Enabling transparency of the CRS Provider’s REC service level performance
Date of latest update
Type
Change
ID
R0272
Change Category
Change Path
Priority
Urgent
No
Latest Update
This Change Proposal has been implemented as part of the February 2026 REC Release.
Summary
RECCo regularly reports on the performance of REC Service Providers in relation to their activities under the REC. However, there is currently no formal agreement to permit the publication of CRS performance measures between the CRS Provider and RECCo. Due to the multi-Party agreement, the REC does not specifically address the publication of this performance data. Instead, RECCo are operating under an informal understanding with the CRS Provider, which means there is a possibility that publication may be delayed or not agreed to in a given month. RECCo is dependent on the CRS Provider’s approval for each publication, which can cause delays. This approval could also be withheld at any point.
Impacted REC Documents
Impacted REC Services
Impacted REC Parties and Market Participants
Status
Status
Implementation Date
27 February 2026
Implementation Status
Date Raised
Fuel
REC Decision Maker
Date of Update to Priority
Solution Development
Proposed solution summary
- An update to the REC Schedule 6 – Performance Assurance.
Proposed Solution Document
Document title
R0272 Approved legal text (26.01.2026)
Archive
Off
Problem Statement
Unlike REC Service Providers, there is currently no formal agreement in place between the CRS Provider and RECCo to publish details about the CRS Provider’s performance. RECCo is therefore dependent on the CRS Provider’s approval for each publication. Not only could there be delays in RECCo’s reporting, but the approval could also be withheld at any point, preventing RECCo’s reporting.
Stages Selection
SME
SME Role
Lead Technical Analyst
SME Role
Lead Assurance Analyst
SME User
vaishnsharma@deloitte.co.uk
I0272 Change Proposal Form
R0272 Consolidated Consultation responses V1.0
Company Name
-
Review status
Review required
In-year CRS budget amendment
Date of latest update
Type
Change
ID
R0226
Urgent
No
Latest Update
21/01/25 - Change Panel approved final recommendation for immediate implementation.
Summary
DCC has identified that the CRS budget for the current Financial Year (2024-2025) can be reduced, and as per the Code, a REC Change Proposal must be raised for the agreed budget to be amended.
Impacted REC Documents
Impacted REC Services
Impacted REC Parties and Market Participants
Status
Implementation Status
Date Raised
REC Decision Maker
Date of Update to Priority
Solution Development
Stages Selection
Change Proposal Form
R0226 Change Report - Final Recommendation approved.
Company Name
-
Review status
Review required
Agile Reporting within CSS
Date of latest update
Type
Change
ID
R0224
Change Path
Priority
Urgent
No
Latest Update
18/03/2026 - An update to plan has been published for consideration at the Technical Expert Panel on 25 March 26.
Summary
As part of the impact assessment process for R0115, it was identified that it is very costly and time consuming to make reporting changes within the CSS architecture. As such, we would like to explore enabling agile reporting within the CSS ecosystem, by creating a functionality that consolidates all necessary data into a single, centralised database.
Impacted REC Documents
Impacted REC Services
Impacted REC Parties and Market Participants
Status
Implementation Status
Date Raised
Fuel
REC Decision Maker
Date of Update to Priority
Solution Development
Problem Statement
Current CSS arrangements mean that REC Changes designed to facilitate access to CSS data are more onerous that they need to be. Current arrangements are costly and have relatively long lead-times. This Issue seeks to explore changing the way that the CSS data can be accessed.
Stages Selection
SME
SME Role
Lead Technical Analyst
SME User
maxime.van-eyseren@capgemini.com
SME Role
Lead Assurance Analyst
SME User
vaishnsharma@deloitte.co.uk
Proposal Form - Agile reporting within CSS
I0224 Change Report (Plan) (Approved) V1.0 21.01.25
Change Proposal Re-Plan Approved
Solution/Business Case report
R0224 update to plan 18.03.26
R0224 update to plan 19 May 2026
Company Name
-
Review status
Review required
Stranded RMPs in Defunct Suppliers
Date of latest update
Type
Issue
ID
I0219
Other Industry Codes impacted
Change Path
Priority
Urgent
No
Latest Update
27/02/2025 - Change is now not being merged into any other changes and will proceed as a standalone change. A potential solution has been identified, but will be discussed for potential cross code impacts
Summary
Currently within Schedule 23 a Registration can only be undertaken on RMPs with an Operational or Dormant RMP Status, and not Terminated. Terminated is a status that the RMP is set to when the Meter Point Status is no longer operational or the site is isolated. It is right that these sites are not able to be Registered as there is a risk that Suppliers could inadvertently Register such Meter Points. We do have instances where such sites are stranded in defunct Supplier portfolios - and the Supplier no longer has the capability to take the relevant action to Deactivate the Registrations. This may because the operational staff have left and the business is in administration.
Change Plan
Discussed at Technical Change Workshop
Completed
Start:
Due:
Completion:
25 Feb 2025Impacted Consumers
Impacted REC Documents
Impacted REC Services
Impacted REC Parties and Market Participants
Status
Status
Implementation Status
Date Raised
Fuel
Date of Update to Priority
Solution Development
Stages Selection
Stages Selection
SME
SME Role
Lead Technical Analyst
SME User
maxime.van-eyseren@capgemini.com
SME Role
Lead Assurance Analyst
SME User
amoden@deloitte.co.uk
Issue Proposal Form
Company Name
Xoserve
Review status
Review required
Sequence order of CSS00200 message
Date of latest update
Type
Issue
ID
I0204
Urgent
No
Latest Update
08/11/2024 - The Proposer has withdrawn this issue as it is being progressed under MHHS CR056. The adoption window has now closed. * This is Issue relates to the Market-wide Half Hourly Settlement design.
Summary
Empty
Impacted Consumers
Impacted REC Documents
Impacted REC Services
Impacted REC Parties and Market Participants
Status
Status
Implementation Status
Date Raised
Date of Update to Priority
Solution Development
Stages Selection
Stages Selection
Company Name
St.Clements
Review status
Review required
Review of the REC's Address Management Service
Date of latest update
Type
Issue
ID
I0200
Change Category
Change Path
Priority
Urgent
No
Latest Update
13/05/2026 - The REC Code Manager is establishing a new REC working group to support the progression of I0200 – Review of the REC’s Address Management Service. If you would like to attend the I0200 Working Group, please register your interest by contacting the Code Manager at change.management@recmanager.co.uk. The first meeting will take place in June 2026, with the exact date and time to be confirmed in due course and communicated via the REC Change Bulletin and via email to all those who register their interest.
Summary
Having the incorrect address can lead to a range of Consumer issues, including switching, billing and meter reading problems. The Meter Point Location (MPL) and Retail Energy Location (REL) have been added to the Code to resolve this issue. Whilst there had been progress resolving address data issues, there is not currently a mechanism to establish Code level targets for address improvement, resulting in around 2.8 million unmatched addresses.
Impacted Consumers
Impacted REC Documents
Impacted REC Services
Impacted REC Parties and Market Participants
Status
Status
Implementation Status
Date Raised
Fuel
REC Decision Maker
Date of Update to Priority
Solution Development
Problem Statement
There has been progress resolving address data issues, but there is no mechanism to clearly establish Code level targets for address improvement, or overall market performance.
Stages Selection
Stages Selection
SME
SME Role
Lead Assurance Analyst
SME User
amoden@deloitte.co.uk
I0200 - Improving Address Management Targets (Issue Form)
I0200 - Change Issues Group paper
I0200 - Change Report (Proposal Plan) V1.1 (Approved) 18.02.2025
I0200 - Update to Plan (Pre Approval) 14.04.2026
Company Name
REC Code Manager
Review status
Review required
DPI Extract from CSS
Date of latest update
Type
Change
ID
R0183
Change Category
Change Path
Priority
Urgent
No
Latest Update
11/03/2025 - The proposer has withdrawn the request due to the expected delivery of enquiry data in the same anticipated timescales & the continued pursuance of I0224. The adoption window has closed.
Summary
It has emerged that there are data quality issues relating to the Domestic Premises Indicator (DPI) Data Item, where MPxNs have been recorded as having the wrong DPI. This Change has been raised to identify a mechanism by which this issue can be resolved.
Change Plan
Solution Analysis and Development
In Progress
Start:
11 Jun 2024Due:
20 Sep 2024Completion:
Impacted Consumers
Impacted REC Documents
Impacted REC Services
Impacted REC Parties and Market Participants
Status
Implementation Status
Date Raised
Fuel
REC Decision Maker
Date of Update to Priority
Solution Development
Proposed solution summary
- C1 - As a Consumer, I want industry data relating to my energy supply to be accurate, so that I do not experience any issues when switching or engaging with other consumer facing industry practices.
- M1 - As a CSS User, I want available DPI data to be accurate, so that when I engage with industry processes that require DPI data, I am confident that I am engaging with the right information. M2 - As the CSS, I want to provide accurate data to CSS Users, so that I am able to facilitate successful industry operations for my Users.
Problem Statement
Inaccurate DPI data available within industry data sources can result in less accuracy within REC processes that utilise this data, and poorer consumer outcomes. DPI data accuracy needs to be improved to ensure that industry processes and Consumers are not impacted.
Stages Selection
SME
SME Role
Lead Technical Analyst
SME User
maxime.van-eyseren@capgemini.com
SME Role
Lead Assurance Analyst
SME User
vaishnsharma@deloitte.co.uk
Change Proposal Form
R0183 Change Report V3.0 02.12.2024
Company Name
-
Review status
Review required
Improvements to CSS Business Process Logic
Date of latest update
Type
Change
ID
R0178
Change Category
Change Path
Priority
Urgent
No
Latest Update
17/06/2026 - The Code Manager has published an Update to Plan. This will be presented to the REC Technical Expert Panel at their meeting on 24 June 2026.
Summary
This change proposal is aimed towards rectifying a collection of issues that were identified with the CSS Business Process Logic. These have been identified as follows: 1. Deactivation of an active reg. whilst in-flight switch in progress 2. Deactivation of a prior cancelled registration 3. OFAF switch containing multiple MPxN
Impacted Consumers
Impacted REC Services
Impacted REC Parties and Market Participants
Status
Implementation Date
25 June 2027
Implementation Status
Date Raised
Fuel
REC Decision Maker
Date of Update to Priority
Solution Development
Proposed solution summary
- Deactivation of an active reg. whilst in-flight switch in progress As mentioned previously, the ‘Deactivation of an active reg. whilst in-flight switch in progress’ issue did have an existing REC CP raised and therefore is further along the discussion process compared to the other two issues identified. Initial discussion outlined that the most appropriate solution for this change proposal should consider the business needs and the desired outcomes. It was noted that from a business perspective, if the switch has already been accepted, then it should still go through and not be cancelled. Therefore, the following points were raised: • It was acknowledged that there are multiple solution options/approaches that could potentially be employed to resolve this issue. As such, and to avoid being overly prescriptive, it is requested that CSS provider investigate all possible options and outline their recommendation for the most suitable approach, which would be developed/progressed further through the subsequent Impact Assessments. • However, the aim is for an effective solution to be developed which would ensure that the consumer is switched with the original effective date being used and that CSS systems could cater for such registration events whilst following the normal Gate Closure processes. • Where possible, the solution should also look to proactively mitigate the impact of this scenario, as opposed to working on a retrospective basis which can lead to the issue persisting over an extended period of time. It was also noted that consideration would need to be given to state of the meters as this would also have an impact on whether switches are able to progress: Therefore, the following points were raised: • The solution would need to consider how the incumbent supplier has deactivated the meter and whether it has been moved to a ‘terminated’ state or a ‘dormant’ state. o Dormant – The meter is inactive. Note that this is a temporary state and therefore the meter could be put back into service. o Terminated – The meter has reached end of life and cannot be reinstated. Note that this is a permanent state. • If the incumbent supplier has moved the meter into a ‘terminated’ state, the in-flight switch would then need to be cancelled. • However, for the ‘dormant’ state, the following two options would be available in terms of what could happen to the status of the meter and thus the in-flight switch: o Moves from ‘inactive’ to ‘active’ (continue with the switch) o Moves from ‘inactive’ to ‘cancelled’ (cannot continue with the switch)
- Deactivation of a prior cancelled registration and OFAF switch contains multiple of the same MPxN It is noted that the initial approach discussed was to add new Business Data Validation Rules (BDVR) to stop these issues from occurring. However, this was only discussed at high-level and therefore we request that the CSS provider confirm this approach and provide further details as this change proposal progresses.
Problem Statement
1) Deactivation of an active reg. whilst in-flight switch in progress: There are instances where the incumbent supplier is withdrawing prior to the ‘Supply Effective from Date’, causing the accepted switch to fail at Gate Closure which occurs at 17:00hrs. This creates the scenario in which there is no longer a losing supplier for the consumer to switch from, and therefore the switch process stalls and cannot be progressed. Therefore, this has a direct impact on consumers who have a switch request which has already been accepted but CSS is not able to progress further as the switch process stops. Indeed, there have been a total of 82 missing messages observed since 1st January 2023, of which 66 messages have been related to switches where there was no registered Supplier recorded at Gate Closure. The 30th September 2023 Gate Closure was particularly impacted by this scenario and resulted in 45 registrations which did not become effective on 14th October 2023 as planned. It should also be noted that the 1st October is one of the key contracting dates for large Industrial and Commercial (I&C) consumers, consequently increasing the impact to consumers in this instance. 2) Deactivation of a prior cancelled registration: This scenario occurs when the registered supplier of a MPxN (via the active registration) is the same supplier that cancelled a previous switch for the same MPxN. In this case there is the possibility that the supplier could attempt to deactivate the active registration by accidentally providing the cancelled registration identifier. Currently, CSS still accepts the deactivation request and erroneously changes the cancelled registration state from cancelled to inactive, sending out securedInactive messages. Currently, after an MPxN is disconnected, the Supplier is required to submit a deregistration request to CSS. Therefore, there is a possibility that the suppliers could submit this request for a cancelled registration not active registration. CSS would still accept this request as the Business Data Validation Rules (BDVR) lack coverage of this case; in such cases the Supplier may incorrectly believe that they have deregistered the MPANs. 3) OFAF switch containing multiple MPxN: This is the instance where the end user sends through a One Fail All Fail (OFAF) switch with the same MPxN contained within the payload 2 or more times. Multiple registration IDs are created for the same MPxN, and the registration is left in an incorrect state given a lack of appropriate BDVRs. Indeed, there has been a further reported incident regarding an OFAF transaction of the same MPxN. The primary MPxN was associated with a secondary MPxN and therefore two registrations were created for the primary and secondary MPxN, equating to four registrations in total. There was then an objection raised but this only cancelled 1 of the 2 registrations for each MPxN. The remaining 2 registrations proceeded through gate closure.
Stages Selection
SME
SME Role
Lead Technical Analyst
SME User
maxime.van-eyseren@capgemini.com
R0178 - Change Proposal Form
R0178 - Change Report (Proposal Plan) V2.0 (18.02.2025)
R0178 - Update to Proposal Plan V1.0 (Approved) 18.02.2025
R0178 - Consolidated Impact Assessment Responses (Non-Confidential) 18.03.2026
R0178 - Change Report (For Consultation) V1.0
R0178 - Update to Plan (17.06.2026) Pre-Approval
Company Name
REC Technical Services
Review status
Review required
Clarify & Strengthen CRS Providers Requirements
Date of latest update
Type
Change
ID
R0168
Change Category
Change Path
Priority
Urgent
No
Latest Update
This Change Proposal was implemented on 28 February 2025.
Summary
The RECCo MSI review focused on the analysis and assessment of; Code compliance, performance, impacts and insights from lessons learned feedback from impacted stakeholders. These assessments thematically articulated changes and improvements identified to assure industry market participants that clear and appropriate action is, and will be, taken to prevent, detect and mitigate the risks and impacts of another event, and prepare for the right response to any future incidents. This Issue has been raised to address learnings from the P1 switching incident in July 2023.
Impacted Consumers
Impacted REC Documents
Impacted REC Services
Impacted REC Parties and Market Participants
Status
Implementation Date
28 February 2025
Implementation Status
Date Raised
Fuel
REC Decision Maker
Date of Update to Priority
Solution Development
Proposed solution summary
- Root Cause Communication: That the DCC, in its role as Switching Operator, delivers, clear, accurate, timely information on the incident root cause, as soon as possible, once it has obtained a reasonable understanding. Both to offset the risks of uncertainty and limited information introduce, ensuring Switching parties (like Supplier, TPIs and Networks) have the right information to enable meaningful engagement, assist their end-consumers, and all impacted Market Participants can more proactively manage the incident impacts, including making appropriate plans in response to the incident and its resolution. Switching Operator's End-Consumer Communication: Introduce a requirement for the DCC, in its role as the Switching Operator, to provide end-consumer appropriate information for REC Parties and Non-REC Parties use to determine communication and action for their Consumers.
- Switching Operator, Switching Incident Impact Assessment: This change should clarify the existing Switching Operator’s broader obligation to assess an incidents impact on the wider Switching Arrangements (set out in REC Schedule 26, Switching Service Management Schedule (SSMS), section 1.7, or Major Switching Incidents starting at section 2.9), to ensure the Switching Operator facilitates the most effective, efficient (time, cost, resource) overall Switching industry solution is promoted and implemented. Incident Wider Switching Impact Assessment: Clarify that if a Major Switching Incident is not going to be resolved within defined Service levels (4 hours), then the DCC in its role as Switching Operator should determine the impact on compliance with the REC end-to-end Switching Arrangements, and work with Ofgem, and the Code Administrators for BSC, UNC and DCUSA, and RECCo, to identify the cross code impacts/impacts on other Codes when managing an incident and developing an appropriate solution for industry, with least negative impact to end-consumers.
- Refresh and testing of Switching Operator’s (SO) incident related policies, processes, and procedures, to ensure they remain fit for purpose.
- Refresh and testing of Switching Operator’s (SO) incident related policies, processes, and procedures, to ensure they remain fit for purpose.
Proposed Solution Document
Document title
I0168 Switching Operator MSI Best Practice Document - for RFI and Industry Comments (02.08.2024)
Archive
Off
Document title
Central Switching Service (CSS) Service Definition (R0168 - Red-lining) 05.12.2024
Archive
Off
Document title
Switching Operator (SO) Service Definition (R0168 - Red-lining) 05.12.2024
Archive
Off
Document title
Schedule 26 - Switching Service Management Schedule (R0168 - Red-lining) 05.12.2024
Archive
Off
Document title
R0168 Draft Switching Operator Best Practice Document (V1.0 for Industry Consultation) 05.12.2024 (Word Version)
Archive
Off
Document title
R0168 Draft Switching Operator Best Practice Document (V1.0 for Industry Consultation) 05.12.2024 (PDF Version)
Archive
Off
Document title
R0168 - Change Report (for Consultation) 12.12.2024
Archive
Off
Document title
Schedule 26 - Switching Service Management Schedule (R0168 - Red-lining) 28.01.2025
Archive
Off
Document title
Central Switching Service (CSS) Service Definition (R0168 - Red-lining) 28.01.2025
Archive
Off
Document title
Switching Operator (SO) Service Definition (R0168 - Red-lining) 28.01.2025
Archive
Off
Document title
Major Switching Incident: Switching Operator Best Practice Document V0.2
Archive
Off
Document title
Major Switching Incident: Switching Operator Best Practice Evaluation Form V1.0
Archive
Off
Problem Statement
On 6th July 2023, a Major Switching Incident occurred with the Central Switching Service ((CSS) operated by the Switching Operator and CSS Service Provider, the Smart Data Communication Company (DCC)). It prevented the successful completion of that day’s planned electricity and gas, supply switches and new registrations. The CSS was stabilised post-incident and any new requests submitted after 9 a.m., 6th July were processed successfully. Through the collective action of the Switching Operator and industry parties, the CSS sent the missing industry messages to give effect to the intended switches and new registrations during the period of the 2nd to the 8th of August 2023. Priority 1 (P1) Major Switching Incidents of this nature are required to be resolved within 4 hours; however, DCC reported it took 1,605.6 hours in this instance. This incident had significant impacts on multiple industry parties and end consumers, demonstrating a clear need for improvement in the arrangements managing switching services and response to major incidents. The Retail Energy Code Company ((RECCo) with the assistance of its Code Manager) completed an end-to-end incident review; to identify the root cause, consider the efficiency and effectiveness of the incident management response, assess the improvements required, and identify appropriate actions for risk mitigation. With the overarching objective that by delivering the identified review recommendations, these actions should limit the possibility, or minimise the impact of, any future major switch incidents.
Stages Selection
SME
SME Role
Lead Assurance Analyst
SME User
vaishnsharma@deloitte.co.uk
I0168 - Issue Form
I0168 Switching Operator MSI Best Practice Document - for RFI and Industry Comments (02.08.2024)
I0168 - Change Report (Change Plan) (Approved) 17.09.2024
I0168 - Update to Proposal Plan (Approved 30.10.2024)
R0168 - Consolidated Consultation Responses (Non-Confidential) 20.01.2025
R0168 - Change Report (Final Reccomendation) 04.02.2025 (Approved) V2.0
Company Name
-
Review status
Review required
Catering for Registration Events where the Incumbent Supplier deactivates prior to a Switch becoming effective
Date of latest update
Type
Change
ID
R0153
Change Category
Change Path
Priority
Urgent
No
Latest Update
04/06/24 - This change has been withdrawn by the proposer and is being incorporated as part of R0178 - Improvements to CSS Business Process Logic. 03/05/2024 - An investigation was held into the requirements of this change and into other issues identified with the CSS Business Process and Logic. Landmark have provided data relating to the number of incidents for three different scenarios which had been identified. A discussion as held between the Code Manager, DCC and Landmark, and agreed that they will look to combine all identified issues into a new REC Change Proposal.
Summary
This change looks to resolve the issue for Registration Events where the incumbent Supplier deactivates prior to a Switch becoming effective. In some instances, the incumbent Supplier is withdrawing prior to the ‘Supply Effective from Date’ which causes the accepted Switch to fail at Gate Closure (17:00hrs) . An effective solution is to allow the consumer to Switch with the original effective date. There are a number of solution options to enable this to happen.
Impacted Consumers
Impacted REC Documents
Impacted REC Services
Status
Implementation Status
Date Raised
Fuel
Date of Update to Priority
Solution Development
Problem Statement
In some instances, the incumbent Supplier is withdrawing prior to the ‘Supply Effective from Date’ which causes the accepted Switch to fail at Gate Closure (17:00hrs).
Stages Selection
SME
SME Role
Lead Technical Analyst
SME User
caroline.milner@capgemini.com
Catering for Registration of Events CP Form 24.11.2023
Company Name
Xoserve
Review status
Review required