Utility Warehouse (Telecom Plus) Discussion

vinnyph

johnjames1 wrote: »

The UWDC is nothing more than a re-seller full stop. As I was an ID for 10 years I cannot and will not work for a company who appears to warrant abuse of statutory rights and also treat customers with disputes below a level of service of The Sales of Goods and Services Act 1979.

UW isn't a re-seller. It has licences for the provision of the many services. In the case of energy the provision of purchase power for energy is currently with NPower, it used to be with other companies and for a while was handled in house. However UW still have the licence for provision of services. For instance British Gas produce gas but doesn't produce electricity. The electricity is purchased from the regional electricity distributor for each region. You would say British Gas are a provider. This is no different to the licence UW has to provide services.

BT retail provides services through BT Wholesale as do many over companies. You would not say BT are a re-seller of BT Wholesale.

The licences are for the provision of services in billing.

johnjames1 wrote: »

There are a few investigations going on at the moment that for legal reasons I cannot go in too. Once they have I will post a link to some information that will let people decide and also show the other side of the UWDC.

If there are in fact legal proceedings being investigated then its important for you to realise that any statement you make in regards to those in advance of a court ruling cannot be presented to anyone else or even suggestions of wrong doing. This would be Contempt of Court.

johnjames1 wrote: »

On the whole customer services is good, but when you get further up the ladder, then this is when you come across some of the most (cannot comment people) I have had the displeasure of dealing with.

Don't know what you are talking about so cannot make comment.

johnjames1 wrote: »

Two faced? As an ID are you using your free calls and internet for business? Then you are in breach of their terms and conditions, but they turn a blind eye to this. When however you are using the same services for other business they do not. This shows the double standards.

It has been allowed for ID's to use the residential service to speak to contacts they know to grow the UW business. This has been the case since free calls have been provided and stated by UW. The terms and conditions states residential phone cannot be used for business purposes. Cannot see how this is a double standard.

johnjames1 wrote: »

If you work from home as an ID then you should have a business line internet etc. Show me that all the ID's have this and I will eat my hat.

It has been allowed for ID's to use the residential service to speak to contacts they know to grow the UW business

johnjames1 wrote: »

Everything the UWDC have stated in the past they would not do to ID's they have. The customer attrition rate is high regardless of how good customer services is.

As you do not mention what it is exactly, cannot make a comment.

The customer attrition rate is low. You probably have very old single service TP telephone customers from before the change to UWDC or tenants. I have never expected people to stay with them for life but most have stayed for many years because I continue to keep in contact with them, ask how they are and tell them about new discounts etc if they are interested. One of my distributors has lost 1 customer in 6 years out of over 100, and they died.

johnjames1 wrote: »

Which? And I remember the email we were told of in advance and ourselves family and friends to vote.

The Which selects the customers to vote at random from the Which subscribers. I have never received any forewarning from within UW and there have been many Which customer surveys. Even if there was a forewarning it wouldn't make any difference, most distributors are not subscribers to the Which magazine.

johnjames1 wrote: »

If you compare your CVC etc to inflation you will find deflation of the figures of about 50%. There are plenty of other ways of making residual income that does not fall, the goal posts changed and plenty of other companies who do crusies etc.

It hasn't fallen for me as I have kept doing it. The average per customer has kept increasing each year as well. It has been growing in fact as has my customer base.

johnjames1 wrote: »

I also know of one guy who became an ID with a mass data base of customers. The emails he was sending out you would have lost your ID for, but because of the customers gained he did not loose his ID.

Cannot make a statement on this as know nothing of it.

johnjames1 wrote: »

Regardless of what Charles says there will come a day when the company is sold and the ID's left high and dry. The old saying is true dont place all your eggs in the same basket. A good read and listen is "creating multiple streams of income" which is much better than UWDC.

Surely if that was his intention Charles would have sold his share a number of years ago.

An alternative would be a pension. How many people have lost money on their pension scheme.

johnjames1 wrote: »

Dont forget as well there is a lot of ID's out there that are not working legally as they are running their own business. If something goes wrong who is going to protect you?

The customers are those of UW, not the distributor. No financial advise is being given so there is no liability on the Distributor. Distributors are told to register as self employed and complete a tax return

johnjames1 wrote: »

I predicted the cash back card and also its pro's and cons the most serious being lack of protection if something goes wrong.

Be interested to see any evidence of something going wrong with cashback card.

johnjames1 wrote: »

I suggest you check out karen and Trevour Blakes story of rags to riches from the start.

I know Karen and Trevor. I know their story. Don't know what your point is here or what you are inferring.

johnjames1 wrote: »

Also not many ID's are aware that they need liability insurance, business insurance for their car and also as they are self employed a consumer credit licence. Also if you employ people to do leaflet drops and pay them you need employers liability insurance as well.

Liability insurance is not required for provision of services as no financial advise is being given. If something did go wrong and compensation was required then it would be UW that would be responsible for this as the customer is that of UW.

Consumer credit licence is not required as customers do not pay money by direct debit to distributor but to UW itself. UW needs the consumer credit licence.

Business car insurance is required for a car however this doesn't cost any more than a normal policy.

I don't know of any distributors who employ someone to leaflet drop. There might one or two in company. This isn't the normal way people do things.

johnjames1 wrote: »

If you take expansion of the company and the customer data base it works out on average of 4 customers a year per distributor. I know those who are ID's but WONT take the services themselves one being a warrant officer he knows the law and even he admitted that "they dont tell you that you need a consumer credit licence." Ask the FSA and they will tell you, in fact I need one just to help people with insurance claims!

This is untrue. The company itself requires a consumer credit licence not a distributor. Distributors are licensed agents for UW. A customer does not pay money to a distributor by direct debit it is paid by customer to UW. In terms of insurance, no advise is given or should be given. A leaflet is provided for someone to read instead. I know this as I am qualified myself. You should not be getting involved with insurance claims as a distributor of UW.

andybos

thanks for that vinny,very informative,and I am being serious.
Andy uw dis.

Senior_Paper_Monitor

JohnJames1 raises an interesting - but I believe incorrect - point that IDs should hold a Consumer Credit Licence.

I should stress at this stage that my principal holds various registrations, approvals and licences (including CCL & Data Protection registration) as necessary in her role as a self employed Mortage/Insurance broker - FSA regulated - and is a (non active) UW independent distributor.

I am by nature a paperwork and contractual animal (I actually read these things in some depth and argue them where I find that necessary) and:

1) I see nothing in the ID role that requires a CCL.

I quote (from the OFT site) the 'simple' definition of the circumstances under which someone is likely to require a covering CCL:

Businesses requiring a licence


You are likely to need a licence if you want to:

• sell on credit
• hire or lease out goods for more than three months
• lend money
• issue credit cards or trading checks
• arrange credit for others
• offer hire purchase terms
• collect debts
• help people with debt problems
• advise on people's credit standing
• administer agreements (but do not collect debts) for creditors or assignees
• help individuals to locate and correct records about their financial standing.

You are not likely to need a licence if:

• you only deal with limited companies (or,in the case of credit reference agencies, you only furnish information about limited companies)
• you are just accepting credit cards or trading checks issued by someone else (and you didn't introduce the borrower to them)
• you are just allowing customers to pay their bills in four or fewer instalments within a year beginning on the date of the arrangement.

2) I am however convinced that the very great majority of IDs will need a Data Protection registration unless they simply tear up their copy of each application once issued to UW and the client (i.e if they retain a copy or any record of the customers details - such as address connected with name, telephone number connected with name, services ordered, bank details and various other components of the application).

If the ID retains such information without being a registered person under the Data Protection act they are clearly in breach of the Act's requirements.

If the ID uses that information to contact customers subsequently (i.e to sell them an additional service - UW's or anything else) they are in breach of the act if they don't have the registration or EVEN IF THEY DO - this is because the waiver (which must be obtained for this purpose under the act) on the application is clearly for UW and not the ID (who in every document it is made clear is not an employee or representative of UW).

Therefore to be legal in this circumstance, it is necessary for the ID to hold both the Data Protection Act Registration and a signed waiver (not the one on the application form) specifically for the ID.

Frankly, unles there is a very !!!!ed off customer involved (who is willing to and knows how to complain fully) a 'non regulated' ID is likely to get away with nothing more than a mild bollicking and instructions to desist or register.

However an FSA registered person committing such an offence is unable to claim 'ignorance of the rules' and is likely to be dealt with far more severely.

Our own plan had been to develop a string of IDs who we would actively support and use the shared database to cross sell our mainline services with the IDs as introducers (for which they would be rewarded) - and this sort of relationship is actively encouraged in the UW training sessions.

A full evaluation of the UW range indicates that for some people the UW offering can be very attractive (it certainly is for us and the handful of clients we put on the service before suspending our UW operation - we hold Data Protection waivers for them anyway), for others maybe not so and for some (particularly where they have the time and will to continuously monitor and move their accounts and can evaluate the penalty implications in doing so). In short we were willing to offer the product provided we gave it the FSA 'Treating Cutomers Fairly' type analysis of their options to them, analysing their spend and habits etc (not necessarily the approach recommended by UW!). For us the onging 'trust relationship' across all financial areas with the client is far more important than a few pounds worth of commission for utilities.

The real danger for us arrives when/if one of our 'team IDs' fails to obtain Data Protection registration and/or a client waiver for 'other services', perhaps sells UW with a little less caution/diligence than we might, has an upset customer as a result who subsequently gets a mortgage/insurance promotion from us (either direct or through the individual ID) and decides to complain. In these circumstances we would be clearly guilty of i) breach of the Data Protection Act ii) breach of the mortgage 'cold selling' regulations - both of which would be serious issues for us.

What really concerns me about UW is that having realised this problem I have written two detailed and constructive letters to a senior manager in UW asking for their analysis, comment and suggestions and have simply been ignored.

We, for obvious reasons, have suspended active promotion of UW services (if one of our current clients - covered by waiver - follows up on our initial flyers we will service it, but we are not chasing or promoting any further until this is resolved) until - and if - this matter is resolved. Obviously a bunch of customers, bonuses etc have 'gone by the board' in the mean time - the £199 'investment' is not looking like our best yet!

Senior_Paper_Monitor

Just for clarification on a couple of postings that appeared while I was writing my response .....

The FSA does not regulate 'Consumer Credit Licenses' - this is done by the OFT. The FSA require that certain approved persons also obtain CCL as part of the FSA approval process.

The FSA would view all ID activities for UW as 'non regulated' - whether the person was 'regulated for other activities' or not.

A breach of either Data Protection or Consumer Credit Licence legislations would impact on ongoing approval by the FSA of any 'FSA regulated' party.

With regard to third party liability cover - (in my opinion - without further research) probably not legally required to be held by a self employed ID but definitely advisable and cheap to obtain. If client comes to ID's home, ID goes to client's home, anyone works - paid or unpaid - under the instruction of the ID even if only once (what happens when 16 year old leaflet dropper gets savaged by dog while delivering - or run over?) it is vital, but not necessarily legally required in all circumstances (you will simply be 'self insuring' - a very high risk option).

I have just reread VinnyPH's posting where he quotes "Liability insurance is not required for provision of services as no financial advise is being given. If something did go wrong and compensation was required then it would be UW that would be responsible for this as the customer is that of UW." ..... Generally an excellent posting but I think he is confusing liability cover with Professional Indemnity (Professional Indemnity covers the consequential finacial impact of incorrect advice - normally in a regulated environament such as financial advice. It is extremely expensive at best and horrifically so in a non-regulated environment - I used to advise investors/shareholders etc on airline set-ups or investment and the figures I was quoted for PI were huge sums of mony. VinnyPH is correct that there is no requirement/need for ID's to take out professional Indemnity. Third Party Liability covers you wandering around the client's garden in the night looking for the way in and putting your foot through his coldhouse or worse. I repeat that such insurance may not always be a legal requirement, but it is a cheap investment and certainly advisable).

vinnyph

Senior_Paper_Monitor wrote: »

JohnJames1 raises an interesting - but I believe incorrect - point that IDs should hold a Consumer Credit Licence.

I should stress at this stage that my principal holds various registrations, approvals and licences (including CCL & Data Protection registration) as necessary in her role as a self employed Mortage/Insurance broker - FSA regulated - and is a (non active) UW independent distributor.

I am by nature a paperwork and contractual animal (I actually read these things in some depth and argue them where I find that necessary) and:

1) I see nothing in the ID role that requires a CCL.

I quote (from the OFT site) the 'simple' definition of the circumstances under which someone is likely to require a covering CCL:

Businesses requiring a licence

You are likely to need a licence if you want to:

• sell on credit
• hire or lease out goods for more than three months
• lend money
• issue credit cards or trading checks
• arrange credit for others
• offer hire purchase terms
• collect debts
• help people with debt problems
• advise on people's credit standing
• administer agreements (but do not collect debts) for creditors or assignees
• help individuals to locate and correct records about their financial standing.

You are not likely to need a licence if:

• you only deal with limited companies (or,in the case of credit reference agencies, you only furnish information about limited companies)
• you are just accepting credit cards or trading checks issued by someone else (and you didn't introduce the borrower to them)
• you are just allowing customers to pay their bills in four or fewer instalments within a year beginning on the date of the arrangement.

2) I am however convinced that the very great majority of IDs will need a Data Protection registration unless they simply tear up their copy of each application once issued to UW and the client (i.e if they retain a copy or any record of the customers details - such as address connected with name, telephone number connected with name, services ordered, bank details and various other components of the application).

If the ID retains such information without being a registered person under the Data Protection act they are clearly in breach of the Act's requirements.

If the ID uses that information to contact customers subsequently (i.e to sell them an additional service - UW's or anything else) they are in breach of the act if they don't have the registration or EVEN IF THEY DO - this is because the waiver (which must be obtained for this purpose under the act) on the application is clearly for UW and not the ID (who in every document it is made clear is not an employee or representative of UW).

Therefore to be legal in this circumstance, it is necessary for the ID to hold both the Data Protection Act Registration and a signed waiver (not the one on the application form) specifically for the ID.

Frankly, unles there is a very !!!!ed off customer involved (who is willing to and knows how to complain fully) a 'non regulated' ID is likely to get away with nothing more than a mild bollicking and instructions to desist or register.

However an FSA registered person committing such an offence is unable to claim 'ignorance of the rules' and is likely to be dealt with far more severely.

Our own plan had been to develop a string of IDs who we would actively support and use the shared database to cross sell our mainline services with the IDs as introducers (for which they would be rewarded) - and this sort of relationship is actively encouraged in the UW training sessions.

A full evaluation of the UW range indicates that for some people the UW offering can be very attractive (it certainly is for us and the handful of clients we put on the service before suspending our UW operation - we hold Data Protection waivers for them anyway), for others maybe not so and for some (particularly where they have the time and will to continuously monitor and move their accounts and can evaluate the penalty implications in doing so). In short we were willing to offer the product provided we gave it the FSA 'Treating Cutomers Fairly' type analysis of their options to them, analysing their spend and habits etc (not necessarily the approach recommended by UW!). For us the onging 'trust relationship' across all financial areas with the client is far more important than a few pounds worth of commission for utilities.

The real danger for us arrives when/if one of our 'team IDs' fails to obtain Data Protection registration and/or a client waiver for 'other services', perhaps sells UW with a little less caution/diligence than we might, has an upset customer as a result who subsequently gets a mortgage/insurance promotion from us (either direct or through the individual ID) and decides to complain. In these circumstances we would be clearly guilty of i) breach of the Data Protection Act ii) breach of the mortgage 'cold selling' regulations - both of which would be serious issues for us.

What really concerns me about UW is that having realised this problem I have written two detailed and constructive letters to a senior manager in UW asking for their analysis, comment and suggestions and have simply been ignored.

We, for obvious reasons, have suspended active promotion of UW services (if one of our current clients - covered by waiver - follows up on our initial flyers we will service it, but we are not chasing or promoting any further until this is resolved) until - and if - this matter is resolved. Obviously a bunch of customers, bonuses etc have 'gone by the board' in the mean tiome - the £199 'investment' is not looking like our best yet!

It should be noted that problems with cross selling is in regards to your involvement with regulated business and using a database from existing mortgage clients.

Distributors usually are just speaking to friends they know or to people their customers know and have no involvement with any FSA regulated business and are not using a database of mortgage clients. In either case because the distributor knows them then it is OK to keep their details and no need to be a person registered under Data Protection. Otherwise I would never be able to retain my friends contact details and contact them.

Why not just contact other people who are not on that FSA regulated database.

SwanJon

vinnyph wrote: »

For instance British Gas produce gas but doesn't produce electricity. The electricity is purchased from the regional electricity distributor for each region. You would say British Gas are a provider. This is no different to the licence UW has to provide services.

Vinny, once again you demonstrate your lack of knowledge of the energy industry.
Electricity is not purchased from the Regional electricity distributor - the hint is in the name. The distributor distributes electricity and maintains the netowrk for doing this.
This is like saying that I didn't buy a book from Amazon, I bought it from Royal Mail because they delivered it to my door.
Electricity is generated by around 60 companies in the UK (known as Generators). Centrica Energy is one of these, as are sister companies to the other big 6. There are many small/single site generators too. Suppliers (like British Gas & npower) buy electricity from the generator, then pay the distributor to deliver it to the customer. I don't know what npower do for UW.

1carminestocky

Whilst I can't comment on the details raised by johnjames as i'm not s distributor and know very little about the internal workings of the company, I think it must be borne in mind when reading JJs 'claims' regarding quite complicated legal requirements that he was originally under the impression that an ID could force UW to release info under the auspices of the FOI Act.

I'm assuming he also has a real problem with the company at the moment, unless this thread he started is not related, of course.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1916685&highlight=

Cardew

Originally Posted by johnjames1
Which? And I remember the email we were told of in advance and ourselves family and friends to vote.

vinnyph wrote: »

The Which selects the customers to vote at random from the Which subscribers. I have never received any forewarning from within UW and there have been many Which customer surveys. Even if there was a forewarning it wouldn't make any difference, most distributors are not subscribers to the Which magazine.



.

On what evidence can you stste that most UW distributors are are not Which suscribers?

About 10% of UW's customer base are IDs. They and their families have a vested interest in UW performing well in any customer survey.

How on earth would any company that charges just about the highesr gas and electricity prices in UK, always appear top for value in any survey - and have done long before the introduction of the cashback card!!

Senior_Paper_Monitor

Vinnyph, I am afraid you misunderstand my post (and the regulations):

i) Our mortage client database is not a problem in any way - we hold Data Protection registration and the required waiver from each client to contact them with 'products or services which we believe may be of interest to them'. We can legally phone, write or email them with any 'half witted' sales pitch we want provided it is legal in itself.

ii) The FSA have no direct involvement in 'Data Protection' - other than insisting that appropriate registration and compliance with the ICO is maintained. The fact that it is on an '"FSA Regulated database" (whatever one of those is) is neither here nor there - the ICO regulations apply.

iii) There is no exemption in the Data Protection Act for "the distributor/data holder because he knows them then it is OK to keep their details and no need to be a person registered under Data Protection. "

An overview of the exemptions (from the ICO website) is as follows:




Exemptions are possible for the following.

• Data controllers who only process personal information for:
  • staff administration (including payroll);
  • advertising, marketing and public relations (in connection with their own business activity); and
  • accounts and records.
• Some not-for-profit organisations.
• Processing personal information for personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes).
• Maintenance of a public register.
• Processing personal information without an automated system such as a computer.

Please note: data controllers who are exempt from notification must comply with the other provisions of the Act, and may choose to notify voluntarily. More detailed guidance about the notification exemptions can be found in.

Your example "Otherwise I would never be able to retain my friends contact details and contact them" is covered by the item in red - but sell them something and it becomes a different matter. Please also note that despite no need for registration (notification) you still have to comply with the other provisions (primarily about providing their data to a third party).

I suggest anyone in any doubt just runs through the simple self assessment linked here:

www .ico. gov. uk/notify/self/question1.html (remove spaces!!)

Frankly if an ID limits themselves to signing up family and close friends then there is little at risk (certainly for them - although possibly an up-line contact such as us would be at greater risk), but there are many IDs who sell to a much broader market (friend = close friend = mate's pal = acquaintance = someone you met in the pub?).

1carminestocky

Cardew wrote: »

On what evidence can you stste that most UW distributors are are not Which suscribers?

About 10% of UW's customer base are IDs. They and their families have a vested interest in UW performing well in any customer survey.

How on earth would any company that charges just about the highesr gas and electricity prices in UK, always appear top for value in any survey - and have done long before the introduction of the cashback card!!

It's a similar situation to you being happy with the service you get from BG and BT - even though the 2 companies are some of the most badly-performing on surveys/online polls/Which surveys etc (I believe BG came 2nd last in this latest survey with a 38% overall satisfaction rating even though websaver4 is purportedly one of the cheaper tariffs on the market). How can this be so? Because different people have different ideas regarding what constitutes value for money. I have just left Three on account of their appalling CS, even though, for me, they offer the cheapest deal. Does that make it the best value for money? Absolutely not.