Regulatory Alliance Creation Rejections
Summary
An incident where Network Parties did not submit Regulatory Alliances on time to the Central Switching Service (CSS) Provider, or did submit the Regulatory Alliances but did not action rejections from the CSS Provider in a timely manner, led to over 200 Consumers being delayed in Switching to their chosen Energy Supplier. This Change Proposal has been raised to review this process.
Latest update and next planned activity
Date of latest update
Latest Update
19/08/2026 - the Change Report (Proposal Plan) was approved by Change Panel. The Change Team and Performance Assurance team are working together to determine if there are performance assurance requirements for this change.
Impacts Overview
Impacted REC Parties and Market Participants
Distribution Network Operator
Energy Supplier
Gas Transporter
Impacted REC Documents
Schedule 9 - Qualification and Maintenance
Schedule 24 - Switching Data Management
Schedule 26 - Switching Service Management
Impacted REC Services
Central Switching Service (CSS)
Electricity Retail Data Service (ERDS)
Gas Retail Data Service (GRDS)
Other Industry Codes impacted
Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC)
Distribution Connection and Use of System Agreement (DCUSA)
Uniform Network Code (UNC)
Priority and rationale
Standard
Priority last updated on 17 Sep 2026
Solution development
Problem Statement
The lack of Service Level Agreements (SLAs) on Network Parties to submit Regulatory Alliances to the CSS Provider or to work any rejections received from the CSS Provider can lead to delays in Consumers being able to Switch to their chosen Energy Supplier.
No documents available.
There is currently no Change Plan.
Original submission
Change details
- - -
8 Jun 2026
Change details
Regulatory Alliance Creation Rejections
Gaps or inconsistent interpretations of the process for creating a Regulatory Alliance within the REC can cause issues for DNOs, Energy Suppliers and the Consumer.
The gaps or interpretation inconsistency with the Regulatory Alliance creation process have caused unnecessary delays for Energy Suppliers entering the market which have directly impacted a small number of Consumer Switches.
Full review of the REC legal text, service providers and central system obligations to ensure that all gaps and inconsistencies are resolved. It is recommended this review also includes the MDD / ISD process setting up new MPIDs, the DCUSA legal text regarding Regulatory Alliances, CSS rejections and SLAs on each step.
There have been two incidents where Switches have been attempted and did not occur as the Regulatory Alliance was not set up in time by various ERDAs. The ERDA attempted to set up the Regulatory Alliance and it was rejected by the CSS, with no mechanism for how this rejection should work or be communicated specified within the REC.
Impacts
No details provided
Switching experience, Trust and confidence
-
Schedule 9 - Qualification and Maintenance, Schedule 24 - Switching Data Management, Schedule 26 - Switching Service Management
Qualification Schedule flagged if new steps are required
Performance Assurance Report Catalogue
PARC flagged in case monitoring of SLAs is required
Central Data Service Provider Further Services Service Definition, CSS Certificate Authority Service Definition
-
Data Item Catalogue, Market Message Catalogue
-
No details provided
-
Central Data Service Provider Further Services, Central Switching Service (CSS), CSS Certificate Authority, Electricity Retail Data Service, Gas Retail Data Service
-
Distribution Network Operators, Energy Suppliers, Gas Transporters
-
Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC), Distribution Connection and Use of System Agreement (DCUSA), Uniform Network Code (UNC)
Note that Regulatory Alliance is also set out in DCUSA and UNC so checks required to make sure cross code impacts are considered. BSC to be included if ISD/MDD changes are required.
-
No details provided
Priority & timing
No
-
-
-
No details provided
Switching experience, Trust and confidence