Three water companies have been heavily criticised for failing to properly engage with their customer-focused stakeholder groups.
The CCW has taken aim at South East Water, Portsmouth Water and Hafren Dyfrdwy for the way they engage with their Independent Challenge Groups (ICGs), in its review of PR24 business plans.
However, the consumer body has been forced to amend its review and apologise to Southern Water after its initial publication falsely accused the company of deliberately restricting information it provided to its ICG. South East Water also “entirely refutes” any wrongdoing.
ICGs are independent, customer focused stakeholder groups which provide scrutiny of water company business plans.
CCW’s review of business plans for PR24 found variations in how well companies engaged with their stakeholders in the ICGs.
Some companies, such as Wessex Water, the Pennon Group of companies, Severn Trent and Northumbrian Water, are praised for their work with their respective ICGs.
However, it adds, some groups “were frustrated by a lack of engagement with their companies”.
It adds: “One ICG’s influence faded in the latter stages of the business plan development as the company met them less often so opportunities to challenge were reduced – Portsmouth Water. And in one extreme case, the relationship between the company and its ICG broke down completely – South East Water.
“Hafren Dyfrdwy declined to have an ICG and hired one person to act as its customer engagement expert instead. This led to reduced resource, stakeholder engagement and challenge.
“If companies are not fully transparent and do not engage with their ICGs, their plans are not sufficiently scrutinised or challenged by stakeholders. This means plans are not as customer-focused as they should be. CCW is reviewing how ICGs were deployed in PR24 to identify more effective and inclusive customer engagement for future price reviews.”
Yet South East Water has hit back at CCW’s conclusions, saying it is “extremely disappointed”.
South East Water’s customer services director, Tanya Sephton, told Utility Week: “We have read this report and can confirm that the views expressed within it are not shared by South East Water, or the chair of our ICG, Zoe McLeod.
“We are actively engaged with CCW to understand how they have formed their views. We would like to ensure that any conclusions drawn by CCW regarding South East Water’s relationship with its ICG are accurate and factor all elements of the engagement programme, and associated assurance processes.
“We are extremely disappointed that this viewpoint has been shared publicly and do not agree with the conclusions in the report. We are in dialogue with CCW to put the record straight.”
She added that both South East Water and its customer group “entirely refute” CCW’s assertions regarding the relationship between the two, and “ask that they be removed from their report without delay”.
Meanwhile CCW has admitted that it made an error when making claims in the report about Southern Water’s relationship with its ICG.
The consumer body has since confirmed it has apologised to Southern over the claims.
A spokesperson told Utility Week: “In CCW’s review of water companies’ business plans for PR24, we made an editing error. This error meant we mistakenly included Southern Water in a sentence about how companies engaged with their ICGs.
“CCW has apologised to Southern for our mistake – and for any confusion and offence.
“We have amended the report on our website and will be sending the corrected version to Ofwat immediately.”