Ecotricity lodges complaints over Good Energy's green tariff claims

The row between two of the UK's leading green energy providers took another twist this week, after Ecotricity revealed that it has contacted regulators over what it regards as its rival's misleading statements about its green tariff policies.

Meanwhile, one of Good Energy's most high-profile customers, environmental lobby group Friends of the Earth, has confirmed that it has written to the company urging it to consider how it can " more clearly" communicate the ROC retiral policy that is the subject of Ecotricity's allegations.

As reported last week, Ecotricity has accused Good Energy of misleading customers by claiming it retires five per cent more Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) than it is required to under the Renewables Obligation (RO). Ofgem figures show that Good Energy has never retired ROCs at this face-value level, although the company argues that the number it has retired is financially equivalent to five per cent.

Ecotricity said it has now reported Good Energy to industry watchdog Ofgem, financial regulator the Financial Services Authority, and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales. It said that it has also contacted Friends of the Earth and Consumer Focus, both of which have endorsed Good Energy in the past, and requested that they correct material in which they state that Good Energy retires an additional five per cent of ROCs.

Good Energy has vigorously denied Ecotricity's allegations, citing the financial implications of voluntarily retiring additional ROCs. Under the rules of the RO, any additional ROCs that are retired do not qualify for a rebate paid out for those ROCs that are retired in line with legal obligations. Good Energy said it retires ROCs at a level that is "financially equivalent" to retiring the pledged five per cent were it to receive money at the same rate as for the ROCs it is required to submit.

A spokesman for the company said this has always been the case and that the company has always communicated that it retires "ROCs equivalent to five per cent". He added that ROC retiral was not central to the company's marketing strategy and that the company had never previously received any complaints about the policy.

However, writing on his blog, Ecotricity boss Dale Vince rejected Good Energy's explanation, arguing that the firm's published statements lacked the "wriggle room" needed to accord with Ofgem's records. "You either do or you don't [retire five per cent], " he wrote.

Vince also said third-party endorsements from Friends of the Earth and the National Consumer Council, now known as Consumer Focus, were partly based on Good Energy’s ROC commitment and should be amended.

Friends of the Earth's renewable energy campaigner Nick Rau said that the organisation had received a letter from Ecotricity detailing its concerns and was meeting with Good Energy later this week when it would be seeking clarification about the company's ROC retiral and communication practices.

"Our understanding has been that Good Energy retires ROCs to the equivalent economic value of compliance ROCs up to five per cent and that this is verified by an independent auditor," he said. "In view of recent accusations, we have written to Good Energy to ask for confirmation of its annual level of ROC retirement and to urge it to consider how this can be communicated more clearly in future."

A spokesman for Consumer Focus said that the organisation was aware of the situation and was still working on getting clarification on a number of issues from Good Energy.

Spokespeople for the FSA and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales said they could not confirm whether or not a complaint had been received or if an investigation was ongoing as a matter of policy.

A spokesman for Good Energy insisted that those parties that had contacted the firm to enquire about ROC retiral practices had been entirely satisfied with the company's explanation of its equivalence policy.

Ecotricity also said it has contacted the Advertising Standards Authority and Trading Standards about Good Energy's ROC retiral policy, although both signalled that the matter was either outside or on the edge of their remit, and as such they would not be pursuing the issue.