We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Utility Warehouse (Telecom Plus) Discussion
Options
Comments
-
Mike_by_the_Sea wrote: »I have to agree with Cardew on the basic premis that anyone who has been mis-sold through doorstep selling should have the opportunity to be compensated.
However, to simply state that UW will be exposed by this legislation is interesting. The business model that UW operates is very different to that used by the "Big 6" salesmen. As I understand it, the majority of salesmen that "sell" gas and electricity receive a one-off payment for each person they convince to change.
The payments paid to UW distributors are primarily accrued over time through having "happy" customers. Also, the one-off payments for Gas and Electricity are considerably less than for other services.
Although there will be bad apples in every barrel, the vast majority of UW distributors are in it for the long game and short-term gains would not be their motivation.
PS I am a UW ID
How UW distributors are remunerated is irrelevant to this discussion.
If customers have been mis-sold UW gas and electricity, then the customer is entitled to compensation regardless of how the salesmen receives his commission.
Would you consider that any UW salesman who claims that the TVG ensures potential customers will get the cheapest gas and electricity to be a 'bad apple'?0 -
Should compensation be paid to those who knowingly switched to a higher tariff?
It sounds like many people who are happy with UW have chosen them for reasons other than price (e.g. service, cashback card, bundled bill).
How can UW (or any supplier) prove that the customer was aware and included this in their thinking?
I assume for any compensation, comparison needs to be made against the customers previous tariff, which may not have been the best on the market.0 -
Nice to see SwanJon backing up my original point - the majority of households remain on standard tariffs - UW's prices are in most cases more than comparable with any of the Big 6's standard tariffs (and in some cases very competitive against their online tariffs also, which I can prove). The challenge remains for Cardew to disprove my earlier claims with verifiable facts but I won't hold my breath. I would also like him to back up his claim regarding the vast majority of UW customers who switch will be paying more. Again, not holding my breath. He would appear to be a fact free zone. I can only speculate as to why he doesn't seem interested in taking me on with this one. It's not like I'm using his oft-repeated 'diversionary tactic', the price argument is actually central to the compensation plan.0
-
Should compensation be paid to those who knowingly switched to a higher tariff?
It sounds like many people who are happy with UW have chosen them for reasons other than price (e.g. service, cashback card, bundled bill).
How can UW (or any supplier) prove that the customer was aware and included this in their thinking?
I assume for any compensation, comparison needs to be made against the customers previous tariff, which may not have been the best on the market.
Agreed.
If they are happy with the deal(and admit it) then they have no claim for compensation.
However, in spite of the protestations of the multi-named UW fan, without doubt UW gas and electricity was just about(tm) the most expensive in UK often 30% to 40% more than the cheapest tariffs.
Apparently 40% of the 'victims' of doorstep selling moved to a higher priced tariff.
Virtually all of UW customers were recruited by 'doorstep selling'(as defined under the regulations). We are all aware that the discredited Triple Value Guarantee was the cornerstone of the UW sales pitch.
So it should be brought to UW customer's notice that they may have a claim for compensation.0 -
Should compensation be paid to those who knowingly switched to a higher tariff?
It sounds like many people who are happy with UW have chosen them for reasons other than price (e.g. service, cashback card, bundled bill).
How can UW (or any supplier) prove that the customer was aware and included this in their thinking?
I assume for any compensation, comparison needs to be made against the customers previous tariff, which may not have been the best on the market.
I don't believe that these new suggested regulations will amount to anything, as you say, how do you prove it? Everybody will be jumping on the bandwagon trying to claim some compo. And who is going to end up footing the bill for this compo that might get paid to people, another raise in prices I suspect!
People need to do their research and make the decision based on that with regards to which supplier and tariff you choose, as usual somebody else is always at fault.
I do agree with this sentence from the BBC article though:
The committee also said the huge number of tariffs on offer to customers were designed to bamboozle people.:heart2: Newborn Thread Member :heart2:
'Children reinvent the world for you.' - Susan Sarandan0 -
Agreed.
If they are happy with the deal(and admit it) then they have no claim for compensation.
However, in spite of the protestations of the multi-named UW fan, without doubt UW gas and electricity was just about(tm) the most expensive in UK often 30% to 40% more than the cheapest tariffs.
Apparently 40% of the 'victims' of doorstep selling moved to a higher priced tariff.
Virtually all of UW customers were recruited by 'doorstep selling'(as defined under the regulations). We are all aware that the discredited Triple Value Guarantee was the cornerstone of the UW sales pitch.
So it should be brought to UW customer's notice that they may have a claim for compensation.
But surely these people weren't on the cheapest tariffs and then switched? I suspect if they were on the cheapest tariffs they are quite clued up and wouldn't change supplier without research? Plus 40% switched to a higher tariff, that means 60% saved money. Who's to blame that 40% switched to a higher priced tariff? The sales person, or the person who agreed to switch and signed the new contract without correctly researching first? Why can't people accept resonsibilty for what they are doing?
The article doesn't mention the smaller companies though, just that 4 of the main energy suppliers were being investigated. And SSE have been the first company to have been successfully prosecuted. No mention of UW. I hope that in the interest of moneysaving you've started a thread and mentioned this to the customers of these other companies who are actually being investigated!:heart2: Newborn Thread Member :heart2:
'Children reinvent the world for you.' - Susan Sarandan0 -
Agreed.
If they are happy with the deal(and admit it) then they have no claim for compensation.
However, in spite of the protestations of the multi-named UW fan, without doubt UW gas and electricity was just about(tm) the most expensive in UK often 30% to 40% more than the cheapest tariffs.
Apparently 40% of the 'victims' of doorstep selling moved to a higher priced tariff.
Virtually all of UW customers were recruited by 'doorstep selling'(as defined under the regulations). We are all aware that the discredited Triple Value Guarantee was the cornerstone of the UW sales pitch.
So it should be brought to UW customer's notice that they may have a claim for compensation.
Yet more wild, unsubstantiated claims. Like I challenged you before, get yourself on energyhelpline, input the OFGEM average consumption figures (16500 gas, 3300 electric) and come back with actual %tage figures. To not do so gives the impression you're just talking nonsense (again).
And as janninew suggets, why haven't you also put your rant in threads regarding any of the Big 6? It's not like their cold callers offer up the cheapest deals to their potential clients, is it? You're making yourself appear Quentin-esque in your obsession with criticising UW at every opportunity. It's a wholly unedifying spectacle.
PS There's even an official MSE industry wide thread been started on this proposal. Bizarrely, as he clearly feels so strongly in favour of it, Mr Cardew has made no contribution to it.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/33796200 -
I don't believe that these new suggested regulations will amount to anything , as you say, how do you prove it? Everybody will be jumping on the bandwagon trying to claim some compo. And who is going to end up footing the bill for this compo that might get paid to people, another raise in prices I suspect!
People need to do their research and make the decision based on that with regards to which supplier and tariff you choose, as usual somebody else is always at fault.
I do agree with this sentence from the BBC article though:
The committee also said the huge number of tariffs on offer to customers were designed to bamboozle people.
Neither do I but the ranting internet dictator has obviously decided these proposals have already been implemented so that's that.0 -
I hope that in the interest of moneysaving you've started a thread and mentioned this to the customers of these other companies who are actually being investigated!
Actually I started a thread on the subject before my post on this thread, see:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3379512
Shortly afterwards MSE wrote an article and invited comment on their article.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/45539814#Comment_45539814
Likewise I fear that the proposed legislation won't see the light of day unless there is a campaign to ensure maximum publicity. I posted this:
The fact remains that if this compensation legislation comes to pass, there are likely to be a shed load of UW customers who will stand to benefit
0 -
Just to weigh in slightly here, I'll pick one small element of the latest discussion, because all the rest is simply noise.Cardew wrote:5. The central plank of UW selling technique is the Triple Value Guarantee which we all know(and many UW reps concede) is worthless.Cardew wrote:We are all aware that the discredited Triple Value Guarantee was the cornerstone of the UW sales pitch.
I can say with honesty and sincerity that, from all of the company events and training sessions that I have been on in the past 12 months, Triple Value Guarantee might have been mentioned a sum total of 3 times. It is absolutely not anything like the "cornerstone" or "central plank" of the proposition at all. It is, in fact, such a minor part of the proposition that I have never mentioned it once to any customers that I have signed, and there is no mention of the Triple Value Guarantee in the current "presenter" folder.
I am a UW Distributor.I am an Independent Financial AdviserYou should note that this site doesn't check my status as an Independent Financial Adviser, so you need to take my word for it. This signature is here as I follow MSE's Adviser Code of Conduct. Any posts on here are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as financial advice.0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards