Is your energy company’s service any good?

whitelabel

Then why are the only people defending it all people who have joined VERY recently and all have some financial interest in doing so....


Where are the long term members from here with good balanced reputations saying how good it is... I won't hold my breath till such a time but happy to re review my position should that occur.

Nhpus

whitelabel wrote: »

Then why lie about being a member for years....
Your profile clearly shows when you joined....

Nhpus
MoneySaving Newbie
Join Date: 08 Oct 2013

So your only contribution to the site has been these two posts both with levels of bias.
At the moment you are not doing yourself any favours
If you had been a member for years you would know I treat people fairly, over the 9 years i have been a member and judge things on the facts presented without my own adgenda.

I have been a keen follower of Martin for years via e- mail but have never registered for the forum. So I registered today to say a comment. I was under the impression that was allowed on here.
I'm not here for an argument far from it I just wanted to say my opinion which is allowed I believe.
So please stop attacking me for my opinion.

Nhpus

I did not comment to cause problems just to have an opinion. I won't again I apologise if I offended anyone but I thought that was what a forum was for

MSE_Martin

My last comment on the issue . It is without doubt that the UW vote is vastly, uncoincidentally disproportionate. Not in terms of the votes in favour, but simply the number of votes for a small provider. Therefore something is askance. It is my job to point that out to those who may rely on this poll for making a decision.

Priest party. The reason we ask about service is because we know about price. That's a hard fact we can and do analyse and compare. Yet service is about collecting a mass of data of people's experience.

We are collecting this data so we can use it in conjunction with our lead metric - price.

psmith64

whitelabel wrote: »

Then why are the only people defending it all people who have joined VERY recently and all have some financial interest in doing so....


Where are the long term members from here with good balanced reputations saying how good it is... I won't hold my breath till such a time but happy to re review my position should that occur.

It's like anything Whitelable - people normally only report the bad in this world and not the good - you only have to watch the daily news for this.

My opinion is based on fact and personal experience. A company simply does not grow at the scale of Telecom Plus ( Utility Warehouse ) does over the last 17 years if it is doing something wrong.

People like Martin Lewis seem to ignore this fact in ignoring the current result of this particular survey.

What he wrote at the top of this reply thread is trying to ignore the major growth that this company has achieved and continues to achieve.

You only have to look at the companies last annaul report to see it's diminishing churn rate which is just over 1 % another indication that customer retention is excellent and again another fact that backs up what his current survey shows.

The truth about any company cannot be hidden when it's so transparent of that of an FTSE listed company.

Whether anyone likes it or not this company is gradually chipping away at those who take their customers for granted and think they can treat them as they wish.

Fortunately nothing Martin Lewis says can affect this as more and more people get to hear about Utility Warehouse whether it's from a friend, a distributor or just their own research.

Nhpus

whitelabel wrote: »

I only comment on facts and give my opinion, which is as equally allowed as yours

However you did specific state you were a member AND followed for years.



Had you not put this mistruth in I would not have cause to question it. The fact you feel so personally attacked shows in the saying, the truth hurts.

It was not an untruth I have been following for years and I have received all e-mail alerts and I have used many of his services. I have never registered for the forums as I have never bothered with it or had the time. I did today as I have an opinion and I am allowed to say it. That is what forums are for.

No the truth does not hurt being called a liar and a cult on an open forum by someone who knows nothing about me is out of order. So stop pushing your weight round with me. I have a right to an opinion wether you agree or not. That's it.

If this is how you answer people who just want to get their own opinion across then I won't refer anyone to this for help.

psmith64

MSE_Martin wrote: »

My last comment on the issue . It is without doubt that the UW vote is vastly, uncoincidentally disproportionate. Not in terms of the votes in favour, but simply the number of votes for a small provider. Therefore something is askance. It is my job to point that out to those who may rely on this poll for making a decision.

Priest party. The reason we ask about service is because we know about price. That's a hard fact we can and do analyse and compare. Yet service is about collecting a mass of data of people's experience.

We are collecting this data so we can use it in conjunction with our lead metric - price.

Is that your last comment Martin as you can't bring yourself to look at the facts I suggested and report back the truth to people why this company is able to retain it's customers as backed up by the incredibly low churn rate that it was totally transparent with in it's last annual accounts.

You won't find published churn rates with any of the other companies you are comparing in this survey as frankly they would probably be embarrassing to those companies.

You remark that people should take your survey with a pinch of salt regarding it's 97% good feedback totally ignores fact produced in audited accounts submitted to the City.

I once again ask how you base your advise to people on your web site as it is obviously not based on fact in this case when the evidence is out there to suggest the result is quite true.

priestparty

MSE_Martin wrote: »

My last comment on the issue . It is without doubt that the UW vote is vastly, uncoincidentally disproportionate. Not in terms of the votes in favour, but simply the number of votes for a small provider. Therefore something is askance. It is my job to point that out to those who may rely on this poll for making a decision.

Priest party. The reason we ask about service is because we know about price. That's a hard fact we can and do analyse and compare. Yet service is about collecting a mass of data of people's experience.

We are collecting this data so we can use it in conjunction with our lead metric - price.

Thankyou Martin.
In your journalistic research, would it be better to focus and start a thread about my last point: If we could lobby against the confusing large number of tariffs, the confusing bills and bring in 4 standard tariffs across all companies then 'service' would be the only thing you could measure accurately.

Nhpus

I'm not going to engage in anymore discussions so don't involve me in anymore please. I am going to enjoy this website for what it is doing not this.

whitelabel

psmith64 wrote: »

It's like anything Whitelable - people normally only report the bad in this world and not the good - you only have to watch the daily news for this..

Had you been a member who read this forum you would see that both praise and criticism is given of all companies by the 1000s of membes when it is due, there are specific areas exactly for that and it is encouraged and well used.

I stand by my comments on and do not consider having any weight to throw around beyond my length of time and my unbiased posts which count for nothing beyond what others interpret it to mean.
I have highlighted particular factual statements made in this thread which have not been adequately countered and used careful considered language which was not accusary but makes a comparison to something else unless is direct reference to a particular fact ie something explicitly stated eg length of membership which when pointed to be factually inaccurate gets defensive and denies not stating something as fact when they did .

I'm not hear to cause arguments either and won't necessarily comment on this further as it is plain for all none interested parties to read and make their own judgements easily.