← Back to Guides

£7 Million in Refunds: Energy Overcharging Is Not a Myth

In May 2025, Ofgem confirmed that ten UK energy suppliers were required to pay £7 million in refunds and compensation after overcharging more than 34,000 customers.

This was not speculation. It was not social media outrage. It was a regulator-confirmed billing failure.

What Actually Happened?

The issue centred on standing charges being applied incorrectly to customers with restricted meter infrastructure — properties with multiple electricity meter points.

Suppliers are permitted to apply multiple standing charges in certain setups. They are not permitted to exceed Ofgem’s price cap.

In this case, billing systems failed to apply the cap correctly. Customers were charged more than allowed under regulation.

This Was a Systems Failure

Modern energy billing is no longer a simple calculation of usage × unit rate. It relies on:

• Automated billing platforms
• Tariff configuration engines
• Price cap integration logic
• Smart meter data systems
• Multi-meter property rules

When billing becomes heavily system-driven, small configuration errors can scale across thousands of accounts.

Complexity Creates Risk

Over recent years, UK energy billing has become more layered due to:

• Standing charge structures
• Time-of-use tariffs
• Smart meter integration
• Multiple meter points per property
• Price cap adjustments

Each layer adds operational complexity. Each layer increases reliance on software functioning perfectly.

Ofgem’s ruling demonstrates that even large, regulated suppliers can get this wrong.

Is This Evidence of Widespread Misconduct?

There is no evidence of deliberate fraud. The issue appears to have been a configuration and compliance failure.

However, intent does not change the outcome: customers were overcharged.

Where Smart Meters Fit In

Smart meters themselves are not proven to cause overcharging. However, they are part of a broader digital billing ecosystem.

When billing systems become fully automated and dependent on software interpretation of tariff rules, transparency can become harder for households to independently verify.

The Real Takeaway

Energy billing in 2025 is highly automated. Automation improves efficiency — but it also introduces systemic risk when errors occur.

Regulators can intervene after the fact. Refunds can be issued later.

But independent verification provides an additional layer of protection.

The lesson from this case is simple: complex systems benefit from independent checks.