Utility Warehouse (Telecom Plus) Discussion

Quentin

Meeper wrote: »

Top marks for quality and clarity of bills, customer service, dealing with enquiries and *gasp* value for money, with a 77% customer satisfaction rate, and this published on 25th January.

You "gasp" to see uw members vote their company top marks for value for money.

So did Which magazine, pointing out how expensive the energy is.

But as we know it's meaningless as everyone voting (you had to be a member of uw to vote for them in the survey) has a vested interest in the uw (as they either work for it or their friend/relative who signed them up does) it comes as no gasping matter to the rest of us!

Still good to have it in your presenter to show gullibles as we have seen, and mislead them into believing this was a Which independent survey!

MillicentBystander

Meeper wrote: »

Thanks cgk - I look forward to it.

As an aside: http://www.which.co.uk/switch/energy-advice/customer-satisfaction-survey-results and http://www.which.co.uk/switch/news/2011/01/best-and-worst-energy-companies-revealed-243074 make for good reading, I find.

Top marks for quality and clarity of bills, customer service, dealing with enquiries and *gasp* value for money, with a 77% customer satisfaction rate, and this published on 25th January.

Interesting times.

Nice one, and nice score for OVO also. Npower, 34%. Ouch. And in the Daily Mail survey of CS across all industries TalkTalk came out way below npower. Seriously, how bad must TalkTalk be?? Interesting, though, that UW take their services from 2 of the very worst companies for CS, add their CS to them, resell them and usually come top or near top in all these Which surveys! Just shows how important proper, UK-based CS really is! A thing that never usually gets factored into any price comparison.

MillicentBystander

Quentin wrote: »

You "gasp" to see uw members vote their company top marks for value for money.

So did Which magazine, pointing out how expensive the energy is.

But as we know it's meaningless as everyone voting (you had to be a member of uw to vote for them in the survey) has a vested interest in the uw (as they either work for it or their friend/relative who signed them up does) it comes as no gasping matter to the rest of us!

Still good to have it in your presenter to show gullibles as we have seen, and mislead them into believing this was a Which independent survey!

Where exactly is your proof for this? Or are you as per usual just making it up as you go along? I would imagine companies like British Gas and npower have maybe hundreds of thousands of employees and retired former employees but they still come way down the list. Any ideas why?

Meeper

Quentin wrote: »

You "gasp" to see uw members vote their company top marks for value for money.

So did Which magazine, pointing out how expensive the energy is.

But as we know it's meaningless as everyone voting (you had to be a member of uw to vote for them in the survey) has a vested interest in the uw (as they either work for it or their friend/relative who signed them up does) it comes as no gasping matter to the rest of us!

Still good to have it in your presenter to show gullibles as we have seen, and mislead them into believing this was a Which independent survey!

Interesting. You refer to it as a "presenter", which is a term I hadn't heard until I went on my UW training. Perhaps that's where you picked it up also, Quentin/Cardew/Whoever you might be, when you did yours before you got disgruntled and bitter?

I'm intrigued however, as to why you think that everyone connected with UW has a vested interest in its success? I have a number of customers who have absolutely nothing to do with me. I gathered customers at fairs, events, networking meetings and all manner of random occasions. In fact, of all of my customers, I believe only 1 is actually family. The rest are professional connections through my other job or people I have met at above events. What you, Cardew / Quentin, are saying is that you think that people who use the UW services will knowingly say that it is cheap when it isn't, will knowingly give good scores for crappy service, and that they will obfuscate the results of the Which? survey?! I sure hope you have some evidence to back that scandalous accusation up. I think that Which? might be interested to hear you calling into question the independence of their surveys.

Any new readers here should take note that the independent market research company, Which?, who have always championed choice for consumers and ensured that they are not biased towards any companies, are giving top marks to Utility Warehouse in their survey for the best gas & electric providers in January 2011. Back in November I believe UW was one of the three "Which? Preferred Providers" of broadband services and there are "Best-Buy" awards going back to 2009 for our services. Please do not be put off by the disgruntled former distributor on here who posts under the names of Quentin (with random links and copy/pasted quotes from elsewhere) or Cardew (with stock phrases and the same old messages again and again with no substance to back up his words). Take heed of the consumer champion, not the naysayer who obviously failed as a distributor and will now attack my words here because he has nothing to say about the facts.

Meeper
--UW Distributor, not failed :rotfl:

MillicentBystander

Cardew/Quentin is starting to reveal more about himself than he originally wanted, I feel. It's probably borne out of frustration....

Quentin

Meeper wrote: »

Any new readers here should take note that the independent market research company, Which?, who have always championed choice for consumers and ensured that they are not biased towards any companies, are giving top marks to Utility Warehouse in their survey for the best gas & electric providers in January 2011.

This is more misleading uw promotion.

Which are not saying this at all.

They are reporting what 185 members of UW have said about UW.

That's all!

Meeper

Thanks for that observation Cardew. Care to respond to previous requests for corroborative evidence that all UW customers have a vested interest and therefore the survey is tainted? You know all of the people who replied, I assume.

By the way, what did you do with your "presenter" when you resigned your position as a UW Distributor? I hope that you sent it back to the company, because you wouldn't want all of those dirty secrets to fall into the wrong hands.

Sorry, just realised my mistake, I referred to you as Cardew in my first line, when you obviously posted this one under the Quentin alter-ego. Apologies.

Quentin

Meeper wrote: »

Interesting. You refer to it as a "presenter", which is a term I hadn't heard until I went on my UW training. Perhaps that's where you picked it up also, Quentin/Cardew/Whoever you might be, when you did yours before you got disgruntled and bitter?

Yes, we heard scouse Jimmy referring to it in your training sessions. (Though don't think its exclusive to the UW)

I already replied to you that I have had no connection whatsoever with UW. But if you get some satisfaction to ignore that and carry on with your accusation, then that's up to you.

And revealing more of the "qualities" you see in the UW and its reps!

Meeper

Ah, so when I ignore you and post unsubstantiated accusations, it is "revealing qualities" that you consider to be bad. I see.

All I've done, however, is post in a similar style to you and your Cardew alter-ego. It's ok for you to post spurious pointless and non-factual nonsense that isn't backed up with substance, so I thought I'd get in on the act.

Boot, welcome to other foot. I hope you enjoy your stay.

MillicentBystander

Quentin wrote: »

Yes, we heard scouse Jimmy referring to it in your training sessions. (Though don't think its exclusive to the UW)

I already replied to you that I have had no connection whatsoever with UW. But if you get some satisfaction to ignore that and carry on with your accusation, then that's up to you.

And revealing more of the "qualities" you see in the UW and its reps!

This is classic Cardew/Quentin. Shifting the burden of 'guilt' onto someone else. CardQuen, if you have never had any connection to UW then you are hacking into that site. Not good when you are attempting to occupy the moral high ground. And if you are not hacking into that site then you ARE a UW distributor, failed or not. Which would make you a liar. Which one are you? Hacker or liar? Whichever one it is, you really aren't the sort of character any parents would want as a son-in-law..