Administrative Materials

Latest documents

  • Redacted name (Case reference: 192311)

    This case was brought against a person alleged to be an associated individual under paragraph 4.8.8 of the 14th edition of the Code of Practice (“the Code”).The Tribunal was asked to consider imposing a prohibition against [name redacted] (“associated individual”) pursuant to paragraph 4.8.3(g) of the Code.The Tribunal unanimously concluded that, on the balance of probabilities, that there was insufficient evidence of the associated individual’s knowing involvement in the commission of the serious breaches of the code. Therefore, the Executive’s request to prohibit the associated individual from providing, or having any involvement in, any premium rate services in the UK was refused. Accordingly, the Tribunal did not impose a prohibition on [name redacted].

  • Embill Services Limited (Case reference: 187522)

    This case was brought against Embill Services Limited (“the Level 2 provider”) under Paragraph 4.5 of the 14th Edition of the Code of Practice (“the Code”).The case concerned a sexual entertainment service provided by the Level 2 provider. The Service was registered and operated under the brand name “Girls Next Door”. The Service provided pre-recorded adult audio content to consumers.The Executive received 25 complaints regarding the Service, 24 from members of the public and one from a Phone-Paid Services Authority (“PSA”) employee between June 2020 and December 2020. Complainants alleged that they had received an unsolicited message without their consent and that the messages were misleading. The message requested for the consumer to click on a link to retrieve a voicemail from a named individual. Some of the complainants referred to a “Zoom voicemail“.The Tribunal concluded that the seriousness of the case should be regarded overall as very serious.Sanctions imposed• a formal reprimand• a prohibition on the Level 2 provider from providing, or having any involvement in, any premium rate service for a period of five years, starting from the date of publication of the Tribunal decision, or until all sanctions imposed have been complied with, whichever is the later.• a requirement that the Level 2 provider must refund all consumers who claim a refund for the full amount spent by them on the Service, within 28 days of their claim, save where there is good cause to believe such claims are not valid, and provide evidence to the PSA that such refunds have been made• a fine of £500,000 broken down as follows:Breach 1 - Rule 2.3.2: £125,000Breach 2 - Rule 2.3.7: £100,000Breach 3 - Rule 2.4.2: £100,000Breach 4 - Paragraph 4.2.2: £100,000Breach 5 - Paragraph 4.2.2: £75,000.Administrative charge recommendation: 100%

  • Ballylumford – Eden 110kV Double Circuit Overhead Line Refurbishment: Construction Allowance Determination
  • Gothamiax Limited (Case reference: 169028)

    This case was brought against Gothamiax Limited, (‘the Level 2 provider’) under Paragraph 4.5 of the 14th Edition of the Code of Practice (‘the Code’). This case concerned a subscription alerts service called ‘Every Day Saves’ (‘the Service’), which provided consumers with links to websites offering discounts and savings.The Executive submitted that the Level 2 provider had breached rules of Code 14 because some consumers who were subscribed to the Service had not been provided with billed messages and subscription reminders, and for not solving consumer complaints quickly, easily and fairly.The Tribunal concluded that the seriousness of the case should be regarded overall as serious.Sanctions imposed:• a formal reprimand• a requirement that the Level 2 provider obtains and implements compliance advice to ensure that its customer service and complaint handling function is compliant and complaints are resolved quickly, easily and fairly and that any redress to consumers is provided quickly and easily and free messages and subscription messages are delivered to consumers• a requirement that the Level 2 provider must refund all consumers who claim a refund, for the full amount spent by them on the Service, within 28 days of their claim, save where there is good cause to believe that such claims are not valid, and provide evidence to PSA that such refunds have been made• a fine of £100,000.The Tribunal considered that as it had not upheld the breach of Rule 2.3.3, circumstances justified reducing the recovery of the PSA’s administrative costs. It therefore recommended that the Level 2 provider be invoiced for two-thirds of the PSA’s total administrative and legal costs.Administrative charge recommendation: 66.7%

  • Extension to issuing a connection offer – Rigged Hill Windfarm

    The Utility Regulator has granted NIE Networks an extension until 30 August 2022 to issue a connection offer for Rigged Hill Windfarm. Condition 30 of NIE Network’s Distribution Licence states that (barring specified exceptions) NIE Networks is obliged to make an offer for connection to the distribution system as soon as practicable and in any event within three months from receipt of a valid/completed application for connection. The Utility Regulator has the powers to provide a consent for extensions to this time period under the same Condition. Following review and full consideration of NIE Networks’ extension request regarding Rigged Hill Windfarm, the Utility Regulator has provided consent to grant an extension to issuing an offer as soon as practicable but no later that 30 August 2022.

  • Micro-Generation Settlement Decision Paper
  • SONI Licence Condition 16 – Grid Code Modification Determination (FERA)
  • SONI Licence Condition 16 – Grid Code Modification Determination (DRAI)
  • RP7 approach document
  • Proposed approach to Best practice framework programme

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT