Tomato Energy (Electric Only Supplier) - Too Good To Be True ?

Chrysalis

lohr500 said:

grandadgolfer said:

I sometimes get the impression people would love them to go under…..strange

I have no desire to see TE go bust. We need viable competition in the market to bring prices down.
But based on their business naivety back in Autumn last year (when I was a customer) I decided TE's business wasn't sustainable so I left.

I keep watching their progress (or lack of it) closely and nothing I have seen since Autumn last year has led me to conclude I had made the wrong decision to leave.

The prime reason for leaving was the worry about being stuck with a SOLR for weeks until the back billing was sorted by either the SOLR or the administrators.

As a high off-peak user ( 98% of my annual 18,000kWh usage) I could not risk having to pay a standard variable capped price for more than a few days. The EDF capped price in my region is 26p, so 21p more than the TE 5p off-peak. £0.21 * 17640 = £3704 p.a. on cost, or £10 a day.

My Nov 25 fixed off-peak bog standard Economy 7 rate with UW is £0.049, so it was a no brainer for me to leave the greenhouse.(Had to take out an expensive SIM only plan to lock in the 12 M Fix, but the maths made sense to do so).

I think you have explained your position, but I also understand why he made the post, for me if I leave or dont join an energy company I dont obsess over them as they no longer relevant to my life.  There is some non TE customers who seem really interested in TE's fate.  TroubledTarts might have been what triggered the comment rather than yourself.

I am considering my position now though, I am one of those being billed so would imagine no back billing issues, but also not sure if SOLR would be quick or slow.

What normally triggers these Ofgem investigations? Competitors Lobbying? Winding orders? Released accounts? Consumer complaints?

Chrysalis

SJMALBA said:

From the TE Users' Facebook Group:

Farouk Alhassan - 

'So its finally out and I am sure very few people in this group and many in other groups are having a field day with doomsday scenarios but if you ignore the noise, all this order says is we should provide financial information and until then, we are not allowed to take on new customers. We are working with Ofgem to ensure customers who have already switched but registration has  not gone through will be allowed to complete their switch.

The timing of this order couldn't be any worse as we were just about to re-launch but its fine. We will delay it while we confirm our financial and capital position with the regulator.

The worst part of the winter is over. It hasn't been an easy one and although we missed a few invoices, we always pay it so everything will be fine. Wholesale price of electricity has come down significantly.  There is no reason to worry as we are working fully to provide the financial information requested.

We are absolutely not going anywhere. For all the doomsday scenario experts,'

He has basically admitting to not being truthful there before Ofcom's announcement, so no credibility in all his postings now.
Also he states they were about to relaunch which seems too early anyway as there is still a bunch of pending customers in limbo, surely those should be resolved before relaunching as well.

Chrysalis

masonic said:

SJMALBA said:

From the TE Users' Facebook Group:

Farouk Alhassan - 

'So its finally out and I am sure very few people in this group and many in other groups are having a field day with doomsday scenarios but if you ignore the noise, all this order says is we should provide financial information and until then, we are not allowed to take on new customers...'

That isn't all it says. It actually goes into a reasonable amount of detail about the sequence of events that led to this decision, especially notable is the reasoning behind the decision to make a provisional order rather than start the process of imposing a final order. It is well worth a read.

Are you able to summarise this sequence of events for us on here?  Thanks.

Chrysalis

masonic said:

SJMALBA said:

SJMALBA said:

After 2 months, during which time both TE and Octopus Energy said, on multiple occasions, that the switch did take place, TE have now said that it did not, and I am still with Octopus! 

Can anyone clarify/confirm the GSOP rules regarding late final bills?

You didn't switch, so there was no requirement to issue one. However, TE would owe you the GSOP payment for failing to switch within the stipulated timeframe.

I assume you started a switch out already? Curious if you get any issues.

I read the PDF, it seems largely financial, I am curious on the non financial bits you mentioned, but does suggest some serious ongoing cashflow issues at this point.

Chrysalis

joowho said:

Over 3 months since joining TE and having no data whatsoever in myWatts or any bills despite chasing and being added to the technical team 'spreadsheet' in January, I phoned again earlier in the week and have today received a bill covering 3 months, not on the Lifestyle TOU tariff I signed up to but their standard single rate tariff (usage based on meter reads I gave) which, by my reckoning, has worked out around 20% more expensive.  Have been told that until they can get myWatts working that's how it is and they will rebill when/if(?) data ever comes through.  Should add no problems previously with Octopus tracker & Bright app is still recording HH usage (smets2 meter) and now nothing to encourage TE to sort it out as they will be being paid more! 

This was always possible for those not getting readings/bills, this is why I said I wouldnt be happy in that situation.  I wouldnt have stayed for months and months with that happening.  People just got too hopeful that it wouldnt catch up with them.

MWT

Chrysalis said:

What normally triggers these Ofcom investigations? Competitors Lobbying? Winding orders? Released accounts? Consumer complaints?

It often appears to be reports of non-payment/non-performance of their obligations within the regulated market.

Those will come from other market participants rather than from consumers.

Published accounts may raise some concerns as would failure to publish accounts.

In this case, Ofgem have been clear on the cause of their action, see their explanation here:

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-04/Notice-of-Reasons-Tomato-Energy-Ltd-(Unsigned).pdf

Specifically on the source of the complaints:

"Since late 2024, the Authority has been contacted by multiple industry parties in
relation to the late or non-payment of financial liabilities by Tomato Energy. The
Authority has engaged with Tomato Energy in respect of its obligations under the
financial responsibility principle and its business practices in relation to meeting
its financial liabilities and met with the licensee on 13 February 2025, 5 March
2025 and 7 April 2025. The licensee has repeatedly sought to assure the
Authority that while it acknowledged that it had experienced cashflow challenges
which had led to the late payment of financial liabilities, effective action had been
taken to prevent a recurrence. However, as of 10 April 2025 it has not provided
evidence that it has taken the necessary action to bring itself into compliance
with its ongoing obligations. If Tomato Energy fails to pay its debts, including to
industry participants, this could increase the risk of Mutualised costs which are
ultimately passed on to consumers through higher bills. The apparent failure of
Tomato Energy to have Liquidity of sufficient amount and Quality that it is able to
meet its reasonably anticipated financial liabilities as they fall due on an ongoing
basis mean that Tomato Energy appears to be contravening SLC 4B.1"

... and why they are acting quickly to limit the potential damage:

"The Authority considers it requisite to issue a Provisional Order rather than consulting
on a Final Order. It is not appropriate in these circumstances to allow the delay
associated with a Final Order. The issuing of a Provisional Order is requisite for the
purposes of section 25(2) of the Act to secure compliance with SLC 4A and with SLC
4B.1 at the earliest opportunity, by 1 May 2025 requiring Tomato Energy to take the
actions set out therein which are necessary, proportionate and in the public interest.
If the Authority does not require Tomato Energy to make improvements to its
compliance immediately, by virtue of this Provisional Order and instead consults on a
final order, it is more likely that Tomato Energy may fail to comply with SLC 4B.1,
increasing the risk of potential Mutualised costs. The Authority needs to understand if
Trigger Points have occurred and whether this may impact on the licensee’s
compliance with the broader SLC 4B and the licensee must have in place the
capability to comply with these important relevant conditions. To that end, the
Authority considers it is requisite to intervene immediately to secure compliance with
SLC 4A, SLC 4B.1 and SLC 4B.8."

Chrysalis

Ok yeah, so is a pattern suggesting cashflow problems, and that was also mentioned in the PDF as well.

I guess if I decide to move back to Octopus with the tail in between my legs, its a case of joining on SVR first, then when done moving back to a smart tariff after?

bristolleedsfan

Chrysalis said:

Ok yeah, so is a pattern suggesting cashflow problems, and that was also mentioned in the PDF as well.

I guess if I decide to move back to Octopus with the tail in between my legs, its a case of joining on SVR first, then when done moving back to a smart tariff after?

Arrange to switch back, apply for say Agile, my experience last year was got email asking for T+C to be agreed the day following switch date at latest.

MWT

Chrysalis said:

Ok yeah, so is a pattern suggesting cashflow problems, and that was also mentioned in the PDF as well.

I guess if I decide to move back to Octopus with the tail in between my legs, its a case of joining on SVR first, then when done moving back to a smart tariff after?

That is the correct process as it allows for accurate agreement of the final meter reading at the point of switching and confirmation that smart meter data is being obtained.

It shouldn't take long if both sides complete all the flows accurately and in a timely manner.

masonic

Chrysalis said:

masonic said:

SJMALBA said:

SJMALBA said:

After 2 months, during which time both TE and Octopus Energy said, on multiple occasions, that the switch did take place, TE have now said that it did not, and I am still with Octopus! 

Can anyone clarify/confirm the GSOP rules regarding late final bills?

You didn't switch, so there was no requirement to issue one. However, TE would owe you the GSOP payment for failing to switch within the stipulated timeframe.

I assume you started a switch out already? Curious if you get any issues.

I read the PDF, it seems largely financial, I am curious on the non financial bits you mentioned, but does suggest some serious ongoing cashflow issues at this point.

My switch date is tomorrow. I expect TE will lose access to my meter in the next few hours. My data for April is complete up to midday today, so they'll have as much data as they could with which to issue my final bill. I've given them meter readings for the last couple of days so that they can bill for individual days as needed.

Let's see how they fare when they receive a change of supply reading that is 1500 units lower than the one they sent to Octopus 3 months ago!

While I'll be paying an extra 20p per day for the privilege, I am looking forward to plugging my home mini in again and making the most of the occasional price plunge on Agile. I saved close to £150 over the coldest months, so I am pleased enough with that.

FYI, I followed the steps bristolleedsfan suggested above, and am hoping to switch from Flexible to Agile on Wednesday.

On the non-financial bits, it was really as MWT outlined above. The fact that Ofgem felt there was enough to pursue a final order, which would have ended TE, but felt it had to intervene immediately for damage limitation purposes, was what tipped the balance for me.