Register of enforcement action

Victorian energy efficiency certificates ordered for surrender: 180 

Other enforcement action:

• Warning.

Provisions contravened:

• Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) Act 2007 section 18(1)
• Code of conduct within schedule 6 VEET Regulations 2018, included clauses 4(d) and 13(c) 

Obligation contravened: In2 Energy allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because it: 

• Exaggerated energy savings by claiming two cold room upgrades were for freezers when they were actually for fridges.
• Used a logo in marketing materials that resembled the Victorian Government logo. 

More information

Duration of accreditation suspension: Three months

Other enforcement actions:

• Victorian energy efficiency certificates refused: 47.
• Victorian energy efficiency certificates ordered for surrender: 28.
• Compliance audit.

Provisions contravened:

• Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) Act 2007 sections 16(1)(c) and 17
• VEET Regulations 2018 regulation 15(2)
• Code of conduct within schedule 6 VEET Regulations 2018, included clauses 11, 12(1), 13A, 14, 15, 19 and 25. 

Obligation contravened: Re-Energi allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because it created certificates:

• without holding an assignment of a right to create a certificate by the energy consumer
• where a person responsible for any part of the prescribed activity or any regulated action associated with the prescribed activity has not complied with the code of conduct. 

More information

Duration of accreditation suspension: 3 months. 

Other enforcement actions:

• Victorian energy efficiency certificates refused: 236.
• Victorian energy efficiency certificates ordered for surrender: 664.
• Compliance audit.

Provisions contravened: Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) Act 2007 section 17(1). 

Obligation contravened: Electra Energy Efficient Solutions allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because activities were either not undertaken or they claimed more upgrades than performed. 

More information

Other enforcement actions:

• Victorian energy efficiency certificates refused: 880.
• Victorian energy efficiency certificates withdrawn: 203.
• Warning.

Provisions contravened:

• Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) Act 2007 sections 17(1), 22 and 56
• VEET Regulations 2018 regulation 10(3)(b); Schedule 2, Part 36
• Code of conduct within schedule 6 VEET Regulations 2018, included clauses 27(1)(a)(i). 

Obligation contravened: Sustainable Renew Energy allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because upgrades involved two spray valves being installed per tap. 

This occurred after the tap was modified using a customised fitting, making the upgrades ineligible for certificates. A high-efficiency pre-rinse spray valve must be installed on an existing fitting designed specifically for that purpose. 

Sustainable Renew Energy applied for a review of the commission decision to refuse registration of 880 allegedly non-compliant certificates. The review was completed on 15 October 2025 and upheld the commission’s decision. 

More information

Duration of accreditation restriction: 3-month restriction from undertaking and creating Victorian energy efficiency certificates for VEU prescribed activity 35 (non-building based lighting). 

Other enforcement actions:

• Victorian energy efficiency certificates refused: 1,969.
• Victorian energy efficiency certificates ordered for surrender: 13,912. 

Provisions contravened: VEET Regulations 2018 regulation 21(b). 

Obligations contravened: Green Energy Trading allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because the energy consumer had not demonstrated acceptance of the lighting design in accordance with the commission's determination under regulation 36(1)(b), in contravention of regulation 21(b) of the VEET Regulations.

More information

Duration of VEU accreditation restriction: 3-month restriction from undertaking and creating Victorian energy efficiency certificates for VEU prescribed activity 35 (non-building based lighting). 

Other enforcement action:

• Victorian energy efficiency certificates ordered for surrender: 1,178.

Provisions contravened:

• Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) Act 2007 section 16(1)
• VEET Regulations 2018 regulation 21(b). 

Obligation contravened: Greenbank Environmental allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because it:

• Failed to obtain consumer consent before completing two car park lighting upgrades.
• Provided false information to the commission about the consumer.
• Failed to use appropriate lighting designers for 14 car park and other lighting upgrades.

More information

Duration of VEU accreditation suspension: 3 months. 

Other enforcement actions:

• Victorian energy efficiency certificates refused: 200.
• Compliance audit.

Provisions contravened: Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) Act 2007 section/s 17(1) and 18(1). 

Obligation contravened: Zerowatt allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because contractors working for Zerowatt manipulated photos to claim additional certificates and, on at least one occasion, incentivised a customer to support a false claim.

More information

Number of notices: 25

Penalty amount: $961,550

Provision contravened: Energy Retail Code of Practice (versions 1-3), clause 80(1)

Obligation contravened: Pacific Blue allegedly failed to apply guaranteed service level payments to customer accounts within 10 business days.

More information

Duration of accreditation restriction: 6-month restriction from undertaking and creating Victorian energy efficiency certificates for VEU prescribed activities:

• activity 15 (space conditioning – weather sealing)
• activity 17 (low flow shower rose). 

Other enforcement actions:

• Victorian energy efficiency certificates refused: 1,186.
• Victorian energy efficiency certificates ordered for surrender: 3,651.
• Compliance audit.

Provisions contravened: Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) Act 2007 sections 17(1) and 18(1). 

Obligation contravened: LEDSaves allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because activities were either not undertaken or they claimed more upgrades than performed.

More information

Number of notices: 9

Penalty amount: $341,724

Provision contravened: Electricity Industry Act 2000 (Vic), sections 40EA(2), 40EB(1) and 23A; Gas Industry Act 2001 (Vic), section 48DA(2)

Obligation contravened: CovaU allegedly engaged in cold-calling and win-back conduct by contacting former customers who had moved to another retailer, and failed to report breaches to the commission within prescribed timeframes.

More information

Victorian energy efficiency certificates refused: 12,751.

Other enforcement actions:

• Victorian energy efficiency certificates withdrawn: 1,128.
• Warning.

Provisions contravened:

• Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) Act 2007 sections 17(1), 22 and 56
• VEET Regulations 2018 regulation 10(3)(b); Schedule 2, Part 36
• Code of conduct within schedule 6 VEET Regulations 2018, included clauses 27(1)(a)(i). 

Obligation contravened: Opt Energy allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because upgrades involved two spray valves being installed per tap. 

This occurred after the tap was modified using a customised fitting, making the upgrades ineligible for certificates. A high-efficiency pre-rinse spray valve must be installed on an existing fitting designed specifically for that purpose. 

Opt Energy applied for a review of the commission decision to refuse registration of 12,751 allegedly non-compliant certificates to Opt Energy. The review was completed on 24 September 2025 and upheld the commission’s decision. 

More information

Number of penalty notices: 3. 

Penalty amount: $69,231.

Other enforcement action:

• Victorian energy efficiency certificates ordered for surrender: 28. 

Provisions contravened: Code of conduct within schedule 6 VEET Regulations 2018, included clause 11B(1)(c).

Obligation contravened: Astra Green Solutions allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because it acquired consumer contact details through unsolicited marketing phone calls conducted by overseas businesses.

More information

Victorian energy efficiency certificates refused: 200. 

Other enforcement action: 

• Warning.

Provisions contravened: VEET Regulations 2018 regulation 21(a)(i). 

Obligation contravened: Eco Light Up allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because the lighting designer did not satisfy the VEU program’s lighting designer qualification requirements.

The nature of the contravention order/obligations:

• On about 13 May 2022, in respect of one customer who was a life support customer for the purpose of the Gas Industry act 2001 (Vic) (GI Act), contravened s 48DI(1) of the GI Act, by failing to record in a register of life support customers and residents the life support customer details of the customer in respect of their premises in Victoria within one business day after being advised that a life support resident for the purpose of the EI Act resided or were intending to reside at their premises in Victoria
• On about 19 May 2022, in respect of one customer who was a life support customers for the purpose of the GI Act, contravened s 48DI(3) of the GI Act, by failing to give the customer the information specified by cl 163(1)(a) of the ERCOP v 1, within 5 business days after being advised that a life support resident resided or was intending to reside at their premises in Victoria
• On about 13 May 2022, in respect of one customer who was a life support customer for the purpose of the GI Act, contravened s 48DI(4) of the GI Act, by failing to give the distribution company that distributes gas to the customers’ premises, the details specified by cl 163(1)(b) of the ERCOP v 1 within one business day after being advised that a life support resident resided or was intending to reside at their premises in Victoria
• On about 21 May 2022, contravened cl 1.5 of the Compliance and Performance Reporting Guideline v 6 and v 7 by failing to report breaches of s 48DI(1), 48DI(3) and 48DI(4) of the GI Act within two business days of their identification on 19 May 2022
• On about 6 October 2022, in respect of one customer who was a life support customer for the purpose of the GI Act, contravened cl 165(1)(a) of the ERCOP v 1 to v 2 (as applicable) by failing to give the distribution company that distributes gas to the customers’ premises the information about the customers’ medical confirmation within one business day after receiving their medical confirmation
• On about 6 October 2022, in respect of one customer who was a life support customer for the purpose of the GI Act, contravened cl 165(1)(b) of the ERCOP v 1 to v 2 (as applicable), by failing to update the register of life support customers and residents within one business day after receiving the customers’ medical confirmation
• On about 6 October 2022, in respect of one customer who was a life support customer for the purpose of the GI Act, contravened cl 167(1)(b) of the ERCOP v 1 to v 2 (as applicable), by failing to ensure that the register of life support customers and residents was maintained and kept up to date with the details of when the medical confirmation from was received from the customer in respect of their premises
• Between 1 December 2021 to 5 May 2023, in respect of customers who were receiving payment assistance under Division 3 Part 3 of the ERC or Division 2 Part 2 of the ERCOP (as applicable) whose repayment of arrears was not on hold and who failed to make a payment by the date on which it was payable, contravened cl 81(6) of the ERC v 21 or cl 130(6) of the ERCOP v 1 and v 2 (as applicable) by failing to contact 2,359 customers to discuss their putting forward a revied proposal under cl 81 of the ERC or cl 130 of the ERCOP (as applicable)
• Between 1 December 2021 to 5 May 2023, in respect of customers who were receiving payment assistance under Division 3 Part 3 of the ERC or Division 2 Part 6 of the ERCOP (as applicable) whose repayment of arrears were on hold and who failed to make a payment toward the cost of their ongoing energy use by the date on which it was payable, contravened cl 82(2) of the ERC v 21 or cl 131(2) of the ERCOP v 1 and v 2 (as applicable) by failing to contact 587 customers to discuss varying the amount payable or the frequency of those payments, or both, to give the customers more time to lower their energy costs
• On about 12 February 2022, contravened cl 1.5 of the Compliance and Performance Reporting Guideline v 6 by failing to report breaches of cl 83(1) of the ERC within two business days of their identification on 10 February 2022
• Between 25 May 2022 and 8 August 2022, in respect of 38 small customers who had been overcharged by an amount equal to or above the overcharge threshold (namely, $50), contravened cl 71(1) of the ERCOP v 1, by failing to inform those customers that they had been overcharged within 10 business days after it became aware of the overcharging.
• Between 1 December 2021 and 2 August 2022, in respect of 50 small customers who had been undercharged and from whom it proposed to recover the amount undercharged, contravened cl 30(2)(a) of the ERC v 21 or cl 70(2)(a) of the ERCOP v 1 (as applicable), by not limiting the amount to be recovered to the amount that had been undercharged by it in the four months before the date on which the customers were notified of the undercharging, and in circumstances where the amount undercharged was not as a result of the customers’ fault or unlawful act or omission
• Between 3 March 2022 and 7 September 2022, in respect of 466 small customers who were entitled to receive a “deemed best offer”, contravened cl 110(1) of the ERCOP v 1, by failing to provide a “deemed best offer” at least once every four months, or, if the customer had agreed to a billing cycle with a regular recurrent period that differed from the usual recurrent period and that period was three months or longer, once in each billing cycle
• Between 3 March 2022 and 21 October 2022, in respect of 260,414 small customers for whom it was required to carry out a “deemed best offer check”, contravened cl 108(1) of the ERCOP v1 and v2, by failing to identify the relevant “deemed best offer” for those customers when required to carry out a “deemed best offer check” for those customers in accordance with cl 108(2)(b)
• Between 3 March 2022 and 7 September 2022, in respect of 16 customers, contravened cl 65(1) of the ERCOP v 1 by providing a “pay-by date” for a bill that was earlier than 13 business days from the bill issue date

Amount of civil penalty orders:

• $165,000 for contraventions of s 48DI(1), 48DI(30 and 48DI(4) of the GI Act, cl 165(1)(a), 165(1)(b) and 167(1)(b) of the ERCOP, and cl 1.5 of the Compliance and Performance Reporting Guideline (CPRG)
• $2,217,000 for contraventions of cl 81(6) and 82(2) of the ERC, cl 130(6) and 131(2) of the ERCOP, and cl 1.5 of the (CPRG)
• $375,000 for contraventions of cl 71(1) of the ERCOP
• $321,000 for contraventions of cl 30(2)(a) of the ERC and cl 70(2)(a) of the ERCOP
• $337,125 for contraventions of cl 110(1) of the ERCOP
• $3,531,600 for contraventions of cl 108(1) of the ERCOP
• $92,500 for contraventions of cl 65(1) of the ERCOP

Other orders: Adverse publicity orders under s54F of the ESC Act, Order for the implementation of quality assurance systems and compliance, education and training programs under s54G of the ESC Act

More information

Declarations

In its orders, the court also made declarations that:

• Between 1 January 2019 and 30 November 2021, in respect of customers who were receiving payment assistance under Division 3 Part 3 of the ERC whose repayment of arrears was not on hold and who failed to make a payment by the date on which it was payable, contravened cl 81(6) of the ERC by failing to contact 11,670 customers to discuss their putting forward a revised proposal under cl 81 of the ERC
• Between 1 January 2019 to 30 November 2021, in respect of customers who were receiving payment assistance under Division 3 Part 3 of the ERC whose repayment of arrears were on hold and who failed to make a payment toward the cost of their ongoing energy use by the date on which it was payable, contravened cl 82(2) of the ERC by failing to contact 2,738 customers to discuss varying the amount payable or the frequency of those payments, or both, to give the customers more time to lower their energy costs
• On about 25 September 2021, contravened cl 1.5 of the Compliance and Performance Reporting Guideline v 6 by failing to report breaches of cl 83(1) of the ERC within two business days of their identification on 23 September 2021
• Between 14 February 2019 and 31 March 2020, contravened cl 111A(1)(a)(iv) of the ERC v 12 to v 15 by arranging de-energisation of the premises of 20 residential customers for not paying a bill without, after the issue of a disconnection warning notice, using its best endeavours to contact the customer in relation to the matter, and in doing so, failing to provide clear and unambiguous information about the assistance available under Part 3 of the ERC.
• Between 23 April 2018 and 31 December 2020, in respect of 36 small customers who had been undercharged and from whom it proposed to recover the amount undercharged, contravened cl 30(2)(a) of the ERC v 11a to v 17, by not limiting the amount to be recovered to the amount that had been undercharged by it in the nine months before the date on which the customers were notified of the undercharging, and in circumstances where the amount undercharged was not as a result of the customer’s fault or unlawful act or omission
• Between 1 January 2021 to 30 November 2021, in respect of 86 small customers who had been undercharged and from whom it proposed to recover the amount undercharged, contravened cl 30(2)(a) of the ERC v 18 to v 21, by not limiting the amount to be recovered to the amount that had been undercharged by it in the four months before the date on which the customers were notified of the undercharging, and in circumstances where the amount undercharged was not as a result of the customer’s fault or unlawful act or omission
• Between 1 July 2019 and 28 February 2022, in respect of 404 small customers who were entitled to receive a “deemed best offer”, contravened cl 70R (1) of the ERC v 13 to v 21, by failing to provide a “deemed best offer” at least once every four months, or, if the customer had agreed to a billing cycle with a regular recurrent period that differed from the usual recurrent period and that period was three months or longer, once in each billing cycle
• Between 22 August 2018 and 28 February 2022, in respect of 33 customers, contravened cl 26 (1) of the ERC v 11b to v 21 by providing a “pay-by date” for a bill that was earlier than 13 business days from the bill issue date

More information

The Supreme Court of Victoria made declarations that:

• Between 1 January 2019 to 20 March 2020, in respect of 1,102 gas customers who had not paid a bill by its due by date and had arrears of more than $55 (inclusive of GST):
  • contravened cl 80(2) of the ERC, by failing to contact those customers within 21 business days after the pay-by date and give them information about the assistance to which each was entitled under Division 3 Part 3 of the ESC and how to access it.
  • contravened cl 89(1)(b) of the ERC, by failing to provide clear and unambiguous information to those customers when required to do so.
• Between 1 January 2019 to 20 March 2020, in respect of 285 gas customers who were receiving payment assistance under Division 3 of Part 3 of the ERC whose repayment of arrears was not on hold, and who failed to make a payment by the date on which it was payable:
  • contravened cl 81(6) of the ERC, by failing to contact those customers to discuss their putting forward a revised proposal under cl 81 of the ERC
• Between 1 January 2019 to 20 March 2020, in respect of 285 gas customers who were receiving payment assistance under Division 3 Part 3 of the ERC whose repayment of arrears were on hold, and who failed to make a payment towards the cost of their ongoing energy use by the date on which it was payable:
  • contravened cl 82(2) of the ERC, by failing to contact them to discuss varying the amount payable, or the frequency of those payments, or both, to give the customers more time to lower their energy costs
• Between 1 January 2019 to 8 November 2021:
  • contravened cl 83(1) of the ERC, by failing to continue to provide assistance to 173 customers in accordance with Division 3 Part 3 of the ERC where no exception applied
• Between 1 January 2019 to 25 January 2022:
  •  contravened cl 111A(1)(a) of the ERC, by failing to comply with all of its obligations to 98 gas customers under cl 89 of the ERC and after issuing a disconnection warning notice, use its best endeavours to contact each customer in relation to the matter and provide clear and unambiguous information about the assistance available under Part 3 of the ERC

More information

The nature of the contravention order/obligations:

• Between 13 May 2022 and 3 November 2022, in respect of five customers who were life support customers for the purpose of the Electricity Industry Act 2000 (Vic) (EI Act), contravened s 40SG(1) of the EI Act, by failing to record in a register of life support customers and residents the life support customer details of those customers in respect of their premises in Victoria within one business day after being advised that a life support resident for the purpose of the EI Act resided or were intending to reside at their premises in Victoria
• Between 19 May 2022 and 3 November 2022, in respect of five customers who were life support customers for the purpose of the EI Act, contravened s 40SG(3) of the EI Act, by failing to give those customers the information specified by cl 163(1)(a) of the Energy Retail Code of Practice (ERCOP) v 1 to v 2 (as applicable), within 5 business days after being advised that a life support resident resided or was intending to reside at their premises in Victoria
• Between 13 May 2022 and 3 November 2022, in respect of five customers who were life support customers for the purpose of the EI Act, contravened s 40SG(4) of the EI Act, by failing to give the distribution company that distributes electricity to those customers’ premises, the details specified by cl 163(1)(b) of the ERCOP v 1 to v 2 (as applicable) within one business day after being advised that a life support resident resided or was intending to reside at their premises in Victoria
• On about 21 May 2022, contravened cl 1.5 of the Compliance and Performance Reporting Guideline v 6 and v 7 by failing to report breaches of s 40SG(1), 40SG(3) and 40SG(4) of the EI Act within two business days of their identification on 19 May 2022
• Between 27 July 2022 and 16 September 2022, in respect of four customers who were life support customers for the purpose of the EI Act, contravened cl 165(1)(a) of the ERCOP v 1 to v 2 (as applicable) by failing to give the distribution company that distributes electricity to those customers premises the information about the customers’ medical confirmation within one business day after receiving their medical confirmation
• Between 27 July 2022 and 16 September 2022, in respect of four customers who were life support customers for the purpose of the EI Act, contravened cl 165(1)(b) of the ERCOP v 1 to v 2 (as applicable), by failing to update the register of life support customers and residents within one business day after receiving the customers’ medical confirmation
• Between 27 July 2022 and 16 September 2022, in respect of four customers who were life support customers for the purpose of the EI Act, contravened cl 167(1)() of the ERCOP v 1 to v 2 (as applicable), by failing to ensure that the register of life support customers and residents was maintained and kept up to date with the details of when the medical confirmation from was received from those customers in respect of their premises
• Between 1 December 2021 to 5 May 2023, in respect of customers who were receiving payment assistance under Division 3 Part 3 of the Energy Retail Code (ERC) v 21 or Division 2 Part 2 of the ERCOP v 1 and v 2(as applicable) whose repayment of arrears was not on hold and who failed to make a payment by the date on which it was payable, contravened cl 81(6) of the ERC v 21 or cl 130(6) of the ERCOP v 1 and v 2 (as applicable) by failing to contact 3,238 customers to discuss their putting forward a revied proposal under cl 81 of the ERC or cl 130 of the ERCOP (as applicable)
• Between 1 December 2021 to 5 May 2023, in respect of customers who were receiving payment assistance under Division 3 Part 3 of the ERC or Division 2 Part 6 of the ERCOP (as applicable) whose repayment of arrears were on hold and who failed to make a payment toward the cost of their ongoing energy use by the date on which it was payable, contravened cl 82(2) of the ERC v 21 or cl 131(2) of the ERCOP v 1 and v 2 (as applicable) by failing to contact 622 customers to discuss varying the amount payable or the frequency of those payments, or both, to give the customers more time to lower their energy costs
• On about 12 February 2022, contravened cl 1.5 of the Compliance and Performance Reporting Guideline v 6 by failing to report breaches of cl 83(1) of the ERC within two business days of their identification on 10 February 2022
• On 18 August 2022, in respect of one relevant customer that had not in fact requested it to arrange for disconnection of their premises:
  • contravened cl 191(1) of the ERCOP v 1, by failing if a relevant customer requests the retailer to arrange for disconnection of the relevant customer’s premises, to use its best endeavours to arrange for disconnection in accordance with the relevant customer’s request; and
  • s 40SE(1) of the EI Act, by arranging for the supply of electricity at the relevant customer’s premises to be disconnected not in accordance with Subdivision 3, relevantly s 40SL in Subdivision 3, by arranging for the supply of electricity at the customer’s premises to be disconnected without the customer’s agreement or notice from the customer, in accordance with the supply and sale contract with it, that the customer wished to end the contract
• Between 26 April 2022 and 8 August 2022, in respect of 40 small customers who had been overcharged by an amount equal to or above the overcharge threshold (namely, $50), contravened cl 71(1) of the ERCOP v 1, by failing to inform those customers that they had been overcharged within 10 business days after it became aware of the overcharging.
• Between 1 December 2021 and 2 August 2022, in respect of 361 small customers who had been undercharged and from whom it proposed to recover the amount undercharged, contravened cl 30(2)(a) of the ERC v 21 or cl 70(2)(a) of the ERCOP v 1 (as applicable), by not limiting the amount to be recovered to the amount that had been undercharged by it in the four months before the date on which the customers were notified of the undercharging, and in circumstances where the amount undercharged was not as a result of the customers’ fault or unlawful act or omission
• Between 3 March 2022 and 7 September 2022, in respect of 1,103 small customers who were entitled to receive a “deemed best offer”, contravened cl 110(1) of the ERCOP v 1, by failing to provide a “deemed best offer” at least once every three months, or, if the customer had agreed to a billing cycle with a regular recurrent period that differed from the usual recurrent period and that period was three months or longer, once in each billing cycle
• Between 3 March 2022 and 21 October 2022, in respect of 395,525 small customers for whom it was required to carry out a “deemed best offer check”, contravened cl 108(1) of the ERCOP v1 and v2, by failing to identify the relevant “deemed best offer” for those customers when required to carry out a “deemed best offer check” for those customers in accordance with cl 108(2)(b)
• Between 3 March 2022 and 7 September 2022, in respect of 17 customers, contravened cl 65(1) of the ERCOP v 1 by providing a “pay-by date” for a bill that was earlier than 13 business days from the bill issue date
• Between 18 June 2022 and 17 July 2022, in respect of 3,636 customers who had nominated a preferred method of communication, contravened cl 106(1) of the ERCOP v 1, by failing to use those customers’ preferred method of communication in accordance with cl 106(2)(b) when providing a bill change alert to those customers
• Between 19 June 2022 and 20 June 2022, in respect of 267 customers who had nominated a preferred method of communication, contravened cl 107(2)(b) of the ERCOP v 1, by failing to use those customers’ preferred method of communication when providing a feed-in tariff change alert to those customers

Amount of civil penalty orders:

• $735,000 for contraventions of s 40SG(1), 40SG(3), 40SG(4) of the EI Act and cl 165(1)(a), 165(1)(b) and 167(1)(b) of the ERCOP and cl 1.5 of the Compliance and Performance Reporting Guideline (CPRG)
• $2,783,000 for contraventions of cl 81(6) and 82(2) of the ERC, cl 130(6) and 131(2) of the ERCOP and cl 1.5 of the CPRG
• $75,000 for contraventions of cl 191(1) of the ERCOP and s 40SE(1) of the EI Act
• $375,000 for contraventions of cl 71(1) of the ERCOP
• $1,179,000 for contraventions of cl 30(2)(a) of the ERC and cl 70(2)(a) of the ERCOP
• $487,875 for contraventions of cl 110(1) of the ERCOP
• $4,568,400 for contraventions of cl 108(1) of the ERCOP
• $92,500 for contraventions of cl 65(1) of the ERCOP
• $270,000 for contraventions of cl 106(1) and cl 107(2)(b) of the ERCOP

Other orders: Adverse publicity orders under s54F of the ESC Act, Order for the implementation of quality assurance systems and compliance, education and training programs under s54G of the ESC Act

More information

Declarations

In its orders, the court also made declarations that:

• Between 1 January 2019 and 30 November 2021, in respect of customers who were receiving payment assistance under Division 3 Part 3 of the ERC whose repayment of arrears was not on hold and who failed to make a payment by the date on which it was payable, contravened cl 81(6) of the ERC by failing to contact 14,933 customers to discuss their putting forward a revied proposal under cl 81 of the ERC
• Between 1 January 2019 to 30 November 2021, in respect of customers who were receiving payment assistance under Division 3 Part 3 of the ERC whose repayment of arrears were on hold and who failed to make a payment toward the cost of their ongoing energy use by the date on which it was payable, contravened cl 82(2) of the ERC by failing to contact 3,808 customers to discuss varying the amount payable or the frequency of those payments, or both, to give the customers more time to lower their energy costs
• Between 14 February 2019 and 16 March 2020, contravened cl 111A(1)(a)(iv) of the ERC v 12 to v 15 by arranging de-energisation of the premises of 177 residential customers for not paying a bill without, after the issue of a disconnection warning notice, using its best endeavours to contact the customer in relation to the matter, and in doing so, failing to provide clear and unambiguous information about the assistance available under Part 3 of the ERC.
• Between 23 April 2018 and 31 December 2020, in respect of 477 small customers who had been undercharged and from whom it proposed to recover the amount undercharged, contravened cl 30(2)(a) of the ERC v 11a to v 17, by not limiting the amount to be recovered to the amount that had been undercharged by it in the nine months before the date on which the customers were notified of the undercharging, and in circumstances where the amount undercharged was not as a result of the customer’s fault or unlawful act or omission
• Between 1 January 2021 to 30 November 2021, in respect of 958 small customers who had been undercharged and from whom it proposed to recover the amount undercharged, contravened cl 30(2)(a) of the ERC v 18 to v 21, by not limiting the amount to be recovered to the amount that had been undercharged by it in the four months before the date on which the customers were notified of the undercharging, and in circumstances where the amount undercharged was not as a result of the customer’s fault or unlawful act or omission
• Between 1 July 2019 and 28 February 2022, in respect of 2,212 small customers who were entitled to receive a “deemed best offer”, contravened cl 70R (1) of the ERC v 13 to v 21, by failing to provide a “deemed best offer” at least once every three months, or, if the customer had agreed to a billing cycle with a regular recurrent period that differed from the usual recurrent period and that period was three months or longer, once in each billing cycle
• Between 22 August 2018 and 28 February 2022, in respect of 40 customers, contravened cl 26 (1) of the ERC v 11b to v 21 by providing a “pay-by date” for a bill that was earlier than 13 business days from the bill issue date

More information

Victorian energy efficiency certificates ordered for surrender: 1 

Other enforcement action:

• Warning.

Provisions contravened:

• VEET Regulations 2018 regulation 15(2)
• Code of conduct within schedule 6 VEET Regulations 2018, included clause 19, 21 and 25.

Obligation contravened: 60 Shades allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because it failed to:

• Obtain consent from the energy consumer prior to undertaking the prescribed activities.
• Provide information about the person who would undertake the prescribed activity.
• Comply with the Specifications for installation of weather sealing products.

Victorian energy efficiency certificates refused: 8 (4 certificates each). 

Other enforcement action:

• Warning.

Provisions contravened: 

• Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) Act 2007 section/s 16, 17, 20(5)(b), 20(7)(a) & (b), 68.
• VEET Regulations 2018 regulation 15(1)(c). 

Obligation contravened: Glow Green and Aussie Greenmarks allegedly created non-compliant Victorian energy efficiency certificates because they each created four certificates for four activity 15 and 17 upgrades, where certificates had already been created by another accredited person for the same upgrade.