Utility Warehouse (Telecom Plus) Discussion

Cardew

giraffe69 wrote: »

I know some of the posters here work for UW but the persistent and unpleasant posts by one or two other people don't really help because they are just making the same point 75 times over! Yes salesmen slant the facts but that is not really a brand new discovery. When I wanted to compare I used a site and made sure that things like VAT were common to the comparisons.

Undoubtedly true and of course comparison websites are the way to find out prices.

However anyone who is aware that the 'anti UW brigade' continually post the same point over and over, are surely fully aware of the very high prices charged by UW; and the constant repetition is not for their benefit.

However there are regular new contributers to MSE who post about UW. Some are genuine enquiries, many are from UW salesmen masquerading as potential customers.

Unless the facts about UW's high prices, dubious sales tactics and misleading posts are repeated time and again, new readers will be duped.

As you mention comparison websites, don't forget that the last thing UW salesmen want is for people to use these websites. The usual 'excuse' is UW don't pay the sites commission so UW fare badly or don't appear at all.

The modus operandi of UW salesmen is largely to recruit(trusting) friends and family.

Quentin

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

IHowever, for people who can't take online tariffs in my area (those without internet access, paper bills), UW Medium is actually high in the available tariff list, with only £16 difference between them and the cheapest, Scottish Power Standard, and is therefore still a reasonably viable alternative

Looking for the best deal, then signing up for a more expensive deal than you can get doesn't seem the greatest money saving suggestion we have seen.

And you could also currently get £62 cashback signing up to the cheapest supplier you mention (SP)!

That's real cashback too, (money in the bank to spend on whatever you want), not the uw idea of what "cashback" is!

Cardew

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

I have Scottish Power Online Energy Saver 10.

For online tariffs, this is still cheapest of all for me, with UW Medium User Tariff in 21st place, and as Cardew says, more expensive (£105 more for me). However, for people who can't take online tariffs in my area (those without internet access, paper bills), UW Medium is actually high in the available tariff list, with only £16 difference between them and the cheapest, Scottish Power Standard, and is therefore still a reasonably viable alternative for someone with similar usage to me (Annual gas usage (6,406kwh), Annual electricity usage (2,412kwh)), but only if they have paper bills/non-online access.

It should be pointed out that 6,406kWh gas and 2,412kWh electricity is an unrepresentitive consumption - less than one third of the UK average for gas and two thirds for electricity.

For my area UW is 'only' £103 more on that very low amount, but that is 22.5% more expensive.

Taking the average consumption for UK of 20,500kWh/3,300kWh gas/electric UW are £235(26.8%) more expensive.

Quentin

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

About 50% of my street will have similar consumption to me. Some of them are pensioners. For them, UW are still competitive for paper bill options...

Not according to your own figures posted above! (And to all the comparison sites)

Cardew

[QUOTE=uptomyeyeballs;38088974Up here, we can't afford to spend and waste money like water.

[/QUOTE]

In which case you should NEVER take gas and electricity from UW.

You make it sound like you are all still wearing clogs!

Quentin

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

According to my own figures? Please explain.

As you already have told us you come here as a WUM, don't know why you ask.

But you did put up your figures in post #322, showing uw to be more expensive than the cheapest (even comparing expensive tariffs!).

But by now everyone is aware of that, so what was the point of you starting this off again?

Quentin

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

This is a discussion board, not an exclusive conduit for your deliberate distortions of the truth.

Please point out these "deliberate distortions".

When it comes to distortion, when talking about paper bills with uw, you seemingly forget to point out that they charge extra for them, either by way of a direct charge, or by "upgrading" your membership fee. Why are such charges always hidden away and never mentioned when attempting to justify their high prices?

Quentin

The uw tariff you are quoting does not include paper bills!

You do not get them in the £18/year membership fee level - the one your figures are based on. (Though you know that, of course).

Quentin

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

I'm not interjecting any manipulation, for or against, I leave that up to you.

You were the one who brought up (and repeated) that you were comparing uw against other tariffs with paper bills!

uptomyeyeballs wrote:

uw.. is therefore still a reasonably viable alternative for someone with similar usage to me (Annual gas usage (6,406kwh), Annual electricity usage (2,412kwh)), but only if they have paper bills/non-online access.

In reply I have pointed out that you are wrong:

1) You claimed the tariff to be "reasonably viable", yet admitted others were cheaper

2) You keep impressing that the figures are for paper bills, but the uw charges more for providing paper bills!

Quentin

All I have pointed out is that customers of uw have to pay more than you quoted if they want to have the paper bills which you have stressed were included.

Your figures showed uw as being more expensive than the cheapest (yet claimed it was still a "viable alternative". In fact it is even more expensive, as the customer would be charged more by uw if they did want paper bills!

In what universe is choosing to pay more than necessary a "viable alternative"? Looks to be a pointless exercise.