British Gas: A Lawless Company? The Evidence

Statement As many of you would have expected a new episode to have been published before now, I am keen to provide an update: I had hoped this week’s expected episode would be published this evening following a Court Hearing earlier today in which The Court considered my “ Recovery of Documents ” application for the “ Client Instructions ” issued to M Philip Knight (solicitor) by his client British Gas Trading Limited in November 2018 requiring him to advise The Court that a British Gas “ Executive Officer ” was a “ junior customer services manager ”. For the avoidance of doubt, British Gas completely denies issuing such improper instructions. Subsequent to The Court listening to my argument that Legal Professional Privilege ceases to pertain if the “ client instructions ” issued to counsel were “improper” – if the instructions required a solicitor to provide demonstrably false and dishonest information to a jurist for example – it became known to the Sheriff t...

Episode 6 A (fast) moving story Like all unfinished stories, you can never tell how they will continue, far less end. This one is no different. But there has been an important development: On Friday June 5th, I requested a copy of the document advising me that Ombudsman Services: Energy (OS) “… could not help [me] with my complaint ” which BG had assured OS it had provided me ( cf . Episode 4). Approximately four hours later, a BG agent responded to my enquiry thus: “ … [BG]   Is not able to locate the document you request but suggest that the Ombudsman might still retain a copy in their case file [ sic ].” This is a very significant response to a request for a specific and important document. It is clearly important because BG could only suggest “ … the Ombudsman might still retain a copy ” if it had, in fact, provided OS with the document in the first place . Of equal significance is BG’ s tacit revelation that the functionality of its “ data sto...

Episode 5 A 1.3 billion to one series of Unfortunate (written) Mistakes! As has been established, British Gas, in a 1995 agreement with the then Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Michael Heseltine) accepted it must treat all of its former tariff customers on “ Piped Propane ” Estates on the “ same contractual terms ” as its network gas customers on the UK mainland. Actually, it was a terrific deal for British Gas : treat your Propane Estate customers in Stornoway on the same terms as the rest of your customers and The Government will ensure the (huge) expense of delivering gas to that area would be free! Which it did. And still does (paid for by every gas user in the UK no matter the supplier). According to British Gas it held its side of the bargain by treating its Piped Propane customers in Stornoway on the same contractual terms as its mainland customers. According to Ofgem it didn’t because an unspecified number of customers were treated differently. A...

British Gas Fails in Bid to have a Scottish Court Constrain Revelatory Blog! Yesterday, in a historic ruling, the Court of Session Judge Lady Poole rejected British Gas ’ Advocate's (Mr Giles Reid) petition that she “order the removal of the first two Episodes and interim removal of the “new Blog Posts” . The Advocate’s petition specifically referenced the “ defamatory ” content evident in Episode 3, “ The Scarlet Letter ” which, he claimed, “ clearly implied” Philip Knight of Womble Bond Dickinson had lied to The Court when he informed a Sheriff that the British Gas Executive Officer , Kathryn White was in fact: “ a junior customer services manager ”. He continued, “ It [the Episode] also implied a slur ” on the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission ( SLCC ) by reproducing its adjudication which cleared Mr Knight (of my accusation that he was a “ pathological liar ”) because: (a)    The false information was not “ Capitalised ”. (b)    He only ...

Episode 4. The Irresistible Appeal of British Gas. Almost!  (Excludes the MP Angus Brendan MacNeil.) This Episode concerns a formal British Gas Appeal to Ombudsman Services : Energy requesting it stop an Investigation. Before considering this document, however, it is perhaps worth taking a closer look at Ombudsman Services: Energy . According to the mandatory complaints procedure of all energy suppliers, any complaint must begin with the customer contacting his/her supplier. The supplier then has a maximum of eight weeks to resolve the complaint before issuing a “ D eadlock Letter ” and thereafter directing the complainer to contact Ombudsman Services: Energy . This is a statutory requirement. If a “ Deadlock Letter ” is issued and Ombudsman Services: Energy is asked to become involved, its role is to provide a non-partisan adjudication service to both parties. When it agrees to investigate a complaint it immediately requests a £334.00 investigation fee from...