Tomato Energy goes bust - here's what you need to know

Bendo

The terms allowed them to apply a deemed profile based on the opening and closing read. Tomato had so little understand of being an energy supplier though, I doubt they bother with follies like capturing an open read and storing it.

masonic

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82026967#Comment_82026967

Someone within Tomato knew about meter readings, as the system did ask for an opening read. However, for many of us the read they captured was wrong. In my case is was a couple of thousand units too high. Had they billed me according to opening and closing reads, they'd have owed me money for the time I was with them. I would guess that the administrators no longer have access to industry systems and data that would allow them to calculate EAC and bill according to that.

Chrysalis

I had an opening read, and even if I didnt I had an exit read on previous supplier.

Usually suppliers if they have metering issues they just bill anyway with estimates, whats stopping the administrators doing this?
I think TE had got to the point people were joining and staying quiet when they wasnt billed with an expectation they would get away with it, it would be a shame if these people got away with doing that.

MWT

The Tomato administrators have a somewhat unusual problem to deal with as the provider of all of their CRM systems (Their parent Senapt) is also in administration with a different set of administrators.

So they have little to no access to the software that would facilitate the billing process and working from any data outside the CRM that they may have is going to be very messy.

It was notable that BG made it very clear right from their appointment as SoLR that they would play no part in handling the final billing from Tomato as they could clearly see the dangers in getting sucked into that.

Ildhund

@masonic raises an interesting point about:

… access to industry systems and data that would allow them to calculate EAC …

I rather thought it was 'industry' that calculated the EAC on the basis of meter readings submitted by suppliers, not the other way round. If Tomato wasn't retrieving readings, then there would be no meter advances for Elexon to calculate an EAC from and the EAC would just stay stuck on something like Ofgem's TDCV. If this were the case, then any bill estimated on the basis of the EAC is bound to be completely fanciful.

Anuone with insight into this aspect?

MWT

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82027101#Comment_82027101

'the industry' is represented by their chosen data collector and they would be the source of that information as I understand it, but they may not be feeling very cooperative in this instance as it looks like Tomato was well behind in actually paying them…

masonic

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82027101#Comment_82027101

It seems a little unclear whether there is one definitive EAC that is used by all. There is, as you point out, the EAC defined by Elexon ( https://bscdocs.elexon.co.uk/user-requirements-specifications/estimation-of-annual-consumption-system ), which is industry generated and defines an estimated consumption over a year.

Then you have providers who imply they are DIYing and even adjusting the calculation to suit their own ends ( https://help.homeenergy.co.uk/hc/en-gb/articles/27123497718801-How-do-you-calculate-the-monetary-cost-of-my-estimated-annual-consumption-EAC - "As we take payment for your energy in advance, we add an additional month’s cost to arrive at the Estimated Annual Consumption").

I suspect it rather depends on whether EAC is referring to an annual number of units (which "consumption" implies) or a cost (which is provider calculated and ought to be called something different).

One other issue around any failure around publishing readings to the industry is that ex-Tomato customers' future EACs could be estimated (even more) poorly until a regular pattern of readings is re-established.

petecov4

Well they have 1 year from liquidation to sort it - not sure that's going to happen it's August now.

When I said they had walked away. I meant they have disclaimed their interest in NGH - as per their 6th of July official filing. I had been told that was also going to be the case for Senapt Assets - but I guess that info was not correct as of yet.

Looking at the latest Senapt Assets one. The one on the 27th of Apr suggests they have applied to do what is in the long proposal, which s not much.

The kit was only really a NGH/SA problem - one no longer has any interest, and SA looks like it could be going that way?

In any case, I had 0 contract/agreement with TE - and the one with SA was DOA anyway - so now all it comes down to is if the Administrators disclaim all company interest in SA too - and then it's all over

By the way - their kit is sat in the shed dead, i would like to charge it before winter to minimise the damage (as it gave up early November and probably plated itself trying to charge in -4) - can I just chuck a solar panel on it and charge it up? Or is getting it connected to a 3 pin plug an option?

The solar panels have been on another system for a good 6 months now

TroubledTarts

Since they went bust do they only have a year to bill or does this come under the 6 year rule for recovering debts?

masonic

Conditions attached to a supply licence no longer apply as they don't have said licence. So standard 6 year limitation would apply. However, any bill will have to stand up to proper scrutiny. If they don't have the consumption data by now, it seems increasingly unlikely as further time passes that any bill will stand up in court.