Cancellation Charges

factoryworker

Cardew wrote: »

I have been going on about this on MSE for years. Not only 'approved' - but run by a Government agency.

It really would be so simple, so cheap to run, no skewing service recommendations toward those companies paying sites higher commission.

If it were run by the Energy Saving Trust they would have massive numbers of people visiting the website and could also see all the excellent advice on energy saving etc.

Martin I fear would not back the scheme as he(understandably) gets income from people going to comparison websites via this site.

My friend, you write poetry.......

the cynic in me suggests that this Govt run body would become bloated/overstaffed (now wheres my CV...)......and if one sees the extension of this, one sort of asks, well why not just natonilise; one price accountable to the taxpayer (with the ubiquitous fat cap Cheif operating officer of course[now wheres my CV...]

i apologise for being a bit flip but, the Energy Savings Trust......that is a beautiful thought......i would guess 60% of people switch for an illusionary saving, but 95% of people could save by being more efficient.

As for Martin, well one should always be careful to bite the hand that feeds you but he'll respond doubtlesly....blip.blip.blip

I'm going to start a new thread: Cardew for Energy Minister.....

Miss_Moppet

Cardew wrote: »

You being rich and invest £500,000…

Oh if only that were true…

The points you make have made me see things in a different light. I can and do accept the idea of exit fees on fixed price fixed term tariffs. My fear all along has been that this year’s exit fees of £20 to £30 on variable tariffs could steadily be pumped up over future years to exorbitant amounts with Ofgem looking the other way and none of us having any choice in the matter.

Clearly, people frequently switching companies and playing the system have made a modest exit fee of up to say £30 not unreasonable but perhaps some sort of sliding scale might be appropriate so that the longer you stay the less you pay. That’s fairer.

Your idea of a single comparison site that is well run and totally accurate is very appealing. On the other hand, you’d be killing off an entire industry at a stroke and putting a lot of people out of work. Also my feeling is that if the Government ran such a site it would be slow and unreliable, and we’d all be back here moaning about it.

factoryworker

Miss_Moppet wrote: »

The points you make have made me see things in a different light. I can and do accept the idea of exit fees on fixed price fixed term tariffs.

Your idea of a single comparison site that is well run and totally accurate is very appealing. On the other hand, you’d be killing off an entire industry at a stroke and putting a lot of people out of work. Also my feeling is that if the Government ran such a site it would be slow and unreliable, and we’d all be back here moaning about it.

its wonderful that people can differ but acknowledge differences, and have the integrity to do so; credit to you- there truly is poetry in the air!

I'm sorry but i don't hear consumers bleating that energy workers are laid off from say scottish power because Npower have gained more (their) customers; hpocritically because i use them, maybe, but comparison sites are parasites-but they are only parasites because the inefficiencies of energy companies allow them to be- it should be noted the minimal people actually employed by comparison companies, being very automated - you only have to look at other threads regarding wrong supplies being taken to realise this. We can't say its a competitive market and then worry about the affects or consequences of that competitive market if that competitor doesn't deliver the goods (i.e not just price but service), in regard to job losses; i won't cry a tear; parisites get exterminated...and while we are at lets exterminate all those commison hungry doorstep sellers with amore patter than integrity.

I do sort of agrre with you about the Govt running it...but then at least they'll employ equal/more than those laid of at comparison co.s, and on better wages no doubt....my CV's in the post

Cardew

Miss_Moppet wrote: »

Oh if only that were true…

The points you make have made me see things in a different light. I can and do accept the idea of exit fees on fixed price fixed term tariffs. My fear all along has been that this year’s exit fees of £20 to £30 on variable tariffs could steadily be pumped up over future years to exorbitant amounts with Ofgem looking the other way and none of us having any choice in the matter.

Clearly, people frequently switching companies and playing the system have made a modest exit fee of up to say £30 not unreasonable but perhaps some sort of sliding scale might be appropriate so that the longer you stay the less you pay. That’s fairer.

Your idea of a single comparison site that is well run and totally accurate is very appealing. On the other hand, you’d be killing off an entire industry at a stroke and putting a lot of people out of work. Also my feeling is that if the Government ran such a site it would be slow and unreliable, and we’d all be back here moaning about it.

On the subject of a sliding scale of exit fees, my BG fixed tariff has such a scheme. It was £75(for both) reducing to £50 and now should I be silly enough to switch it would be £35.

It is also pertinent to point out that all the cheapest variable tariffs have modest exit fees and the tie in periods are generally around a year.

e.g.(all for dual fuel)

BG Websaver 5 - £60 tied to June 2010
NPower £40 tied 12 months
OVO £60 tied 12 months
E-On £30 tied Feb 2011
EDF £50 tied Dec 2010

None of those could be described as punitive, most would save the exit fee in weeks.

Whilst I understand about 'killing off an industry at a stroke' you simply cannot justify keeping people in employment when their services are no longer required.

It is rather like the railways who employed firemen to shovel the coal on steam trains, for a while they had to be kept on the footplate when engines changed to diesel and electric.

The invention of the Alarm clock destroyed the livelihood of the people employed to wake up factory/mill workers.

Cardew

factoryworker wrote: »

but comparison sites are parasites-but they are only parasites because the inefficiencies of energy companies allow them to be- it should be noted the minimal people actually employed by comparison companies, being very automated -

Funny you should use the term 'parasite'. I used it a number of times and upset a lot of people it seemed!

This is a post of mine from April 2007 - there were others on this theme!

They are a 'con' in another way. They are an unnecessary overhead(middleman or parasite) factored into the prices we pay for our gas and electricity. The £millions in commission they earn is paid for by us customers.

With modern technology it will be very easy to set up a similar comparison website. It seems a great pity that a Government funded organisation like the Energy Saving Trust(or Energywatch) don't operate an independant site - which would not be biased and include companies like Ebico.

Save us £millions as well.

At the time some websites did not include companies that paid no commission - since changed.

factoryworker

Cardew wrote: »

Funny you should use the term 'parasite'. I used it a number of times and upset a lot of people it seemed!.

hmmm, at the risk of sounding like a mutual appreciation society, I hope i dont get the bismirching upon me now, that you doubtless got then. All i can say is you were right then on both counts and we're right now!

Whilst on the subject of setting up one regulator approved, Govt run switching site (and Energy Saving Trust WOULD be the perfect body, I would make the following mandatory before a switch was approved:

1)You must confirm you have cavity and loft insulation and if not agree to its insulation (for fee paying subsidised customers cost spplit over a year)

2)Agree to a benefit check to ensure you are receiving all the income you can

3) complete a 'quiz' outlining energy efficiency tips

Why, because it will force customers to do all they can to increase income and reduce usage (claiming the millions in unclaimed benefits, turning off jacuzzis). Then neither the Govt or energy companies can be held to account by customers who don't care/ pretend they didn't know. Then we can help those that need help, and not those who sit on their electic mowers admiring their moats......