OPSS consultation: Measuring Instruments Display Requirements for ESAs

Consumer Scotland is the statutory body for consumers in Scotland. Established by the Consumer Scotland Act 2020[i], our purpose is to improve outcomes for current and future consumers. We are independent of the Scottish Government and accountable to the Scottish Parliament. Our core funding is provided by the Scottish Government, and we also receive funding for research and advocacy activity in the electricity, heat network, gas, post, and water sectors via industry levies which are derived from consumers’ bills.

Our responsibilities relate to consumer advocacy. In our 2023-2027 Strategic Plan[ii], we have identified three cross-cutting consumer challenges, which guide our work during this period. They are:

• Affordability
• Climate change mitigation and adaption
• Consumers in vulnerable circumstances

Consumer Scotland welcomes the opportunity to contribute to this this consultation to support the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) decision making on the review of the Measuring Instrument Regulations (MIR) 2016. 

Consumer Scotland has gained significant experience working to understand how consumers engage with low carbon technologies such as heat pumps, solar PV, heat networks and Electric Vehicles. This includes:

• Our research understanding consumer experiences of driving electric vehicles in Scotland.[iii]
• Our recent research understanding consumer experiences of installing heat pumps and solar PV.[iv]
• Our investigation into home heating, which looked at growing consumer confidence in the market for low-carbon technologies and energy-efficiency measures[v]
• Early insights from consumers through our new role as statutory advocate for heat network consumers in Scotland.[vi]

Our response is informed by this previous work which includes research that provides insight on consumer attitudes and experiences of using these technologies. 

We have also utilised Consumer Scotland’s recently published Climate Change framework toolkit which is designed to help policymakers think about how to make consumers central to legislative, policy or regulatory changes related to climate change.[vii] Finally, we have utilised our Consumer Principles. These are based on frameworks that have been developed over time by both UK and international consumer organisations. Reviewing policy against these principles enables the development of more consumer-focused policy and practice, and ultimately the delivery of better consumer outcomes.[viii] 

Consumer Scotland is cautiously supportive of updating the regulations. We recognise that harmonisation will have benefits to consumers, however we have concerns over the impact that removing the requirement to have a built-in display could have for consumer accessibility and inclusivity of these technologies. Government should consider the wider implications of amending the regulations and ensure that if the decision is made then there are sufficient redundancies in place to support consumers who may not have access to secondary displays or are less likely to engage with secondary displays. 

We would be happy to discuss the content of this response in more detail.

Consumer Scotland is broadly supportive of the wider work carried out by government to support the transition to a more flexible energy system and giving consumers the confidence to participate in this developing market. However, for all consumers to benefit from this transition, the market needs to be designed in an inclusive way. 

We recognise the benefits that could come from updating the measuring instrument regulations to remove the requirement for a built-in digital display. This could bring regulation in line with the way that many consumers are engaging with these technologies. It could also potentially remove a costly component of production of these technologies, which may ultimately enable to lower costs for consumers. 

We understand the possible benefit of bringing the UK in-line with upcoming draft proposals by the European Commission for a new Targeted Technical Amendment to the Measuring Instrument Directive.[ix] Harmonising regulation in this space will have benefits for industry and developing supply chains, which could also bring down costs for consumers. 

While we recognise these potential benefits of updating the regulations. It will be essential to consider the wider impact of the changes on those using the technologies. In reviewing the consultation there were a number of areas where we recommend that further analysis and assessment are required. These include:

• How those consumers who don’t currently engage with or fully utilise remote displays when using ESAs can be supported to do so in future. 
• How the proposed changes will be communicated to consumers and the information that will be provided, particularly so that those who are not engaged with using ESAs through remote displays are aware of the changes and the implications for them.
• The potential impact of the proposed changes on consumer choice and the implications of this.
• What redundancies are in place for consumers should remote digital displays fail.

Lastly, we would encourage government to engage closely with consumers, consumer groups and the third sector to better understand the practical implications of the proposed changes for the users of these technologies.

Question 1 - Do you support amending the physical display requirement to allow a remote-only option for ESAs within scope of the MIR? (YES/NO). Please provide reasons for your answer.

Consumer Scotland recognises that technology has developed at pace and consumer behaviour has also changed rapidly along with it. However, we are cautious about amending the requirements to allow a remote-only option for ESAs. This change could potentially create a barrier to using and engaging with these technologies for consumers that are less digitally engaged, particularly when around 15% of Scotland’s adult population struggle with foundation level digital skills.[x]

Access is a core consumer principle, which considers whether people have access to the services they need. Consumer Scotland supports an inclusive approach which ensures that all consumers can engage and interact with ESAs. There is a need for regulation to support the way in which consumers engage with these technologies but it also has to protect inclusivity to ensure that all consumers can benefit from technological developments and advances in the transition to net zero. Around 9% of Scottish households still do not have full internet access which will impact how they could potentially access and engage with these technologies.[xi]

Question 2 - Do you support amending the physical display requirement in MIR, to allow a remote-only option, for measuring instruments beyond ESAs, such as utility meters? (YES/NO) Please provide reasons for your answer.

As with our response to question 1, we would be cautious about any changes that could unintentionally create barriers for some consumers engaging with these technologies.  

Question 4 - In your view, how would permitting a remote-only display for ESAs in scope of MIR impact consumers? (Positively / Negatively / Other) Please provide reasons for your answer.

Permitting a remote-only display for ESAs in scope of MIR may have both positive and negative impacts on the different consumers that use them. One area where there is the potential for consumer benefit is in relation to heat networks, where at present around 57% of consumers don’t have their own meter.[xii] Reducing the cost of manufacturing meters could lead to a swifter deployment of these for heat network consumers, with the potential benefits this can bring in improving transparency of pricing and accuracy of billing.   

However, consumers in other markets may be impacted negatively – see our response question 5 for more details. 

Question 5 - Could allowing the option of a remote-only display for ESAs create any barriers or challenges for consumers using or accessing those products? (YES/NO) Please provide reasons for your answer.

Remote-only display for ESAs could create accessibility challenges for some consumers, particularly those who are less able to use digital solutions. One example we have identified through our research is how consumers currently engage with EV chargepoints. Consumer Scotland’s research highlighted significant frustration from existing EV drivers with needing to use a variety of different mobile applications in order to pay for charging. These findings are relevant to remote-only displays which potentially could also require EV drivers to access multiple remote options in order to view the information.

When asked to select up to three preferred payment options, only 40% of current EV drivers chose “smartphone app”. Physical payment methods such as RFID cards (52%) or credit and debit cards (48%) were preferred. For those considering purchasing an EV, the proportion picking smartphone app was lower again, at only 30%. 

The research also showed that needing to have access to different payment options was a potential barrier to using public EV chargepoints. How to pay for charging, e.g. finding out whether this could be done directly or via an app, was a factor cited by 43% of current EV drivers when deciding whether or not to use a particularly charging point, while a charge point not providing a suitable payment method was a specific issue encountered by 15% of drivers who had been prevented from charging at a public charge point at least once in the preceding 12 month period.

Feelings of frustration around needing to use mobile devices to pay for public charging, and the number of different payment options EV drivers were required to use were also discussed in two online text-based focus groups conducted as part of our research, as well as in the survey research when drivers were asked to comment on aspects of EV ownership that had not lived up to experience:

“The number of different charge point providers and no consolidated schemes for the public to pay or use as a one stop shop for all public charging. I have 6 apps on my phone for different providers and this includes multi-vendor apps!”

“The charging network is a joke especially compared to other countries, it needs to be standardised to contactless/chip and pin and on 1 app to check for availability, location and if it’s even working!!”

The reality of trying to charge at a public charge point without already having access to the relevant payment method was summed up by one focus group participant:

“It would be great if you … [could] not be downloading apps etc at the roadside for a different type of charging station.”

This reality could be particularly problematic in remote rural areas, that are more likely to experience gaps in mobile phone coverage.

Our findings suggest that should regulations be amended to allow remote-only displays, it will be important to ensure that the information accessed via the display is standardised, to enable easy access via a multi-vendor solution and prevent consumers from requiring to use multiple different solutions to access the information.

These findings should be read in the context of drivers having alternative options to EVs for their private cars, and current EV drivers making only limited use of the public charging network. Future drivers may be far more reliant on public chargepoints and therefore when assessing potential consumer impact, this future changing consumer dynamic should be taken into account. 

It is also likely that consumer accessibility issues will increase in importance in future, as the population of Scotland is aging, and rates of disability rise with age. Previous research by the Equality and Human Rights Commission found that in 2021, 18% of 16-24 year olds reported living with a limiting condition compared with 60% of those aged over 75.[xiii] While not all conditions will impact ability to use digital displays, it is likely that some will.

Should regulations be amended to permit remote-only displays for EV chargepoints, it will be important to ensure that they comply with existing standards to mitigate accessibility issues. Remote displays should still comply with PAS 1889:2022 standard (Electric vehicles – accessible charging – specification) section 8.1 requirements for remote digital platforms for public chargepoints.[xiv]

Question 6 - If the option of remote-only displays were permitted, do you think the existing safeguards in the MIR (e.g. maximum permissible error (MPE) limits, conformity assessments etc.) would be sufficient to ensure consumers and manufacturers are protected against inaccurate meter readings? (YES/NO)

Please provide reasons for your answer.

Consumer Scotland is content that existing safeguards within the MIR, including accuracy standards, duties on manufacturers and the requirement for meters to conformity assessed will continue to protect both consumers and manufacturers against inaccurate meter readings. 

Question 7 - If MIR was updated to allow ESAs to have remote-only displays, when should this change take place? i.e., how long should businesses and consumers be given to prepare before this change takes effect legally?

• a) As soon as possible
• b) 12 months’ notice
• c) 24 months’ notice
• d) Other (please state)…

Please provide reasons for your answer.

Consumer Scotland would expect, at a minimum, that consumers and businesses have 12 months to prepare should the MIR be updated to allow ESAs to have remote-only displays. Any change should be done to a timescale that allows meaningful engagement and communication with the affected consumers to ensure that they understand the implications of the change and the way it could affect how they use this technology. 

Question 8 - Is there anything else that you think the Government should be considering at this stage in respect of the MIR, including whether to implement domestically any of the EU’s proposed updates to the Measuring Instruments Directive, as set out in the draft Targeted Technical Amendment? Please provide reasons for your answer.

Consumer Scotland does not take a specific view on additional elements of the EU’s proposed updates to the Measuring Instruments Directive that could also be considered in the UK. However we recognise the benefits of aligning with EU regulation as this will support manufacturing of ESA’s, more developed supply chains as well as potentially bring costs down for the end consumer.