Dogs used to intimidate customer during PPM install

Customers put on forced prepayment meters (PPMs) often felt intimidated during the installation process, with one report of dogs being brought to a customer’s house by bailiffs.

The revelations are made in an Ofgem report released following qualitative research it undertook with PPM customers which it used to help inform its decision around a new mandatory code of practice concerning the installation of PPMs. The research involved Ofgem commissioning Savanta to interview 50 consumers between April-June this year.

The regulator’s key findings include stories of intimidation, customers feeling “punished” after being involuntarily moved onto a PPM, as well as feelings of “shame and a loss of control”.

While most participants described having had a positive experience with the engineers who installed their PPM, those who had the install done under warrant tended to have a “very different” experience.

“Rather than a single engineer, warrant installations usually included a larger group of people which felt intimidating to participants who experienced this. This was particularly where bailiffs were in attendance, with some reports from participants of bailiffs deliberately trying to intimidate or upset them, or forcing entry into their homes,” the report said.

It further highlighted how some consumers felt their treatment was “disproportionate and inappropriate”, particularly where levels of debt were not perceived to be high or they planned to make repayment once their financial situation had stabilised. This led to a feeling that their supplier failed to properly engage with their individual situation.

In one instance a consumer reported that during their forced PPM installation, a bailiff arrived on their doorstep with dogs.

The anonymised consumer said: “A bailiff came with a court order. And dogs and all sorts, there are loads of them. The dog patrol van, they aren’t the police, it was some…person, cocky as hell. It felt like [it was just to intimidate me]. I thought, ‘why have they brought dogs up?’ And then the woman that I was dealing with, she talked to me as though I was a baby, like a little kid.”

There were also concerns raised about bailiffs forcing entry when children were home alone.

Another consumer said: “They actually forced entry into the home when I wasn’t here and my daughter was at home. She was 14, nearly 15.

“They shouldn’t have come in the house, and they did. […] She opened the door, and then she was like, ‘no, no, don’t come in,’ they said they are coming in. It was really bad.”

Other concerns raised in the report include a lack of communication from suppliers about what to expect during installation or how to use a PPM.

It was not all negative however, with both those who chose to have their PPM installed and those who had one installed under warrant reporting that the meters “gave them control over their budget and removed the stress of receiving unexpectedly high bills based on supplier estimates”.

Ofgem’s research was published alongside its decision on mandating the previously voluntary code of practice around PPM installations.

Among the new rules include the “do not install” upper age limit being lowered from customers aged 85 with no other support in their home to 75. It has additionally banned the installation of PPMs in households with children aged under two years old.

Responding to Ofgem’s findings Matthew Cole, head of Fuel Bank Foundation, said: “We haven’t heard of any specific examples of bailiffs using intimidation tactics when visiting customers’ homes but if, as the evidence suggests in Ofgem’s research, it has happened in the past or is continuing to happen, we would be extremely concerned, especially if vulnerable customers are being subjected to intimidating and threatening behaviour.”

He welcomed the fact the code of practice has become mandatory and hailed it as “a step in the right direction for providing PPM customers better consumer protections, which have sadly been lacking until now”.

He added: “Extending the code of practice to include the most vulnerable households by reducing the age to 75 and over and adding homes with children under the age of two is, of course, a good thing, but these should be a guideline rather than a rule.

“There will be many households that have children over two years old or people under the age of 75 where a PPM being installed could cause significant harm. It shouldn’t be a one size fits all approach, which is why it’s important for suppliers to understand the individual needs of their most vulnerable customers.”

Clare Moriarty, chief executive of Citizens Advice, said: “The harm caused by the prepayment meter scandal must never be allowed to be repeated. As energy bills soared, far too many people were forced onto meters they simply couldn’t afford to keep topped up, often with devastating results.

“Evidence is clear that children under five need energy for their health and wellbeing. Ofgem’s decision does not go far enough to stop all families with children aged five and under from being forced onto a prepayment meter. That poses a significant risk which we will be monitoring closely.

“As we head into what will be yet another incredibly difficult winter for many, it’s essential suppliers ensure that none of their vulnerable customers are forced onto a prepayment meter.”

Adam Scorer, chief executive of National Energy Action, said: “The temporary ban on the forced installations of prepayment meters was a necessary step after many vulnerable people were wrongly switched over. But temporary measures need to become permanent protections, enshrined in the energy licence.

“It is good news that those aged over 75 and those with babies and toddlers under the age of two will not be forced onto a meter or remotely switched against their will. However, with millions of households struggling with unaffordable energy bills and mounting arrears, it’s vital the government offers more support to the most vulnerable otherwise energy debt will continue to rise, as will the number of people moved onto prepayment meters.”