is quite an involved process - 
Search for  Cutting off your energy supply
in this article.
https://nationaldebtline.org/fact-sheet-library/gas-and-electricity-arrears-ew/ 

CSI_Yorkshire

I refer you to my earlier post.

Sees the status quo as acceptable and an effective solution for failed suppliers that doesn't need changing:
Suppliers
OFGEM
BEIS
MPs
The Parliamentary Ombudsman
Most posters here (many of whom are well informed and/or have similar industry background to you, but choose to obey the forum rules and stay anonymous)

Sees the status quo as a systemic failure and conspiracy requiring immediate redress:
The OP

Yes, you had a situation where delays in the system prevented you choosing the tariff you wanted.  Not great for you.  But, the SoLR system isn't supposed to make sure you have free choice of supplier during a failure and transfer, so this isn't a failure of the system.

With your enhanced knowledge that you claimed in the first post, you could have just switched a little earlier before your old supplier failed.  Then you wouldn't have been in this situation.

PowerDev

If you bother to read my original post properly you will realise that my the time of my second Supplier (C) failure I was well aware of this major shortcoming of the SoLR process and therefore switched very quickly.  With the resulting confusion over the SoLR Supplier D identifying Supplier C's customers due to an improperly configured query to the National Database MPAN to Supplier assignment Table which it is a trivial matter to correct.

The SoLR Suppliers have no problem with the process, they just hold on to more customers at their Standard Variable rates, which can be increased, for longer.  

My MP is not of the opinion that this is satisfactory, especially as he has been active re concerns with Cost of Living increases. 
The inability of the Ombudsman to detect Systemic failure by OFGEM is serious.  Our next recourse is of course to DESNZ who, with DSIT, replace BEIS. 

I suggest you try and understand the serious amounts of Customer money involved as I illustrated.  Noting that the Treasury may also be concerned if they identify that more Customer money than necessary has gone into Energy Bills at 5% VAT.   Instead of used to buy Goods at 20% VAT.  (Noting they were concerned when the Retail bill Environmental charges due to the 2010 FiT Fiasco were likely to exceed the Levy control FiT allowance.  And 'sat on' DECC to get the FiT rates pulled back.) 

As regards Anonymity my MSE Forum ID was set up at least 5 years ago when there were no issues.  You will find blogs from me at that time about the dangers of switching from a supplier who is likely to fail.

MSE Support have indeed just started a dialogue with me and I have asked why they had not previously advised original users about the rule changes for IDs.  

PowerDev

Forum post on SoLR behaviour from March 2022

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2022/03/bust-energy-suppliers-credit-delays-survey/