Suppliers’ court agents ‘may have committed perjury’

Agents of suppliers are bringing the courts into “disrepute” by either inadvertently giving “misleading” information or committing “perjury” when seeking warrants to install prepayment (PPM) meters, the chairman of Parliament’s Justice Committee has said.

During a Labour Party-sponsored House of Commons debate on Monday (6 February) into Ofgem’s suspension of the forced PPM installations, Sir Bob Neill said the judiciary had agreed to deal with PPM warrants in bulk because they had been assured by energy providers that Ofgem’s requirement had been met.

Despite suppliers’ representatives providing these assurances by swearing on oath, it is “clear that in many cases they (the requirements) cannot have been met, he said: “That must surely indicate, first, that the process itself is flawed and should not be continued and, secondly, that there must be an inquiry into not just the process itself, but the suitability of some of those who are representing the energy suppliers and Ofgem in court.

“Either they gave misleading information by inadvertence or, potentially, they did so deliberately, which, on oath, amounts to perjury. That is a very serious matter which brings the court process into disrepute, and it needs to be investigated too.”

The veteran Conservative MP’s comments followed the issuing of guidance to magistrates’ courts, instructing them to suspend dealing with PPM warrant applications from energy companies.

Responding to Neill, energy minister Graham Stuart said: “It is clear—not only, potentially, from court proceedings but from evidence given to the regulator—that some suppliers did not provide evidence on which we could rely.”

Stuart, who has retained the energy portfolio following today’s wider re-organisation of the government, said he had asked officials to look into Labour’s call to provide all customers with a minimum amount of power so that nobody is cut off, as is the case in France.

But putting this minimum amount of power on all meters would be complicated, he said: “There are a lot of technical and other challenges to such a system. One of the benefits of having a prepayment meter is that it allows someone who is not engaging with their supplier and is running up debt to none the less have a supply continuing in their home. Having people cut off completely if they fail to manage that is not something we would want to see.”

Stuart urged customers who have been forced to have PPMs installed without companies following proper process to seek redress.