Jump to content

IOM Energy AKA Manx Gas


Major Rushen

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said:

They should count their lucky stars that the MUA didn’t take the same attitude when IEG owed them millions.

 It’d have been better for the island if they had, but still…

They still owe the Mua a huge amount of money, but now they have a payment plan so that's ok apparently.  I wonder if the Mua would reveal the debt of IEG via an FOI? Or would they claim it's exempt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, cissolt said:

They still owe the Mua a huge amount of money, but now they have a payment plan so that's ok apparently.  I wonder if the Mua would reveal the debt of IEG via an FOI? Or would they claim it's exempt?

Commercially Confidential 🤫 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, cissolt said:

They still owe the Mua a huge amount of money, but now they have a payment plan so that's ok apparently.  I wonder if the Mua would reveal the debt of IEG via an FOI? Or would they claim it's exempt?

How do you know, last statement from MUA said they were upto date with payments unless you have other information?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kopek said:

Has anyone managed to delve through Thomas' garbled amendment to know what his angle is???

Voting against the Bill doesn't 'look' good for either of them!

If the Government want to protect vulnerable customers, why don't they just pay their bills to Manx gas. Instead it will just be an added cost to the gas customers who do pay. Where will this Government stop intervening in private businesses, They won't run their own businesses or protect their own customers, but don't mind trying to run private enterprises with legislation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Kopek said:

There isn't an intention that these debts would not be paid off eventually. Probably by an agreement with the customer to pay a monthly DD.

So the cost will not fall on other gas customers.

Yes, that's how the world works, So why didn't the Government incur the debt, then agree with the customer a monthly payment. Why don't they do that with electricity instead of key cards, or lets us book a steam packets crossing and pay by instalments. Bet you don't remember instant credit, how well that worked for the firms that did it.  Well that's what this Government has just done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kopek said:

Has anyone managed to delve through Thomas' garbled amendment to know what his angle is???

Voting against the Bill doesn't 'look' good for either of them!

It's not garbled and is probably wise. It reads that he wants Regulation setting out the conditions when the Act will apply (which would be approved once by Tynwald) as a preference to CoMin deciding without any input from Tynwald (and therefore potentially case by case). 

Tbh. The Bill/Act is a piece of piss. The difficult bit will be getting folk who haven't paid or haven't stuck to repayment plans to do so. Government meddling at speed is never ever a good thing for everyone else.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It never ceases to amaze me the speed and alacrity that Govt can move with, when it suits them.

Either they are genuinely concerned for in-arrears gas consumers or is there some other motivation? Are there an inordinate number of votes balanced on this or something? 🤔

Why can't they move with this speed on other matters, some of long-standing concern?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, english zloty said:

It's not garbled and is probably wise. It reads that he wants Regulation setting out the conditions when the Act will apply (which would be approved once by Tynwald) as a preference to CoMin deciding without any input from Tynwald (and therefore potentially case by case). 

Tbh. The Bill/Act is a piece of piss. The difficult bit will be getting folk who haven't paid or haven't stuck to repayment plans to do so. Government meddling at speed is never ever a good thing for everyone else.

Indeed. They could have legislated for the operator to install PAYG meters at the same time; two birds, one stone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

Indeed. They could have legislated for the operator to install PAYG meters at the same time; two birds, one stone

Yep. Another lost opportunity. The Regulations could have stated acceptable terms for repayment plans etc.. Instead of which CoMin get nagged by Cretneys poor me mates, make an Order, lay before Tynwald and then do it all over again the next time. Most folk have probably deserted their homes to live with mates, whilst still owing money. That's what usually happens with social housing rent arrears

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

Indeed. They could have legislated for the operator to install PAYG meters at the same time; two birds, one stone

This is a private company. The government should not be telling it how to runs its business.

Office of Fair Trade and CURA (Communications and Utilities Regulatory Authority) need to have sufficient powers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...