We asked Ofgem how it ensured the needs of customers were considered in the event of an energy supplier failing. Ofgem told us that the SOLR and SAR processes had three main priorities: ensuring everyone was kept on supply; ensuring customers’ credit balances were protected; and ensuring disruption to customers was minimised. It noted that the SOLR process had not been designed to run for 29 companies in such a short space of but that it had held up really well. It also said that, “by and large” customers kept their supply and their credit balances were transferred, but recognised that there was more work to be done to ensure that customers who were in debt to failed suppliers were treated fairly and reasonably.9 It explained that it was considering other factors which might reduce the costs to customers in the event of future failures, but that these could require legislative change. We questioned Ofgem about the likelihood of future supplier failures. Ofgem told us that it did not think that it would be right for it to speculate on this, but noted that the energy market was still facing a period of high and volatile prices, and the risk was high. It explained that, of the 26 suppliers still left in the market, it was “quite possible” that there would be further exits.10 5 Q 27; C&AG’s Report, para 13 6 Qq 45–46; C&AG’s Report, para 2.8, Figure 8 7 C&AG’s Report, para 2.15 8 C&AG’s Report, para 11 9 Q 37, 40, 44 10 Qq 33, 72, 78–79 10 Regulation of energy suppliers Balancing competition and supplier resilience