Framework agreements are designed to make procurement simpler, faster and fully compliant.

But many organisations fall into the trap of treating frameworks as fixed, defaulting to existing suppliers, or focusing only on compliance.

With Market-wide Half Hourly Settlement (MHHS) data and metering procurement now critical, these mistakes create long-term cost risks.

Because under MHHS, only high-quality data and reliable metering will unlock savings.

Why this matters now: MHHS is already changing expectations

MHHS is transforming how electricity is settled and reported by introducing:

• 7-day settlement timelines (down from 14 months)
• A move to 100% actual data
• Stronger performance requirements across data and metering

At the same time, energy suppliers face penalties of up to £10m per year for poor data quality.

This creates a clear knock-on effect, where poor data and metering performance directly increases costs for customers.

That’s why getting your data and metering procurement right through frameworks now is essential.

1. Staying with your current supplier by default

One of the most common framework mistakes is sticking with an existing supplier simply because they’re already in place.

While this may feel low risk, under MHHS it becomes a commercial risk decision.

The reality under MHHS

Choosing a supplier that cannot:

• Deliver 100% actual data in 7 days
• Maintain reliable meter communications
• Enable remote meter access

Can result in:

• Increased manual meter reads (cost and disruption)
• Supplier penalty costs passed through (up to £1,000 per meter)
• Missed opportunities to optimise energy use

2. Not reviewing your options within the framework

Frameworks are often treated as a one-off decision, but they’re designed to provide ongoing access to multiple suppliers.

Failing to review your options means you may miss:

• Better data quality
• Stronger metering capability
• More efficient service delivery

Under MHHS, data quality directly impacts cost, compliance and performance.

3. Waiting too long to act

MHHS is already happening. Delaying improvements to your data collection, metering infrastructure and reporting capability can lead to higher costs later.

The cost of waiting

• Limited supplier capacity
• Increased implementation costs
• Reactive decision-making
• Poor readiness for 7-day settlement cycles

Most importantly, fixing data and metering issues later is often more expensive than getting it right now.

4. Misunderstanding switching within frameworks

A common misconception is that switching suppliers is complex or disruptive.

In reality, frameworks are designed to make switching compliant, structured and low-risk.

For data and metering services, transitions can often be managed with minimal disruption when planned properly.

Not switching from an underperforming provider can cost more than switching post-MHHS.

5. Focusing on compliance instead of outcomes

Frameworks are often used as a compliance tool, but that’s only part of the picture.

Under MHHS, success depends on:

• Data completeness and accuracy
• Meter reliability and communication
• Operational efficiency
• Cost control over time

6. Underestimating framework flexibility

Frameworks are often underused.

In reality, they provide:

• Multiple approved suppliers
• Flexible procurement routes (direct award or mini-competition)
• A fast, compliant path to better solutions

If you’re not using that flexibility, you’re limiting value

Where Stark fits

Stark is one of the approved suppliers across major frameworks, including:

• Government Commercial Agency (formerly CCS)
• Laser
• ESPO
• YPO and NEPO

Stark supports organisations with:

Through frameworks, Stark helps improve:

Don’t let small mistakes become costly ones

Frameworks are designed to help you move faster, but also to make better decisions.

Avoiding these common mistakes will help you improve data and metering performance, reduce long-term cost, and stay ahead of MHHS requirements.