Plans for all major energy suppliers to offer at least one low Standing Charge tariff from Jan 2026

MSE_Helen_K

Hi everyone, just popping an update on this in here given we're now at the end of January:

Martin Lewis: Standing Charge reform 'feels like a series of over-promises and under-delivery' – as still NO change

GingerTim

Huh, ML implicitly recognises that his proposals were impractical, over-bureaucratic, and ill thought out.

It takes a big man to admit they were wrong, so well done Martin.

gpman

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81862093#Comment_81862093

I'm so glad MSE_Helen_K / MSE Martin posted that. Could be considered too political otherwise.

gpman

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81862115#Comment_81862115

Huh?

"This feels like a series of over-promises and under-delivery from Ofgem. When it first consulted on Standing Charges and received an unprecedented number of replies, it looked like it would finally take concerns about this £300-plus-a-year energy poll tax seriously.

Yet it's been diluted more than a shot of Vimto in a bath. And now we've reached the end of January – when it was initially meant to be introduced – and… nothing.

I get more complaints about Standing Charges than anything else on energy bills. This flat charge just for having gas and electricity – even if you don't use it – is a moral hazard that disincentivises people from cutting their usage, and punishes those, often older people, who only use gas during the winter. …

Now I genuinely don't know if we'll get anything at all. And I suspect if Ofgem does act, and it follows this mechanism, not enough people will switch and they'll say, 'it wasn't worth it'."

That does not sound the words to me of someone who "implicitly recognises that his proposals were impractical, over-bureaucratic, and ill thought out." nor admits they were wrong.

Talk about putting words into people's mouths.

michaels

Martin is a millionaire many times over. He is hardly likely to understand that some high energy users may also have low incomes.

Scot_39

Once Ofgem made it clear they were just shuffling deckchairs on the titanic, moving costs from SC to unit rates, it became obvious this wasnt going to achieve the lower bills for many , that certainly some of the poverty / debt charities were after.

And the concept that 30k repliex - is a significant number of uk households - laughable. But sadly indicative of UK populist governance - reacting to the loud noisy often tiny minority viewpoint.

The govt could have claimed a victory and "were listening" by replacing WHD with a low standing charge social tariff given whd represents c50% typical duel fuel SC.

but Ofgem latest decision to move costs of its extension for 5 years onto unit rates - will only in fact harm the same cohorts - Ofgem identified as most likely to be harmed by low SC tariffs - and again benefit the undeserving with solar and battery arrays - often rich low users.

tfhnota

No surprise that Ofgem, once again, has dismally failed to look after the consumer whilst massively expanding its workforce and salaries… and no doubt adding that cost to the standing charge.

GingerTim

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81866558#Comment_81866558

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/about-us/how-we-work/finances

"Funding

Our regulation work is funded by the annual licence fee we charge some licensed energy network companies. We also get money from government departments for specific projects.

Administration costs for some environmental and social schemes are funded by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ). Other schemes fund the administration costs themselves."

Scot_39

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81866558#Comment_81866558

low standing charge tariffs are not about looking after the general consumer.

And are in fact are as correctly identified by Ofgem a big risk to many vulnerable users.

And depending on which - if any - as all problematic - solution Ofgem decides from those it has proposed to date - many could well see absolutely no overall annual cost benefit - and if they choose the wrong model of those proposed - whilst some will see some small savings others could see £100s added to their bills.

The bottom line is their are a total in £££ mix of fixed costs to be paid - anyone who saves means someone else pays more into the total pot to cover it.

You ever wondered why their used to be several suppliers offering low s/c tariffs and now just one and evrn then only on prepay - if was a viable option for the masses surely all would be doing so. That one uses 2kWh per day - if Ofgem balancedthe shift at 700-800kWh to match annually - few would save anything - even those with solar.

And yes the whole exercise has potentially added to Ofgem costs - and so yes will be reflected in industry costs and so bills - whether via unit costs and / or SC.

Or used up Time and money that could have been focussed on say

better just in time grid and renewables license planning to reduce future curtailment costs,

or

time spent say on fundamental reviews of grid bid auction system (the highest dominant price wins model that saw non CfD renewables paid same as gas in uk during crisis but not overseas - profits so large a 45%(?) windfall tax above price (£75?) Threshold levy was apllied)

etc etc.

tfhnota

agree, lots of way to tighten things up in the retail energy sector and pass the savings on to all via reduced s/c but the point is that Ofgem refuse to do anything useful in that direction - other than when politicians throw a fit and Ofgem make some long drawn out promises (in contrast with slamming on increases in micro seconds) that have now gone into the ether, seemingly. The press may do some front page headlines on their failure over the next few days so not quite got away with it yet.