Key Facts
- •Carol Heaney entered into an energy plan with HELMS, a Green Deal provider, for energy efficiency improvements to her home.
- •Ms. Heaney was allegedly mis-sold the plan; she believed the improvements would be cost-free due to a government grant, but it involved a loan repaid through deductions from her energy bills.
- •HELMS was dissolved, and GDFC Assets Ltd became the payee of Ms. Heaney's instalments.
- •Ms. Heaney complained to the Secretary of State, who imposed a 30% reduction in her payments.
- •Ms. Heaney appealed the decision to the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber).
Legal Principles
For an energy plan to be a Green Deal plan, it must meet all requirements of s.1(3) and s.4(a)-(e) of the Energy Act 2011, regulations 30-36 of the Framework Regulations, and regulation 29.
Preliminary Decision, paragraph 24
Breach of a qualifying condition does not automatically lead to cancellation of a Green Deal plan. Proportionality of the sanction must be considered, given the harm to the bill payer.
Reasons, paragraph 30d, 81-109
Notices under the Framework Regulations must be in writing.
Reasons, paragraph 59
The Tribunal's role is not limited to reviewing the Secretary of State's decision; it reaches its own decision based on the evidence.
Reasons, paragraph 29
Outcomes
The appeal is allowed.
The Tribunal found that a qualifying condition (regulation 30(3) requiring written notification of instalment amounts) was breached, rendering the energy plan not a Green Deal plan. The appropriate sanction, considering the misrepresentation and significant harm to Ms. Heaney, was cancellation of the plan.
Substituted Decision Notice: Cancellation of Ms. Heaney's energy plan with effect from 19 March 2019.
The Tribunal determined that the breach of the qualifying condition, coupled with the mis-selling and resulting harm to Ms. Heaney, warranted cancellation as the proportionate sanction. The effective date was the date of the complaint to the Secretary of State.