Just Energy
Assessed 16 July 2026 under NZ · Medium confidence
Evidence last captured 29 August 2026 · oldest 28 August 2026 · next re-check due 28 August 2027
We contacted this company 2 times between 6 August 2026 and 19 August 2026, by email and phone. No reply received.
A grade rules on whether a public claim is substantiated. It is not a finding about environmental performance, truthfulness, or the merit of the business. HowLegit is not a licensed adviser and nothing here is legal or investment advice.
Where this sits
All 21 energy companies, assessed against the same checklist in the same window.
Just Energy ranks 13 of 21 in this sector by overall score, between 47.6% and 96.0%.
Findings
The homepage states "No Long Term Contracts" and, beneath it, "If you choose to leave, you can do so free of charge." Clause 5.5 of the Standard Residential Terms describes the same promotional arrangement as "a contract of 12 months or more" and reverses any joining credit if the customer switches away inside that period. Neither homepage statement carries a qualifier or a link to the clause, while the Power Draw promotion on the same page carries both an asterisk and a linked terms page.
Why this matters. A customer deciding whether to switch reads the homepage, not clause 5.5, and the two say different things about what leaving costs. An unqualified categorical statement that the business's own terms contradict is the clearest exposure in this assessment under the Fair Trading Act.
What closing this looks like
- Amend "No Long Term Contracts" and "free of charge" language to include qualification about clause 5.5 promotional credit clawback
“No Long Term Contracts”
The homepage states "No Long Term Contracts" without qualification. The business's own Standard Residential Terms describe the promotional arrangement in the opposite words: clause 5.5 says "the promotional price is the price for a contract of 12 months or more". Both statements are published by the business and they cannot both be read at face value. The evidence beside this claim shows each of them. A charge is levied on exit: under the entity's own terms a customer who leaves inside the qualifying period pays money a customer who stays does not.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
“If you choose to leave, you can do so free of charge”
The homepage states that if you choose to leave, you can do so free of charge. No exit, termination, switching or cancellation fee appears in the Standard Residential Terms, in the Freedom Plan Product Schedule, which sets out only a $10 late payment fee, or in the published Schedule of Fees. Clause 5.5 reverses a joining credit where the customer leaves inside twelve months, and on its own wording that credit "will only apply to You if You stay with Us for 12 months or more", so a customer who leaves early is returned to the price they would have paid without the promotion rather than charged for leaving. The same clause does contradict the separate statement that there are no long term contracts, which is graded at ref 1.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
A Toitu Net Carbon Zero Organisation certification mark appears in the footer of every page, including the pages selling natural gas, LPG and gas account additions. The mark is an image with no link, and the site publishes no certificate number, no statement of what the certification covers, no carbon figures and no targets. The certification on record covers operational emissions and does not extend to the burning of the gas and LPG the business sells. Checked on 16 July 2026 against the site's own navigation, reaching 26 of the 30 addresses it links to, with no sitemap available to widen that.
Why this matters. A reader who sees a net carbon zero mark on a page selling gas has no way to find out what it covers. The gap between an operational certification and a product a customer buys is the kind of distinction the Commerce Commission's guidance on environmental claims asks businesses to make plain.
What closing this looks like
- Add scope disclosure statement adjacent to Toitu badge
- Verify Toitu certification is current; remove badge if expired
- Consider removing Toitu badge from gas/LPG-specific pages
“Toitu Net Carbon Zero Organisation mark displayed in the footer of every page”
The mark is displayed in the global footer, so it appears on the natural gas page, the LPG refill page and the Add Gas page as well as everywhere else. It is an image with no link, and its own artwork reads ISO 14064-1 ORGANISATION, which is a certification of how the business runs its own operations rather than of the fuel it sells. The site publishes no certificate number, no validity dates and no statement of what the certification covers, so a reader who meets the mark on a page selling gas has nothing on the site that tells them its scope. The four captures beside this claim show the mark on each of those surfaces.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
The site publishes no 111 Contact Code page, and the term returns no occurrence across 29 captured pages and 8 documents, while three sibling brands under the same owner each publish one. Six infringement notices issued to the parent business over that code, a 2011 Commerce Commission settlement that refunded 2,582 customers, and 38 non-compliances from a 2024 Electricity Authority audit are also undisclosed. Checked on 16 July 2026 against the site's own navigation, reaching 26 of the 30 addresses it links to, with no sitemap available to widen that.
Why this matters. The 111 Contact Code exists so customers who depend on a landline for emergency calls know where they stand, and this is the one place a customer would look. Three comparable brands run by the same owner publish it, which makes its absence here harder to attribute to oversight.
What closing this looks like
- Create dedicated 111 Contact Code page
- Disclose 111 Contact Code infringement notices and remedial action
“Consumer Care Policy "complies with the Consumer Care Obligation"”
The consumer care policy states that it complies with the Consumer Care Obligation, which is a compliance claim about how the business treats customers in difficulty. The site publishes no 111 Contact Code page, and the term returns no occurrence across the 29 captured pages and 8 documents checked on 16 July 2026; three brands run by the same owner each publish one. The evidence beside this claim is the Vulnerable and Medically Dependent Customers page, which is where a customer who depends on a landline would look. The compliance statement is not contradicted, and it is stated without the disclosure a reader would use to test the part of it that matters most to them.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
The business operates no social media presence and no third party review profile was identified, so its messaging cannot be compared across channels. The site does show a cross brand inconsistency: the contact page gives the postal address as Pulse Energy, PO Box 10044 beside a Just Energy email address, and the Pay it Forward programme offered to Just Energy customers sits on a sibling brand's website. Checked on 16 July 2026 against the site's own navigation, reaching 26 of the 30 addresses it links to, with no sitemap available to widen that.
Why this matters. A customer who looks up the business finds one channel and a postal address in another company's name. That makes it harder to confirm who they are dealing with before they sign up.
What closing this looks like
- Give the contact page a postal address in the name a customer is contracting under, or say whose name it is in
- Host a Pay it Forward page on this brand's own site, or link the sibling brand's page and say why it lives there
“Contact page publishes the postal address as "Pulse Energy, PO Box 10044"”
The contact page of justenergy.co.nz gives the postal address as "Pulse Energy, PO Box 10044, Dominion Road, Auckland 1446", beside a Just Energy email address and a Just Energy phone number. The Pay it Forward programme offered to Just Energy customers is likewise hosted on pulseenergy.co.nz. Both are accurate, because Just Energy is a trading name of Pulse Energy Alliance LP, and both require a customer to already know that in order to read them, which the homepage does not tell them: that is the same gap graded at C6. The business operates no social media presence and no independent review profile, so there is no third surface on which to resolve the question.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
The Price Info page states that the Pay it Forward Programme "has helped over 10,000 customers since the Programme launched in 2020", and links to the programme page from that sentence. That page reports its results in a graphic: 9,525 families helped and $957,624 raised, split between $515,316 from the company and $442,308 from customers, as of June 2025. The programme therefore publishes both an amount and an outcome, and the figure on the brand's page is higher than the only figure the programme publishes.
Why this matters. A reader who follows the link to check the number reaches a dated figure lower than the one they were given. The reporting behind this programme is the most complete disclosure in this assessment, and the number on the brand's own page is the part of it that nothing supports.
What closing this looks like
- Bring the Price Info figure into line with the programme graphic, or update the graphic and date it
- Carry the programme's results graphic onto the Just Energy page that makes the claim, so the figure and its evidence sit together
“Pay it Forward: "assisted over 10,000 customers" since 2020”
The Price Info page states the programme "has helped over 10,000 customers since the Programme launched in 2020". The programme's own page, linked from that sentence, publishes "TOGETHER, WE HAVE HELPED 9,525 FAMILIES EXPERIENCING ENERGY HARDSHIP" and "AS OF JUNE 2025". The two are fourteen months apart and the published figure is the lower of them, so the claim's number rests on nothing the entity publishes. It is also counted in different units, customers against families.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
No rates are published anywhere on the site. The rate lookup requires an account number, so only existing customers can reach it, and the Compare My Current Bill route is a bill upload form reviewed by staff rather than a comparison tool. The site does link billy.govt.nz, described as a free independent comparison site, on four pages. Checked on 16 July 2026 against the site's own navigation, reaching 26 of the 30 addresses it links to, with no sitemap available to widen that.
Why this matters. A prospective customer cannot see what they would pay before making contact. The link to the government comparison service partly closes that gap, but it sends the question elsewhere rather than answering it.
What closing this looks like
- Publish indicative pricing or rate ranges
“Compare My Current Bill tool (implies comparison capability)”
Compare My Current Bill is presented as a comparison route but operates as a bill upload reviewed by staff, so it returns a response rather than a comparison. The route sits outside the pages reachable from the site's main navigation, which is the scope of this assessment. Four pages within that scope link billy.govt.nz, which the site describes as a free independent comparison site.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
The homepage states that the plan has a competitive price and offers low cost, high value electricity options, and neither statement carries a comparison method, a competitor rate or a benchmark on the page that makes it. The site does link billy.govt.nz, the Electricity Authority's free comparison service, and describes it in those terms, but on its consumer care policy, contact, complaints, terms and price information pages rather than on the homepage. A prospective customer meets the comparative on the first screen and the route to test it on pages they have no reason to open. Checked on 16 July 2026 against the site's own navigation, reaching 26 of the 30 addresses it links to, with no sitemap available to widen that.
Why this matters. Competitive and low cost are comparative statements, and a comparison needs something to compare against. With no rates published, a customer cannot test either statement for themselves.
What closing this looks like
- Put the billy.govt.nz callout on the homepage, beside the competitive price statement, the way the Power Draw asterisk already works
- If the comparative is to stand without that route, publish the basis for it: a rate, a comparison method or a date
“Our Plan has a competitive price”
The homepage states that the plan has a competitive price. Competitive is a comparative term and the site publishes no rate, no competitor figure, no comparison method and no date, so a reader has nothing to test the statement against.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
“low cost, high-value electricity options”
The homepage offers low cost, high value electricity options. Both terms are comparative and neither is supported by a published rate or benchmark anywhere in the captured estate.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
The Schedule of Fees itemises charges inclusive of GST and discloses the credit card surcharge. No membership is required to join and no exit fee is listed. The All Energy Discount for combining electricity and gas is named on the Add LPG page with no rate published there, in the Freedom Plan Product Schedule or in the Schedule of Fees.
Why this matters. A customer can see the standing charges before signing up. Note that the discount is named without any rate attached, which is under review.
What closing this looks like
- Publish the All Energy Discount rate on the Add LPG page and in the Freedom Plan Product Schedule, or state the basis on which it is calculated
“SmoothPay: "spread your payments evenly”
The consumer care policy states that the SmoothPay option lets you spread your payments evenly over weekly, fortnightly or monthly payments. The same wording appears in the downloadable Consumer Care Policy document, so the claim is consistent across both surfaces a customer would reach.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
“"you will receive our All Energy Discount" for combined electricity and gas”
The Add LPG page states that when you combine your electricity and gas with us, you will receive our All Energy Discount. The page publishes no rate, no dollar value and no percentage for that discount, and neither does the Freedom Plan Product Schedule, which contains the word discount zero times, nor the Schedule of Fees. A search of all 115 collected surfaces returns no per-day or per-unit rate in any notation, and one mention of the discount across the whole estate. A customer is told a benefit exists and is given nothing on any Just Energy surface with which to size it.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
The homepage states the business is 100% community owned by Pioneer Energy and Buller Electricity, which the ownership register confirms. The page names neither the company the customer contracts with nor any route to the owners: Pulse Energy Alliance LP appears only in the terms, the privacy policy and an unexplained postal address, and neither owner is linked anywhere on the site. The word community appears twice on the whole site, both inside this claim, with nothing published about what the ownership delivers.
Why this matters. A customer reading the homepage would reasonably believe they are dealing with Pioneer Energy or Buller Electricity. The contracting party is named only in documents most people will not open before signing up.
What closing this looks like
- Name Pulse Energy Alliance LP on the homepage beside the ownership statement, so the contact page address reads as the same business
- Link Pioneer Energy and Buller Electricity from the ownership statement, and say in one line what community ownership means: who the trusts benefit and what they distribute
“Just Energy is a trading name of Pulse Energy Alliance LP" (T&Cs)”
The Standard Residential Terms and the privacy policy both state that Just Energy is a trading name of Pulse Energy Alliance LP. The disclosure is accurate and appears in both documents a customer would be directed to before contracting.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
“100% community owned by Pioneer Energy and Buller Electricity”
The homepage states the business is "100% community owned by Pioneer Energy in Alexandra and Buller Electricity in Westport", and checked against the NZBN register the ownership is accurate: Pulse Energy Alliance LP (9429043300020) is held through Pioneer Energy Renewables LP by Pioneer Energy Group LP and Buller Electricity Limited, whose ultimate owners are Central Lakes Trust and the Buller Electric Power Trust (9429042958772). Three things are missing from the page that makes the claim. It does not name Pulse Energy Alliance LP, the company the customer contracts with, whose name a customer then meets unexplained as the postal address on the contact page. It does not link Pioneer Energy or Buller Electricity, which appear in none of the 27 off-site links on the site. And it does not say what community ownership means here: the word appears twice on the whole site, both inside this claim, with nothing published about the trusts, who they benefit or what they distribute.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
The only environmental visual on the site is the Toitu certification mark, shown at 85 pixels wide in the footer. The brand palette is blue and yellow, and no nature imagery or green colour treatment appears on any page. The visual presentation does not overstate the environmental position the business actually holds.
Why this matters. Businesses often signal more environmental commitment through imagery than their evidence supports. That is not happening here, and the presentation is proportionate to what is claimed.
Support for medically dependent customers is documented with a registration route, a phone number and a stated 30 day window for medical documentation. The consumer care policy sets out hardship referrals to Money Talks and Work and Income. The ownership statement naming Pioneer Energy and Buller Electricity was checked against the ownership record and is accurate.
Why this matters. These are the statements a customer in difficulty relies on, and they hold up when checked. The support described is real and reachable.
“MDC support: registration, dedicated phone line”
The Vulnerable and Medically Dependent Customers page sets out the registration route, giving the Customer Services number 0508 587 836, naming the Medical Dependency Register, and stating that documentation from a registered medical practitioner is required within 30 days. A downloadable form is linked from the same page.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Consumer care: "work with you to try keep your electricity connected”
The consumer care policy states that the business will work with you to try keep your electricity connected if you are having trouble paying your bill. This is an aspirational commitment and the same page publishes a pathway behind it: payment options including SmoothPay, and hardship referrals to Money Talks and Work and Income.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
“100% community owned by Pioneer Energy and Buller Electricity”
The homepage ownership statement was checked against the NZBN register and is accurate. Pulse Energy Alliance LP (9429043300020) is owned through Pioneer Energy Renewables LP (9429043270699) by Pioneer Energy Group LP (9429052104619) and Buller Electricity Limited (9429038918124), and the ultimate owners are Central Lakes Trust, a charitable trust, and the Buller Electric Power Trust (9429042958772), a consumer trust. All are registered and live, and no private or overseas holder appears anywhere in the chain. Two entities named as owners on the group's own pages, Electra Energy Limited (9429041582084) and Buller Energy Limited (9429038617911), are both recorded as REMOVED, so those pages are out of date rather than describing a wider ownership. The identical wording is graded FLAG under C6 for omitting the contracting entity, and which grade stands is open for ruling.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
The complaints process states a two working day response, a 20 working day resolution target and a 40 working day maximum. Escalation to Utilities Disputes is named as free and independent, with a contact number. The Fern assistant is offered around the clock and is described with an honest limitation, that it is still learning.
Why this matters. A customer who needs to complain can find out what will happen and by when, and can reach an independent decision maker if that fails. That is what remedy visibility should look like.
“Complaints: 2-day acknowledge, 20-day resolve”
The Feedback or Complaints page states that the business will attempt to resolve a complaint within 20 working days, that it may take up to 40 working days in some cases, and that it will write to explain why where it does. A two working day response target is stated on the contact form.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Utilities Disputes escalation (free, independent)”
The Feedback or Complaints page names Utilities Disputes as the escalation route where the business cannot resolve a complaint, and describes it as free and independent. The same route is named on the consumer care policy, the contact page and the terms, so a customer meets it wherever they start.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Fern AI: "available 24/7," "no wait times," "instant answers”
The contact page states that there are no wait times and that Fern is available to help you 24/7. As a remedy route this supplements rather than replaces the Customer Care team, whose stated hours are Monday to Friday 8am to 5pm, and the page sets out how to reach a person.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
The Power Draw promotion offers a chance to win up to $1,000 in credit and is presented as a monthly prize draw rather than a guaranteed benefit. It carries an asterisk and a linked terms page setting out one prize per account per month and the business's ability to modify or cancel. The Fern assistant's capabilities are stated alongside its limitations.
Why this matters. The offer is described as what it is, with the conditions attached where a reader will see them. Nothing here promises an outcome the business cannot deliver.
“Power Draw: "WIN up to $1,000 in credit”
The Power Draw offer is stated as a chance to win up to $1,000 in credit and is presented as a monthly prize draw rather than a guaranteed benefit. It carries an asterisk on the surface and a linked terms page setting out one prize per account per month and the business's ability to modify or cancel.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Fern AI: "no wait times," "instant answers”
The Meet Fern page states that when you chat with Fern you will receive instant answers, with no wait times, and that Fern is available 24/7. The same page carries the business's own limitation, that Fern is still learning and may not have all of the answers yet, which qualifies the capability claim where a reader will see it.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
Tone is consistent across the site. The Fern assistant is introduced with a stated limitation, that it is still learning and may not have every answer. The complaints material is written plainly and without pressure, and no urgency or scarcity tactics appear on any page.
Why this matters. The business does not overstate what it can do, and says so where a customer might otherwise expect more. That consistency is worth preserving.
“supplying Kiwis... since 2010”
The homepage states the business has been supplying Kiwis with low cost, high value electricity options since 2010. The 2010 founding date is consistent with the company record. The price element of the same sentence is assessed separately under C3.
Captured 28 August 2026 · source page ↗
Across the 29 captured pages and 8 documents, the terms sustainable, renewable, emission, climate and net zero return no occurrence in the readable text of any page. The entity's one environmental claim is made as an image rather than as words: a Toitu Net Carbon Zero Organisation mark in the footer of every page, carrying those words in its own artwork and in its alt attribute but nowhere a reader of the page text would meet them. The mark is assessed at E2. Checked on 16 July 2026 against the site's own navigation, reaching 26 of the 30 addresses it links to, with no sitemap available to widen that.
Why this matters. The business makes one environmental claim and it is a certification mark rather than a sentence, so there is no wording here to test for specificity. The mark itself is graded at E2, where the question is what it discloses. Recording this checkpoint as not applicable keeps one claim from being counted twice.
No comparative environmental claims are made, so there is no baseline or comparison method to disclose. Checked on 16 July 2026 against the site's own navigation, reaching 26 of the 30 addresses it links to, with no sitemap available to widen that.
Why this matters. Comparative environmental claims carry the heaviest substantiation burden because a reader cannot check them without the baseline. None are made here, so that burden does not arise.
The environmental mark in the global footer appears at every step of the sign-up and account journey, unchanged, because it is part of the site template rather than a message placed at any particular point. There is no environmental claim that strengthens on the homepage and weakens at the point of purchase, which is what this checkpoint looks for. What the mark itself does not disclose is assessed at E2. Checked on 16 July 2026 against the site's own navigation, reaching 26 of the 30 addresses it links to, with no sitemap available to widen that.
Why this matters. Environmental claims often weaken between a homepage and the point of purchase. There is no such drift here because there is no claim at either end.
No environmental targets, commitments or forward statements are published. Checked on 16 July 2026 against the site's own navigation, reaching 26 of the 30 addresses it links to, with no sitemap available to widen that.
Why this matters. A business that publishes no target cannot be held to one. That is a reasonable position, and it sits oddly beside a net carbon zero mark on every page, which is the tension recorded elsewhere in this assessment.
No cultural claims or imagery requiring assessment appear on the site. Checked on 16 July 2026 against the site's own navigation, reaching 26 of the 30 addresses it links to, with no sitemap available to widen that.
Why this matters. Cultural imagery used without standing behind it is a common source of complaint. The site makes no such use, so the question does not arise.
Cite this
One company, with every graded claim, its own published wording and the dated capture each grade rests on.
You are here
The full analysis behind these grades: what the sector claims, how much of it holds up, and the seven findings that run across it.
Read it, free and without registration →
HowLegit, Just Energy — messaging integrity assessment. Energy sector register, assessed 16 July 2026. Overall B- (61.8%). https://howlegit.com/register/Energy/just-energy A grade rules on whether a public claim is substantiated, not on its truth or on the merit of the business. Not legal or investment advice. Produced by HowLegit, which also sells audits commercially. The data on this page is public.
This entry is part of a complete sector scan. Companies not listed on the Energy register were not assessed — which is not the same as being cleared.