Nakalama John
A harrowing 15-month ordeal culminated this week for Beth Kojder, a new mother from south-east London, who described the protracted struggle to reclaim over £1,500 in credit from British Gas as "absurd." Despite a clear directive from the energy ombudsman nearly a year ago, the energy giant repeatedly failed to issue a final bill and process her refund, leaving her in a financial and emotional limbo that ultimately pushed her to prepare for a small claims court battle. The resolution finally arrived just days before her scheduled court appearance, a testament to the power of persistence and external intervention, but also a stark indictment of the systemic failures within consumer protection mechanisms.
The saga began in October 2024 when Beth moved out of her one-bed flat. Having consistently maintained her energy account in credit, she expected a straightforward process: a final bill based on her provided meter readings, followed by a prompt refund of the substantial balance. At the time, her account held approximately £1,700 in credit, a significant sum she anticipated would ease the financial pressures of moving and, later, preparing for her first child. However, her requests for a final bill and refund were met with an alarming silence, quickly escalating her initial concerns into deep frustration.
After her initial complaints to British Gas yielded no progress, Beth, like many disgruntled consumers, turned to the Energy Ombudsman a few months later. This independent, impartial body is designed to mediate disputes between energy suppliers and their customers. In February 2025, the ombudsman unequivocally sided with Beth, ruling in her favour and instructing British Gas to "complete the final billing of the account… based on the readings already provided by Beth." The ombudsman’s decision also mandated British Gas to take action within 28 days and included a written apology along with a £100 goodwill credit for the service shortfalls. While British Gas promptly addressed the minor aspects of the ruling, the core issue – the final bill and the refund – remained stubbornly unresolved, turning the ombudsman’s ‘remedy’ into a hollow promise.
The subsequent 11 months were a draining period of exasperation for Beth. She found herself in an unenviable position, battling a corporate giant while navigating the immense personal changes of pregnancy and childbirth. Her baby was born in December 2025, during which time the £1,700 she was owed by British Gas could have provided crucial financial support. "It’s a significant amount of money. Maybe not to British Gas but it is to me," Beth articulated, highlighting the disparity between a multi-billion-pound corporation and an individual consumer. "That’s almost £2,000 I could have done with. Then there’s all the admin. The process has been relentless and it’s tiring and it’s completely draining." The emotional toll of this prolonged dispute, coupled with the arrival of a newborn, underscored the profound impact such administrative failures can have on people’s lives.
The case also sheds a critical light on the limitations of the Energy Ombudsman’s powers. While energy suppliers are legally obliged, as part of their licence conditions, to be members of an independent customer dispute scheme, the ombudsman itself is not a statutory body. This crucial distinction means it cannot legally force suppliers to comply with its rulings. In 2024 alone, the Energy Ombudsman accepted 93,000 complaints, with approximately 70% of those cases ruled in favour of consumers. Suppliers are typically required to implement these decisions within 28 days. While the vast majority of suppliers meet this deadline, a worrying "many thousands" of cases see the deadline missed or no action taken at all. Beth’s experience, where a ruling in her favour went unheeded for nearly a year, exemplifies this systemic vulnerability.
This recurring problem has not gone unnoticed by regulators and government bodies. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) has acknowledged the issue, stating they are actively "strengthening the Energy Ombudsman" to ensure consumers can be confident that rulings in their favour will be acted upon. Ofgem, the energy regulator, also expressed its concern through its deputy director of retail compliance, Jackie Gehrmann. She stated, "The message to suppliers is really, really clear. When the ombudsman makes a ruling they should implement that ruling as quickly as possible." Gehrmann noted that in the last year, suppliers have collectively paid out £27 million in fines and voluntary payment agreements related to consumer issues, indicating the scale of widespread problems within the sector.
However, for individuals like Beth, these statistics and future promises offer little solace when faced with immediate, tangible frustration. "I just felt completely desperate and like it was the only option to try to get some traction," she said, referring to her decision to pursue legal action via a small claims court. It was only after BBC Radio 4’s Money Box program contacted British Gas in early December about Beth’s case that the situation dramatically shifted. Up until late Thursday night, Beth was still bracing herself for the court hearing. Then, suddenly, British Gas presented an offer that covered everything Beth was asking for, which she promptly accepted. This eleventh-hour resolution, spurred by media attention and the looming threat of legal proceedings, highlighted the immense pressure consumers often need to exert to achieve justice.
Reflecting on the resolution, Beth expressed a mix of relief and profound frustration. While pleased to finally have the matter settled, she remains critical of the process. "I still think the fact it’s taken this long to reach [a resolution] is absurd. And the level of intervention that’s been required on my part as a consumer is unbelievable." Her sentiment underscores a critical failure on the part of British Gas, which she felt had "completely failed" to engage constructively with the ombudsman process. British Gas, in its statement, reiterated its apology: "We’re implementing the Ombudsman’s remedy and, together with Ms Kojder, are finalising a resolution to her claim. We appreciate this has been difficult for her and we’re very sorry for the length of time it has taken to put things right."
Beth Kojder’s case serves as a potent reminder of the ongoing challenges faced by consumers in the UK energy market. It exposes the chinks in the armour of consumer protection where, despite independent rulings, large corporations can seemingly drag their feet with impunity until faced with the threat of legal action or public scrutiny. While regulators and the government work towards strengthening the ombudsman’s powers, the immediate reality for many remains one of protracted battles, emotional strain, and the sheer absurdity of needing to fight for what is rightfully theirs. The hope is that the proposed reforms will grant the Energy Ombudsman the necessary teeth to ensure that such "absurd" delays become a relic of the past, allowing consumers to trust that their energy suppliers will uphold their obligations without external coercion.
George Anjay
Ramos Leo
atisusanti