BBC: Comparison websites hide a third of deals

Cardew

footyguy wrote: »

I see no problem with comparison sites offering customers who wish to switch via them, the possibility of filtering results to only show them.

There wouldn't be a problem if they announced that 'ploy' instead of hiding it away from their unsuspecting users. Bear in mind that the majority using the comparison websites are not like us 'anoraks' who are mostly aware of the 'tricks' they use.


For instance for those on a fixed price deal that is shortly ending, they make switching look far more attractive by inflating the annual price you are currently paying. They do this by 'assuming' that at the end of the fixed period you will be switching to the most expensive Standard tariff offered by the company. e.g. 2 months on current tariff and then 10 months on the standard tariff.


Us 'anoraks' do know that by clicking some options you can find out the 12 month cost of our current fixed tariff - but I wager a lot of users are not aware of that procedure.


All the comparison websites make many many £millions in commission, £millions paid for by us customers. As stated many times they are parasitic.


It would take very little effort for a Government funded organisation like the Energy Saving Trust(EST) to set up a single authoritative comparison website and save us customers £millions on our bills.

MillicentBystander

Comparison sites effectively add yet another layer of costs to be borne by the already over burdened domestic fuel customer. They really are hard to defend by anyone who doesn't personally profit from them...

SnowMan

footyguy wrote: »

You normally get nowt for nowt in this world, except with comparison sites which are required to show all suppliers & tariffs publically available. I think for such a FREE service, it is acceptable to expect to need to remove filters that otherwise earn the comparison site money.

If the comparison site did not earn money, it would not exist.

A reasonable view, but you then have to accept that the site is steering customers away from a completely unbiased presentation of the best deals, and thus customers may make less well informed decisions than if the results were presented in a completely unbiased way.

When financial advisers were paid commission they were required to give 'best advice', but the reality was that they directed investors to the products that paid them most commission. It was a dreadful system and resulted in many multi-million mis-selling scandals. Since the move to a direct fee payment system things look more promising.

The cost of comparison sites is an expense that indirectly everyone is paying for through higher energy costs.

One alternative system that would reduce costs for consumers, would be a single comparison site set up by a respected body, with the remit that it must be unbiased and directly funded by a levy on energy companies.

(edit cardew made many of these same points while I was typing)

Biggles

footyguy wrote: »

It only shows the ones they earn commission on if that is what the filters require (which may be by default, but the filtering options are there to open up the entire results if required)

But, as I read it, the filters are deliberately misleadingly worded.

If the option says 'Show tariffs I can't switch to now' but actually means 'Show tariffs I can switch to by going directly to the provider instead of via this site', then that is deliberately misleading and, effectively, fraudulent.

SnowMan

Fromply wrote: »

I just tried to test it on Moneysupermarket (the owners of MSE?) but they are down for maintenance.

When I log into the Cheap Energy Club, my up to date comparison shows all tariffs including those that don't pay them commission.

I can't remember if I have ever changed a setting to say show all tariffs. There is a setting 'filter out deals that don't give cashback' but that is showing as N for me. That is about cashback to the consumer, but cashback to the consumer is presumably where there is commission to the Cheap Energy Club.

But my recollection is that all tariffs show as a default (not that you would ever want to only see commission paying tariffs, as you can easily see the cashback or not and factor it in with all tariffs showing).

Can anyone else confirm?

MSE_Dan_L

Hi Snowman

I can confirm that Cheap Energy Club defaults to show you all tariffs available on the market. This includes any tariffs where we can't offer cashback. The top picks on the site are chosen by our editorial team and will also include tariffs which don't offer cashback, if we think the tariff is a good option.

I hope this helps.

rochja

So to sum up: some energy tariffs are not being robbed of business - they are just not prepared to pay commission for the slight increase in business that may bring. The comparison sites take the reasonable position that as the savings to consumers are marginal or non existent if the additional tariffs are displayed they will set the default to deals which can be accepted immediately thereby filtering out those which are harder work. The consumers have fewer deals to confuse their poor heads - and they will get confused if they cant even work out how to change the default options. Win-win?

SnowMan

rochja wrote: »

So to sum up: some energy tariffs are not being robbed of business - they are just not prepared to pay commission for the slight increase in business that may bring. The comparison sites take the reasonable position that as the savings to consumers are marginal or non existent if the additional tariffs are displayed they will set the default to deals which can be accepted immediately thereby filtering out those which are harder work. The consumers have fewer deals to confuse their poor heads - and they will get confused if they cant even work out how to change the default options. Win-win?

No completely and totally wrong. Have you read the thread at all?

There is nothing remotely reasonable about comparison sites showing only deals that pay them commission on their default option.

The Cheap Energy Club don't do it by default, so other comparison sites shouldn't either.

A cheaper tariff from the customer's exisiting supplier would not show on a commission paying list for example. And yet a phone call would enable a switch in a few days. How can that be harder work?

Cardew

rochja wrote: »

So to sum up: some energy tariffs are not being robbed of business - they are just not prepared to pay commission for the slight increase in business that may bring. The comparison sites take the reasonable position that as the savings to consumers are marginal or non existent if the additional tariffs are displayed they will set the default to deals which can be accepted immediately thereby filtering out those which are harder work. The consumers have fewer deals to confuse their poor heads - and they will get confused if they cant even work out how to change the default options. Win-win?

I also think you have got it wrong, it is not IMO a 'reasonable position'


As an example, some people only use mains gas for cooking and have very low consumption. Heating is by other means.


For those people Ebico is normally the best company as they don't levy a daily standing charge and the price is the same regardless of payment method(Direct Debit, quarterly or Pre-pay). They are also non-profit!


Yet as they don't pay commission they are not on the 'default option' for some comparison websites.