Industry Shipperless &Unregistered Working Group Thursday 7 th January 10.30am at xoserve

1. CR & Connections & Registration Industry Shipperless &Unregistered Working GroupThursday 7th January 10.30amat xoserve

2. Agenda • Introduction: (15 minutes) (Alison Jennings & Mark Woodward) > Previous minutes (MW) >Terms of Reference for group to agree (AJ) • Statistical Information: (15 minutes) (Mark Woodward) > Overall industry position with unregistered and shipperless meter points > Category industry breakdowns > Shipper Responses > Age Analysis • Process Updates: (1 hour)(Mark Woodward & David Watson) >Over view of Review Group 245 (DW) > Strawman of unregistered process from RG 245 (DW) >MOD517 (MW) > Code 12 (MW) • Route Cause: (1 hour) > How do we tackle root cause? > Root cause topics identified so far

3. Statistical Information

4. Overall Industry unregistered and Shipperless Sites meter points Produced on a Bi-monthly basis

5. Industry Breakdown • Shipper Activity • Orphaned age analysis & Meter fitted breakdown

6. Industry Breakdown (continued) • Origins of the Orphaned sites report Total number of individual meter points is 12,590 The reason there are 13,733 in table is due to the meter point having more than 1 shipper activity reason NB: The above as been done with July 09’s data set • Shipperless sites – Shipper Report

7. Shipper Responses • Shipper responses to the unregistered reports • Shipper responses to the shipperless reports • 301 “YES” responses still to be confirmed

8. Industry Breakdown (continued) • Age analysis of No Activity • No Activity – UIP allocation

9. Industry Breakdown (continued) • Age analysis of sites < 365 days from creation

10. Analysis on unconfirmed >12 months created September/October 08 created July/August 08 created TOTAL Volume = 2,141 (16.7% Unregistered from created date) • Plots = 326 • Flats = 290 • Units = 280 • Named/ Numbered properties = 1,245 TOTAL Volume = 2,646 (14% Unregistered from created date) • Plots = 385 • Flats = 529 • Units = 334 • Named/ Numbered properties = 1,398 Shipper Activity = 578 (27%) • Conquest = 189 • C&D = 272 • Confirmation Rejection = 34 • Service Request = 150 Shipper Activity = 643 (24.3%) • Conquest = 162 • C&D = 278 • Confirmation Rejection = 60 • Service Request = 215 Checked with 2 MAM’s = 120 with meters fitted (6%) Checked with 2 MAM’s = 108 with meters fitted (7%) No Activity = 1,455 (68%) 4 UIP’s accounting for 77% No Activity = 1,884 (71.2%) 3 UIP’s accounting for 81%

11. Process Updates

12. MOD 517 Changes • Changes were made to the existing Mod 517 templates on 17th August 2009. • We wish to thank our customers for supporting the change to the MOD517 process. Evidence has confirmed that the information relating to the status of service is already benefiting the unregistered process.

13. Code 12 Changes • Changes to the Code 12 M Number Creation process became effective from 5thOctober 2009. As a result of these changes the code 12 requests have now been absorbed by the MNC contact code. Please note that these query types are defined as follows: MNC An MPRN Creation Request (with or without a meter attached) for non tagged service FOM (Fast Track) An MPRN Creation Request (with or without a meter attached) for tagged Service NB: There is no longer a concern over whether the service was pre or post 2002

14. Route cause

15. Outcome of Unregistered meter points • Volumes from creation that remain unregistered after 12 months: • May/June 08 = 3,200 (19% of total created) • July/August 08 = 2,141 (14%) • September/October 08 = 2,646 (16%) • Unconfirmed sites can fall into one of the following categories: • IGT’s • Service never installed • Service still in planning stage of installation • Service installed, but no intention yet, or ever, of having a meter installed • Service installed and meter in planning stage to be fitted • Service installed and Meter fitted

16. Route Causes identified so far • Timescales from MPRN requested to service laid • M Number Allocation process • Services laid and no MPRN requests received • MPRN Rejections • Job Cancellations • M Number & details provided to the requestor • Correctly tagging services • IGT/LPG Sites created • MNC and Fast Track process • Address Clarity • Knowledge • Communication

17. UIP M Number Creation process Service Cancellation Request for Service Details provided of M Number used for service Service laid and tagged Information returned on cancelled service Reinvestigated Reinvestigated Service cancelled System validation checks performed System validation checks performed Meter point details on UK Link set to EX Finish Start Service Requester Start Service planned & M Number requested for creation on UK Link Finish Details provided of M Number created on UK Link Batch of MPRN’s requested Utility Infrastructure provider (UIP Rejected Rejected Accepted Accepted xoserve

18. Data Labelling company allocating MPRN’s UIP Controls around internal UIP have not registered with xoserve Previous batch of MPRN’s not fully utilised Specific MPRN’s not submitted prior to a service going in the ground Job cancelled or deferred and xoserve not informed Not registered UIP Existing Services not set to DE by Networks UIP’s have system constraints (i.e. IAD, PAF & Conquest) UIP process controls (e.g. preliminary checks, MPRN allocation to jobs and validations) Awareness of existing services Non valid MPRN’s MPRN requests are submitted prior to service in the ground Rejections not re-submitted Duplicate files submitted Data Quality Quotation accepted and job complete but no MPRN request submitted UIP preliminary validation (Rejection Volumes 10%) UIP knowledge of process Critical information not provided (where applicable) IGT’s Xoserve Require full access to all Networks MAP’s systems MPRN Information not passed onto Networks/Shippers from UIP’s Existing Services not Set to DE & in some cases set to DE in error Non tagging of Services or tagged incorrectly No job to lay the service is completed Duplicates UIP Cancellation Reports (Shippers have already conformed) Non submission of Cancellation Request Timescales Shippers not informed who proceed with confirmation which generates MOD517 Exceptions (MPRN has meter attached, MPRN at RQ & CO status, MPRN is at DE or EX status, MPRN is live with a Shipper and meter attached)

19. Shipper M Number Creation process 3. System validation checks performed Finish Start 7. M Number details provided date meter work planned 1. Meter installation required End Consumer 2. M Number requested for creation on UK Link via FOM or MNC 5. Details provided of M Number created on UK Link 6. MPRN provided to MAM meter work planned 4. Reinvestigated by Shipper Shipper Rejected Accepted xoserve

20. Duplicates (MNC, FOM and Fast Tracks) • MOD517’s • Knowledge of MNC & FOM process • UIP’s not submitting original request • Rejection Prevention (Current Average 12%) • Communication • Data Quality • Systems (Individuals not having the full range of “user pays” systems/ services to complete their validations) • IGT/ LPG’s • Job Cancellations • Tagging of Services • Requests received for existing MPRN’s & addresses • MPRN Failures (Does not generate) • Previously submitted queries • MPRN Failures (Does not generate) • MPRN is not confirmed twelve months after creation • No cancellations received • Duplicates created as no ISO raised

21. Discussion Points • Meter / No meter (service only) installation required • What checks are carried out to identify if a meter exists? • How is it established that there is a service in the ground? • When a plot address is provided for the original creation are there triggers in place to re-investigate correct postal address once the MPRN is confirmed? • How do you determine if it is a IGT site? • If the customer is unable to read the tag on the service do your staff contact the UIP? • If it is a block of flats is a site visit made if you are unable to identify the tag is a site visit carried out? • M Number requested for creation on UK Link via FOM or MNC • Are all queries submitted directly to Conquest? • Can you explain how you differentiate an MNC from a FOM query? • If an existing service is on site how are query rejections avoided? • What measures do you have in place to prevent both a FOM & MNC query being submitted under the same address? • What preliminary investigations/ checks do you carry out (for example: systems & services etc.) before a request is submitted? • If an MPRN exists where for the property do you ascertain the MPRN from? • System validation checks performed • Over the past twelve months the average rejection rate for Fast Track queries is 12.10% (6,714 rejected queries since Nov 2008) what could be done by yourselves in order to help reduce this figure? • What current validation measures do you have in place to prevent rejections? • Do you have any ideas on how we could help reduce rejection rates further? • The highest rejection reasons are AES (The requested MPRN already exists on UKLink for this site) or MAE (A different MPRN already exists on UKLink for this site). The majority could be avoided by interrogating IAD or contacting Data Centre? Is their a culture within your company to avoid using the “user pays” services in order to reduce costs? • 4. Re-investigated • Are the staff involved with this process aware of the rejection reasons and how they are defined? • If an MPRN/address has been identified on our systems what action is taken by your staff? • What processes do you have in place to handle rejections? (i.e. is it picked up by the originator (If call centre staff in particular?) • If existing service is identified as part of the validations is an ISO query raised?

22. Discussion Points Shipper M Number Creations • 5. Details of MPRN created on UK-Link • How do shippers determine if an MPRN is created? • How is the Supplier of the meter advised? If so, please explain how? • Are details passed to Confirmation Team? If so, please explain how? • Currently we receive no job cancellation requests from Shippers. Could it be explained as to why this does not happen (e.g. is it dealt with through the UIP’s)? • Is the UIP informed that a fast track has been submitted to avoid duplication? • If no tag was present on the service and you are aware it was laid post 2002. Is the Connection company contacted to tag the service correctly?

23. Unregistered and Shipperless Process No Confirmation Within 2 Months Contact UIP, Network or MAM to verify service laid and possible meter fitted Service Not Yet Completed Unregistered Reports – Produced Bi-Monthly. Contains MPRs that have not been confirmed 12 Months after their created date Meter Point set to EX No Activity Report Service Installed Service Cancelled Shipper Activity Report. Consists of: Confirmation Rejections Conquest MNo Requests UK-Link Meter Update Rejection Service Request Legitimately Unregistered. Consists of: Vacant Sites No Gas MOD517 Service Still in Planning Shipperless Report – Produced Bi-monthly. Consists of: GSRs and TOGs Orphaned Report Confirmation Issued To All Shippers Issued To Specific Shippers Shipper start Activity xoserve start No Activity

24. Fast Track Analysis We compiled a report listing all Fast Track Queries received over a 2 month period. We carried out some analysis with the aim of identifying why these were not raised via the UIP route. Our Findings were as follows: Volume Percentage • UIP Creation rejected and not returned 93 21.7% • UIP Creation never raised 270 63% • UIP Creation received around the same time 49 11.8% • Address or quality issue 15 3.5%