Power Cuts by Network: How Reliable Is Your Electricity Supply?
When the lights go out, most people think about their energy supplier. Their energy supplier has nothing to do with it.
The wires are run by a distribution network operator, decided entirely by where you live, and Ofgem measures how well each one keeps the power on. This page is those figures: how often supply was interrupted, for how long, and how each network did against the target it was set.
Your supplier does not run your wires
Britain’s electricity system splits the job in two. Your supplier sells you the energy and sends the bill. A separate company owns the cables, substations and poles that physically deliver it, maintains them, and turns out at three in the morning when a storm brings a line down.
There are fourteen distribution licence areas, run by six groups. You cannot choose yours and you cannot switch it — it is a regulated monopoly, which is precisely why its performance is measured and published. Competition disciplines your supplier; for the network, this data is the substitute.
It also means a power cut is not a reason to change supplier. Moving from one supplier to another changes who bills you and nothing about the wires. If you want to compare the companies you can choose between, that is our supplier complaints data and our supplier reviews.
The two measures, and why there are two
Ofgem publishes reliability as a pair, because one number on its own would hide the thing you actually care about.
- Customer Interruptions counts power cuts per 100 customers over the year. It measures how often supply fails.
- Customer Minutes Lost counts the average minutes a customer spent without power. It measures how long failures last.
A network could score well on one and badly on the other, and that tells you something real. Many brief interruptions suggest a system that faults often but restores quickly, usually by switching supply around an interconnected network. Few but lengthy ones suggest faults are rare and hard to reach when they happen. Only the pair distinguishes them, which is why nothing here combines the two into a single score.
One misreading is worth heading off: an interruptions figure of 40 does not mean 40 per cent of customers lost power. It is 40 interruptions per 100 customers, and one unlucky customer interrupted four times contributes four of them.
How each network performed
Both tables are sorted best first. Every figure is measured against a target set for that licence area, and Ofgem’s own red, amber and green rating is shown as given rather than recalculated here.
2024/25 · lower is better
Customer Interruptions
Power cuts per 100 customers over the year. A figure of 40 means the network recorded 40 interruptions for every 100 customers it serves — not that 40 per cent of customers lost supply, because one customer can be cut off more than once.
Industry average 39.7 interruptions per 100 customers — against 42.5 the year before. Ofgem weights this by customer numbers, so it is not the average of the fourteen rows below and is not a network in its own right.
| Licence area | Actual | Target | Against target | Year on year | Ofgem rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| London (UK Power Networks)LPN | 11.2 | 13.4 | -16.4% | Improved by 1.0 | Green |
| North West England (Electricity North West)SP ENW | 26.1 | 29.7 | -12.3% | Improved by 0.1 | Green |
| Merseyside, Cheshire and North Wales (SP Energy Networks)SPMW | 28.6 | 33.0 | -13.5% | Improved by 3.0 | Green |
| Central and Southern Scotland (SP Energy Networks)SPD | 31.3 | 41.8 | -25.1% | Improved by 1.6 | Green |
| East Midlands (National Grid Electricity Distribution)EMID | 34.3 | 38.5 | -10.9% | Improved by 9.9 | Green |
| Southern England (Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks)SSES | 41.8 | 46.1 | -9.2% | Improved by 9.4 | Green |
| South Wales (National Grid Electricity Distribution)SWALES | 42.1 | 42.3 | -0.4% | Improved by 4.2 | Green |
| South East England (UK Power Networks)SPN | 42.2 | 42.5 | -0.8% | Improved by 7.3 | Green |
| East of England (UK Power Networks)EPN | 44.6 | 41.8 | +6.7% | Improved by 1.6 | Red |
| West Midlands (National Grid Electricity Distribution)WMID | 46.3 | 47.9 | -3.3% | Worse by 1.6 | Green |
| North East England (Northern Powergrid)NPgN | 51.0 | 46.7 | +9.3% | Worse by 2.4 | Red |
| Yorkshire (Northern Powergrid)NPgY | 54.7 | 45.9 | +19.2% | Improved by 0.5 | Red |
| South West England (National Grid Electricity Distribution)SWEST | 59.0 | 51.4 | +14.7% | Worse by 1.5 | Red |
| North Scotland (Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks)SSEH | 59.1 | 61.9 | -4.5% | Worse by 2.5 | Green |
2024/25 · lower is better
Customer Minutes Lost
Average minutes without power per customer over the year, counting every interruption. It answers a different question from the count: a network can have few power cuts that each last a long time, or many short ones.
Industry average 35.1 minutes lost per customer — against 36.7 the year before. Ofgem weights this by customer numbers, so it is not the average of the fourteen rows below and is not a network in its own right.
| Licence area | Actual | Target | Against target | Year on year | Ofgem rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| London (UK Power Networks)LPN | 10.5 | 13.6 | -22.8% | Improved by 0.9 | Green |
| East Midlands (National Grid Electricity Distribution)EMID | 24.6 | 22.7 | +8.4% | Improved by 1.5 | Red |
| Central and Southern Scotland (SP Energy Networks)SPD | 25.8 | 29.6 | -12.9% | Improved by 0.5 | Green |
| North West England (Electricity North West)SP ENW | 27.1 | 26.9 | +0.8% | Worse by 0.3 | Amber |
| South Wales (National Grid Electricity Distribution)SWALES | 27.5 | 24.6 | +11.9% | Worse by 1.4 | Red |
| South East England (UK Power Networks)SPN | 30.4 | 31.2 | -2.5% | Improved by 6.1 | Green |
| East of England (UK Power Networks)EPN | 32.5 | 30.1 | +8.0% | Improved by 3.1 | Red |
| West Midlands (National Grid Electricity Distribution)WMID | 34.2 | 29.5 | +15.7% | Worse by 1.3 | Red |
| Merseyside, Cheshire and North Wales (SP Energy Networks)SPMW | 34.5 | 31.0 | +11.3% | Worse by 1.1 | Red |
| North East England (Northern Powergrid)NPgN | 46.8 | 41.1 | +13.9% | Improved by 2.7 | Red |
| South West England (National Grid Electricity Distribution)SWEST | 50.4 | 38.8 | +29.9% | Worse by 3.6 | Red |
| Southern England (Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks)SSES | 51.2 | 41.7 | +22.9% | Improved by 6.4 | Red |
| Yorkshire (Northern Powergrid)NPgY | 51.2 | 39.1 | +31.0% | Improved by 2.3 | Red |
| North Scotland (Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks)SSEH | 68.9 | 52.9 | +30.3% | Worse by 3.4 | Red |
How to read this data
- Lower is better. Both measures count something unwanted, so the table is sorted best first and a negative figure against target is good news.
- Targets are set per licence area, not nationally. A rural overhead network is not asked to match a dense urban underground one, so beating a target and having the lowest figure are different achievements.
- These cover RIIO-ED2 only, from 2023/24. The previous price control set different targets, so joining the two into one line would show a step change in performance that is really a change in what was being asked.
- The industry average is customer-weighted. It is not the mean of the fourteen rows, and it is not a network.
Source: Ofgem — RIIO-2 Electricity Distribution annual report supplementary datafile. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Why the targets differ by area
Each network is set its own target, and that is the single most important thing to understand before reading the tables as a league table.
Holding a Highlands network to the same standard as inner London would be meaningless: one runs overhead lines across mountains and moorland, the other a dense underground network where an engineer is never far from a fault. Ofgem therefore sets targets that reflect what each network is working with, and rewards or penalises it against its own.
So there are two different questions on this page, and they have different answers. Which network is most reliable? is the actual figure. Which network is doing best with what it has? is the variance against target. A rural network can miss the first badly and comfortably beat the second, and that is not a contradiction.
The targets also tighten over the price control period, so holding a figure steady counts as falling behind. That is deliberate: the scheme is designed to buy improvement, not maintenance.
Geography explains most of the spread
The gap between the best and worst networks is large, and most of it is not about competence.
Overhead lines fail far more often than underground cables. They are exposed to wind, lightning, ice and falling branches, and every one of those is more common in open country than in a city. Rural networks are also long and thinly meshed, so there is often no alternative route to switch supply through, and the repair crew has further to travel to reach a fault that took longer to locate.
Urban networks are the reverse: mostly underground, heavily interconnected, and short. A fault is often restored by rerouting within minutes while the cable is repaired at leisure. That is why the most reliable areas on this page are consistently the densest ones, and it says more about cable depth than about management.
Weather is the other driver, and it is why a single bad year is weak evidence. One major storm can dominate a network’s figures for a whole year. Ofgem makes allowances for exceptional events, but the honest way to read reliability is as a trend across several years rather than a verdict on one.
Satisfaction is a different question
Ofgem also surveys the people who have actually dealt with their network — after a power cut, a new connection or an enquiry — and scores each one out of ten.
It is worth keeping separate from reliability, because it measures something else: not how often the power failed, but how the network handled it when it did. Being told what is happening and when it will be fixed changes the experience of an outage a great deal, and a network can be good at that while still having more outages than most.
2024/25 · higher is better
Customer satisfaction, out of 10
Surveyed among customers who actually dealt with the network — after a power cut, a connection or an enquiry — so it measures the experience of contacting them rather than general opinion. Note the direction: unlike the reliability tables above, a higher score is better.
| Licence area | Overall | Power cuts | Connections | General enquiries | Ofgem rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| East of England (UK Power Networks)EPN | 9.4 | 9.3 | 9.4 | 9.7 | Green |
| London (UK Power Networks)LPN | 9.4 | 9.3 | 9.4 | 9.8 | Green |
| South East England (UK Power Networks)SPN | 9.4 | 9.2 | 9.4 | 9.6 | Green |
| North West England (Electricity North West)SP ENW | 9.3 | 9.1 | 9.4 | 9.4 | Green |
| Central and Southern Scotland (SP Energy Networks)SPD | 9.3 | 9.1 | 9.3 | 9.4 | Green |
| North Scotland (Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks)SSEH | 9.2 | 9.2 | 9.2 | 9.3 | Green |
| Merseyside, Cheshire and North Wales (SP Energy Networks)SPMW | 9.2 | 8.9 | 9.3 | 9.5 | Green |
| South Wales (National Grid Electricity Distribution)SWALES | 9.1 | 9.1 | 9.1 | 9.4 | Green |
| Yorkshire (Northern Powergrid)NPgY | 9.1 | 8.9 | 9.2 | 9.3 | Amber |
| North East England (Northern Powergrid)NPgN | 9.1 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 9.4 | Amber |
| East Midlands (National Grid Electricity Distribution)EMID | 9.0 | 9.0 | 8.9 | 9.2 | Amber |
| West Midlands (National Grid Electricity Distribution)WMID | 9.0 | 9.0 | 8.9 | 9.1 | Amber |
| South West England (National Grid Electricity Distribution)SWEST | 8.9 | 8.9 | 8.8 | 9.1 | Red |
| Southern England (Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks)SSES | 8.4 | 8.7 | 8.1 | 8.8 | Red |
| Industry averageNot a network | 9.1 | 9.0 | 9.1 | 9.4 |
Two cautions on reading those scores. They sit in a narrow band near the top of the scale, so the gap between first and last is far smaller than it looks in a ranking — a table of positions exaggerates differences of a tenth of a point. And the survey only reaches customers who made contact, which is a particular group: it says nothing about the majority who never needed to.
What this means for you
You cannot change your network operator, but this data is still worth something.
If you are choosing where to live and depend on a reliable supply — working from home, medical equipment, running a business — the figures for an area are a genuine input, and the gap between the best and worst is not small.
If your supply is already unreliable, two things are worth knowing. Your network operator, not your supplier, is who to contact about power cuts, and 105 reaches yours from anywhere in Great Britain. And Guaranteed Standards of Performance mean you may be owed a fixed payment when restoration takes longer than the rules allow — those claims also go to the network operator.
It is also worth adding yourself to the Priority Services Register if you are of pension age, disabled, chronically ill or have young children. It is free, and it tells the network who to reach first when supply is lost. Our energy debt and support page covers what else the register does.
Frequently asked questions
Who is my electricity network operator?
It depends on where you live, not on who you buy electricity from. Great Britain is divided into fourteen distribution licence areas run by six groups — Electricity North West, Northern Powergrid, National Grid Electricity Distribution, UK Power Networks, SP Energy Networks and Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks. You cannot choose or switch your network operator.
What is a Customer Interruption figure?
The number of power cuts per 100 customers over a regulatory year. A figure of 40 means the network recorded 40 interruptions for every 100 customers it serves. It is not the percentage of customers who lost power, because one customer can be interrupted more than once and would be counted each time.
What does Customer Minutes Lost mean?
The average number of minutes a customer was without power across the year, counting every interruption. It answers a different question from the count of interruptions: a network can have very few power cuts that each last a long time, or a lot of very short ones, and the two measures separate those cases.
Why does my network have a worse score than another one?
Usually geography. Rural networks run long overhead lines exposed to weather and trees, so they have more faults and take longer to reach them. Dense urban networks are largely underground and heavily interconnected, so a fault can often be switched around in minutes. That is why Ofgem sets each licence area its own target rather than one national standard.
Can I switch my electricity network operator?
No. Your distribution network operator is determined by geography and is a regulated monopoly, unlike your energy supplier, which you can change whenever you like. Switching supplier changes who bills you, not the wires or who maintains them.
Which electricity network has the happiest customers?
Ofgem surveys customers who have actually dealt with their network — after a power cut, a connection or an enquiry — and publishes a score out of ten for each. The scores sit in a narrow band near the top of the scale, so the gaps are small, and a network can be well liked while still being among the less reliable ones. The two measure different things.
Am I owed compensation for a power cut?
Possibly. Guaranteed Standards of Performance require network operators to make fixed payments when supply is not restored within set timescales, and the amounts and deadlines depend on the cause and the conditions. Claims go to the network operator for your area, not to your energy supplier.
Related reading

Written by
Rob Gibbs
Hi, I'm Rob, and I run Energy-Review.co.uk. I initially started this project in 2018 when I was looking to switch energy suppliers and found there wasn't a website that provided simple, data-backed reviews on all the suppliers available. Since then, I have spent a lot of time (too much, some may say!) looking at all publicly available data about each supplier and writing reviews using this information. These reviews are updated as regularly as possible, and any data is backed up by a source where necessary. I have also started writing guides on various energy-related topics, which hopefully you will find useful. If you find any issues, please use our contact form to let us know.
