Utility Week

14 | 26TH APRIL - 2ND MAY 2019 | UTILITY WEEK Policy & Regulation Analysis continued In terms of attitudes towards the cap itself, 68 per cent of respondents agreed the government's price x should stay, with a similar number feeling it had been necessary to bring it in. Only three per cent strongly disagreed with its introduction. But the jury remained out on whether the initiative had resulted in fairer energy prices. Less than one-third (31 per cent) agreed or strongly agreed, with 23 per cent disagree- ing, of which 9 per cent strongly disagreed. A clear third of all respondents (at 33 per cent) neither agreed nor disagreed. Switching suppliers Asked which of the following statements most applied to them, over two- … hs of respondents (44 per cent) said they did not intend to switch energy supplier any time soon. And those who had switched recently said this was not because of the price cap. Only 7 per cent blamed the cap for them switching, with a further 12 per cent citing it as the reason they intended to do so soon. Those who were planning to switch because of the price cap were more likely to be younger (see "Recent switching behaviour"). Most of those who had switched supplier had opted to move from a big six company, with the largest number of them coming from British Gas. However, among those switching from a big six supplier there were no sig- ni cant di' erences between those switch- ing for price cap or non-price cap reasons, at 64 per cent and 59 per cent respectively (see "Energy companies switched from"). A sizeable number of switchers moved to a medium-sized retailer, with Bulb Energy and Ovo Energy bene ting the most. Price cap switchers were less likely to have switched to a smaller supplier (at 12 per cent) and more likely to have switched to a large supplier (46 per cent), although not signi cantly so (with 42 per cent switching to medium suppliers). Among those switching to a small sup- plier, no single supplier stood out. Those switching to one of the big six, respondents were more likely to have switched to British Gas or EDF Energy (see "Energy companies switched to"). Most of those respondents who said they planned to switch were with a big six sup- plier. There was little signi cant di' erence between whether they blamed the price cap (72 per cent) or not (66 per cent), however those planning to switch due to the price cap were much less likely (at 4 per cent) to be with small suppliers (see "Current energy company planned switchers"). Asked which energy company they planned to switch to, signi cantly more price cap "planned switchers" were sure about who they would be switching to, with more saying they would choose a big six company. continued from previous page ENERGY PRICE CAP UNDERSTANDING Respondents understood the price cap to mean that there would be a maximum amount they would pay for their energy each month – and this was seen in a positive light my many. 7 use per price energy prices amount certain charge cap means go cant limit pay set charged much tariff unit rate rise level bills gas put get maximum standard companies customers wont think consumers increase people capped suppliers government fixed time tariffs higher variable company money high cost nothing providers "Companies cannot increase the price of energy more than a stated amount." "It is the limit or the maximum amount to be charged by suppliers for their services." "That energy companies cannot charge extortionate rates to the customers." "A cap on the price than customers can be charged for a product." MQ2. Please tell us, in your own words, what you think the price cap means for consumers? (Base: n=1002) Key fi ndings • Levels of awareness regarding the energy price cap are relatively high, at almost seven in ten. • Most understood the price cap was a limit on energy supplier charges and saw this as a positive thing. • Almost seven in ten thought the cap should stay, with a similar number view- ing it as necessary. • Despite respondents seeing it as a posi- tive step, just over three in ten felt it had led to them receiving fairer energy pricing. • Most had not – and had no intention of – switching supplier. • The majority who had or intended to switch said it was not because of the cap. • Those who had switched or planned to were more likely to be switching from a big six supplier, but as likely to have switched to a medium supplier as one of the big six. • Those influenced by the cap were much less likely than those who weren't to have switched to a small supplier and much more likely to have switched to the big six. • Signi cantly more price cap planned switchers than non-price cap switch- ers were sure about who they would be switching to and signi cantly more would be choosing a big six supplier. Respondents understood the price cap to mean that there would be a maximum amount they would pay for their energy each month – and this was seen in a positive light by many. "A cap on the price that customers can be charged for a product."

• Cover