The energy regulator Ofgem has imposed a £20m fine on British Gas following revelations that the supplier illegally forced vulnerable customers onto pre-payment meters. The penalty, one of the largest in the regulator’s history, comes amid growing public outrage over the treatment of households already struggling with soaring energy costs.
Ofgem’s investigation found that British Gas used court warrants to install pre-payment meters in homes where customers had fallen behind on bills, often without proper assessment of their circumstances. In some cases, meters were installed in the homes of elderly people, individuals with medical conditions, and families with young children, effectively cutting off their supply if they could not afford to top up.
The fine is intended to send a clear signal that such practices will not be tolerated. However, critics argue that it represents only a fraction of the profits made by British Gas, which is owned by Centrica and serves 7.6 million customers. The company reported operating profits of £2.3bn in 2022.
Ofgem has also called for sweeping reforms to the energy market, including stricter rules on when pre-payment meters can be installed and greater protection for households in debt. The regulator wants mandatory assessments of customers’ vulnerability before any installation, and a ban on forced installations during winter months. These proposals come amid a broader crisis of energy affordability in the UK, where average annual household bills have risen by more than 50% since 2021.
But the scandal raises deeper questions about the structure of the energy market. Pre-payment meters are often the most expensive way to pay for energy, charging higher standing charges and unit rates. They disproportionately affect low-income households, people with disabilities, and those living in poorly insulated homes. The system effectively charges the most for those who can least afford it. As the physicist and climate scientist Dr. Helena Vance notes, 'We are seeing a feedback loop of energy poverty and inefficient housing. The most vulnerable are forced to pay more for less energy, trapping them in a cycle of debt and cold homes.'
The fine and proposed reforms come at a time when the UK government is under pressure to deliver a just transition to net-zero emissions. Energy efficiency programmes, such as the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund, have been criticised for being underfunded and slow to roll out. Meanwhile, the cost of gas and electricity remains volatile, with global events and North Sea gas depletion driving prices.
Any meaningful reform must address the underlying inequity of the energy system. The current model, with its emphasis on market competition and minimal regulation, has failed to protect consumers. The demand for reform is not merely about punishing British Gas but about reshaping the energy market so that it serves the public interest. As Dr. Vance puts it, 'We are at a crossroads. We can either continue down a path where energy is a commodity to be extracted from the most vulnerable, or we can build a system where energy is a public good, accessible and affordable to all.'
The £20m fine is a symbolic gesture. The real change must come from policy that prioritises people over profits, and a commitment to a just transition that leaves no one behind in the cold.
