Connect with us

Published

on

One thing the energy industry agrees on in theory – if not, it turns out, in practice – is that forcing prepayment meters on vulnerable customers is unacceptable. 

The widespread revulsion at British Gas debt collectors forcing entry to the homes of families is deserved and universal.

Less clear-cut is what to do about the underlying cause.

The industry calls it the “affordability crisis” but those facing the reality know it simply as poverty.

Forced installation of prepayment meters (PPMs) is a miserable practice that, until the energy crisis, existed at the margins, affecting only the poorest or most reluctant of bill payers.

The explosion in energy prices has pushed it closer to the mainstream.

PPMs are supposed to be a last-resort in response to a challenge that has always faced utility providers; what to do about those households who cannot or will not pay their bills, and who continue to run up unsustainable debt?

Forty years ago, when gas and electricity meters were commonplace and tampering was a criminal, occasionally fatal, offence, affordability was self-regulating. If you did not have 50p to feed the meter the lights stayed off.

In the age of near universal connection the responsibility for balancing ability and willingness to pay, and the right to essential utilities, lies with the energy companies themselves.

It’s an issue the regulator Ofgem has grappled with since its inception.

An ongoing issue for Ofgem

In 2009 it asked suppliers not to disconnect pensioners or any home with under-18s in the coldest months between October and March, and to reconnect anyone inadvertently cut off within 24 hours.

In the last decade PPMs have been the mechanism for managing debt. They are supposed to prevent customers from going deeper into arrears by requiring them to pay upfront with payment cards or emergency credit from suppliers.

In practice they are a digital version of the old coin meters. Those who cannot pay end up self-disconnecting.

Read more:
British Gas prepayment allegations – what you need to know
How do prepayment meters work and what are the rules?

Ofgem’s licence conditions have banned forced installation for vulnerable customers since 2018, and “suppliers must not disconnect certain vulnerable customers during the winter, or disconnect anybody whose debt the supplier has not taken all reasonable steps to recover first by using a PPM”.

That was plainly not the case in the British Gas examples highlighted by The Times, but it should be said even Ofgem believes PPMs have a place.

Support for prepay meters

Its chief executive Jonathan Brearley told MPs this week they were a reasonable recourse for customers who can pay but will not.

Underlying that is the reasonable assumption that suppliers should get paid, and that they have a responsibility to ensure customers do not run up unsustainable debts.

The practical challenge of the current crisis is straining those principles.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The boss of British Gas’ owner, Centrica, has said

The energy industry and charities estimate up to 40% of households are spending more than 10% of their income on energy.

Ofgem’s own figures show close to one million people are in arrears on electricity payments and nearly 800,000 for gas, with no agreed plan to manage debt reduction.

The least well-off customers are routinely offered payment plans or emergency credit, around half of which is never repaid.

Retail suppliers privately say they cannot afford to offer such support on the scale that may currently be required.

Industry sources say the collective debt book is thought to run to around £2.5bn – around £2bn of which is considered bad debt.

The week that Shell announced profits of more than £32bn is a tough one in which to plead poverty, but the retail industry is separate from energy production, with regulated prices that have seen almost 30 companies forced out of business in the last 18 months.

A watershed moment for those in the market to reconsider?

That’s why, with wholesale prices falling, suppliers are calling on government to cancel a scheduled reduction in energy support that will increase prices, and distress to the poorest households, from April.

There’s little question that for those on the receiving end, forced installation of a PPM is a dehumanising bureaucratic device.

It’s possible too that anyone who runs up unsustainable debts heating their home satisfies a definition of vulnerability.

The industry-wide pause on using court warrants gives everyone with a stake in the market a chance to reconsider and may prove a watershed but there are no easy options or solutions.

Ofgem has recently argued for a subsidised social tariff, offering cheaper rates to defined vulnerable groups. The review of PPMs may also ask if it is ever okay to allow someone to be cut off.

Water companies cannot turn off the taps, but if the same applied to energy, how can commercial supply be sustainable in a medium term of elevated energy costs?

A meaningful review will have to examine the court process, which since the cost of living crisis has seen magistrates asked to approve hundred of warrants at a time and take suppliers at their word that due diligence has been done.

Unless government legislates to remove suppliers right to access customers homes the court process will be central to reform.

Centrica chief executive Chris O’Shea said this week that the plight of his energy customers was symptomatic of a wider affordability crisis for basic essentials, including housing.

As the man ultimately responsible for British Gas’s actions he may not be the most sympathetic witness, and the answer can never be to drill the locks of the disabled, but he had a point.

Continue Reading

Business

Whitehall on alert for collapse of Gupta’s steel empire

Published

on

By

Whitehall on alert for collapse of Gupta's steel empire

The metals tycoon Sanjeev Gupta is this weekend plotting a controversial deal to salvage his remaining UK steel operations and avert their collapse into compulsory liquidation – a move that would put close to 1,500 jobs at risk.

Sky News has learnt that Mr Gupta is in talks about a so-called connected pre-pack administration of Liberty Steel’s Speciality Steel UK (SSUK) arm, which would involve the assets being sold – potentially to parties linked to him – after shedding hundreds of millions of pounds of tax and other liabilities to creditors.

Begbies Traynor, the accountancy firm, is understood to be working on efforts to progress the pre-pack deal.

This weekend, Whitehall sources said that government officials had stepped up planning for the collapse of SSUK if an already-deferred winding-up petition scheduled to be heard next Wednesday is approved.

If that were to happen, SSUK would be likely to enter compulsory liquidation within days, with a special manager appointed by the Official Receiver to run the operations.

Mr Gupta’s UK business operates steel plants at Sheffield and Rotherham in South Yorkshire, with a combined workforce of more than 1,400 people.

SSUK is Britain’s third-largest steel producer.

More from Money

Sources close to Mr Gupta could yet secure a further adjournment of the winding-up petition to buy him additional breathing space from creditors.

In May, a hearing was adjourned after lawyers acting for SSUK said talks had been taking place with “a third-party purchaser”.

Their identity has not been publicly disclosed, and it has been unclear in recent weeks if any such discussions were continuing.

A connected pre-pack risks stiff opposition from Liberty Steel’s creditors, which include HM Revenue and Customs.

UBS, the investment bank which rescued Credit Suisse, a major backer of the collapsed finance firm Greensill Capital – which itself had a multibillion dollar exposure to Liberty Steel’s parent, GFG Alliance – is also a creditor of the company.

Grant Thornton, the accountancy firm handling Greensill’s administration, is also watching the legal proceedings with interest.

The Serious Fraud Office launched a probe into GFG – which stands for Gupta Family Group – in 2022.

On Saturday, a Liberty Steel spokesperson said: “Discussions are ongoing to finalise options for SSUK.

“We remain committed to identifying a solution that preserves electric arc furnace steelmaking in the UK-a critical national capability supporting strategic supply chains.

“We continue to work towards an outcome that best serves the interests of creditors, employees, and the broader community.”

Last month, The Guardian reported that Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, was monitoring events at Liberty Steel’s SSUK arm, and had not ruled out stepping in to provide support to the company.

Such a move is still thought to be an option, although it is not said to be imminent.

The Department for Business and Trade has been contacted for comment.

It has previously said: “We continue to closely monitor developments around Liberty Steel, including any public hearings, which are a matter for the company.

“It is for Liberty to manage commercial decisions on the future of its companies, and we hope it succeeds with its plans to continue on a sustainable basis.”

Read more:
Lola’s Cupcakes bakes £30m takeover by Finsbury Food
Trump’s son-in-law Kushner takes stake in UK lender OakNorth

Wednesday’s winding-up petition was filed by Harsco Metals Group, a supplier of materials and labour to SSUK, and is said to be supported by other trade creditors.

Mr Reynolds has already orchestrated the rescue of British Steel, the Scunthorpe-based steelmaker, after failing to reach a government aid deal with Jingye Group, the company’s Chinese owner.

Jingye had been preparing to permanently close Scunthorpe’s remaining blast furnaces, prompting Mr Reynolds to step in and seize control of the company in April.

The government has yet to make a decision to formally nationalise British Steel, although that is anticipated in the autumn.

Tata Steel, the owner of Britain’s biggest steelworks at Port Talbot, has agreed a £500m government grant to build an electric arc furnace capable of manufacturing greener steel.

Other parts of Mr Gupta’s empire have been showing signs of financial stress for years.

The Financial Times reported in May that he was preparing to call in administrators to oversee the insolvency of Liberty Commodities.

Separately, HMRC filed a winding-up petition against Liberty Pipes, another subsidiary, earlier this month, The Guardian reported.

Mr Gupta is said to have explored whether he could persuade the government to step in and support SSUK using the legislation enacted to take control of British Steel’s operations.

Whitehall insiders told Sky News in May that Mr Gupta’s overtures had been rebuffed.

He had previously sought government aid during the pandemic but that plea was also rejected by ministers.

SSUK, which also operates from a site in Bolton, Lancashire, makes highly engineered steel products for use in sectors such as aerospace, automotive and oil and gas.

The company said earlier this year that it had invested nearly £200m in the last five years into the UK steel industry, but had faced “significant challenges due to soaring energy costs and an over-reliance on cheap imports, negatively impacting the performance of all UK steel companies”.

Continue Reading

Business

Trump’s son-in-law Kushner takes stake in UK lender OakNorth

Published

on

By

Trump's son-in-law Kushner takes stake in UK lender OakNorth

The private equity firm set up by Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, is to take a stake in OakNorth, the British-based lender which has set its sights on a rapid expansion in the US.

Sky News has learnt that Affinity Partners, which has amassed billions of dollars in assets under management, has signed a deal to acquire an 8% stake in OakNorth.

The deal is expected to be concluded in the coming weeks, industry sources said on Friday.

Mr Kushner established Affinity Partners in 2021 after leaving his role as an adviser to President Trump during his first term in the White House.

He is married to Ivanka, the president’s daughter.

Affinity manages money for a range of investors including the sovereign wealth funds of Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Insiders said that Affinity Partners was buying the OakNorth stake from an unidentified existing investor in the digital bank.

More from Money

The valuation at which the transaction was taking place was unclear, although OakNorth was valued at $2.8bn in its most recent funding round in 2019.

OakNorth, which was founded by Rishi Khosla, is targeting substantial loan growth in the US in the coming years.

Earlier this year, it agreed to buy Community Unity Bank (CUB), which is based in Birmingham, Michigan, in an all-share deal.

The transaction is awaiting regulatory approval.

OakNorth began lending in the US in 2023 and has since made roughly $1.3bn of loans.

The bank is chaired by the former City watchdog chair Lord Turner, and is among a group of digital-only British banks which are expected to explore stock market listings in the next few years.

Monzo, Revolut and Starling Bank are all likely to float by the end of 2028, although London is far from certain to be the destination for all of them.

Similarly, OakNorth’s ambition to grow its US presence means it is likely to be advised by bankers that New York is a more logical listing venue for the business.

Launched in 2015, the bank is among a group of lenders founded after the 2008 financial crisis.

Its UK clients include F1 Arcade and Ultimate Performance, both of which have themselves expanded into the US market.

Its existing backers include the giant Japanese investor SoftBank, GIC, the Singaporean state fund, and Toscafund, the London-based asset management firm.

Since its launch, OakNorth has lent around £12.5bn and boasts an industry-leading loan default ratio.

Last year, it paid out just over £30m to shareholders in its maiden dividend payment.

OakNorth has been growing rapidly, saying this year that it had recorded pre-tax profits of £214.8m in 2024, up from £187.3m the previous year.

It made more than £2.1bn of new loans last year.

On Friday, a spokesperson for OakNorth declined to comment.

Continue Reading

Business

Government will not offer bailout to UK’s largest bioethanol plant

Published

on

By

Government will not offer bailout to UK's largest bioethanol plant

The UK’s largest bioethanol plant is set for closure with the loss of 160 jobs after the government confirmed it would not offer a bailout deal to the facility in Lincolnshire. 

Owners Vivergo, a subsidiary of Associated British Foods, had warned that the plant would close without government support, and sources at the company have told Sky News the wind-down process is now likely to begin.

An ABF spokesperson, which also owns Primark, said the government’s decision was “deeply regrettable” and it had “chosen not to support a key national asset”.

They added that the government had “thrown away billions in potential growth in the Humber and a sovereign capability in clean fuels that had the chance to lead the world”.

Vivergo have blamed the UK’s trade deal with the United States, which ended a 19% tariff on imported ethanol, for making the plant unviable.

Ethanol tariffs were cut along with those on beef as part of the UK-US deal, which focused on reducing or removing Donald Trump’s import taxes on UK cars and aerospace parts.

The plant, which converts wheat into the fuel typically added to petrol to reduce carbon emissions, was already losing £3m a month before the trade deal, with industrial energy prices, the highest among developed economies, cited as a major factor.

More from Money

Vivergo and ABF have warned of the threat to the plant since the spring, but had hoped negotiations with the government would lead to an improved offer by the end of the week. On Friday morning, they were told there would be no bailout.

Government sources said they had employed external consultants to provide advice, and pointed out that the plant had not been profitable since 2011.

Read more:
How trade deal could bring about collapse of renewable energy plant

MoD urged to reveal details of nuclear incident at Faslane
UK quarterly GDP slows as economy feels effect of higher business costs

A government spokesman said: “Direct funding would not provide value for the UK taxpayer or solve the long-term problems of the bioethanol industry.”

“This government will always take decisions in the national interest. That’s why we negotiated a landmark deal with the US which protected hundreds of thousands of jobs in sectors like auto and aerospace.

“We have worked closely with the companies since June to understand the financial challenges they have faced over the past decade, and have taken the difficult decision not to offer direct funding as it would not provide value for the taxpayer or solve the long-term problems the industry faces.

“We recognise this is a difficult time for the workers and their families and we will work with trade unions, local partners and the companies to support them through this process.

“We also continue to work up proposals that ensure the resilience of our CO2 supply in the long-term in consultation with the sector.”

Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said the government’s decision not to provide support to the UK’s bioethanol industry was “short-sighted” and “totally disregards the benefits the domestic bioethanol sector will bring to jobs and energy security”.

“Once again, the government’s total lack of a plan to support oil and gas workers as the industry transitions is glaring,” Ms Graham added.

GMB Union’s Charlotte Brumpton-Childs said the closure of the Hull and Redcar bioethanol plants would result in “working people losing their livelihoods”, adding that this was the impact of tariffs and trade deals.

“They’re not numbers in a spreadsheet. These are lives put on hold and communities potentially devastated,” she said.

Continue Reading

Trending