Outrageous saving money email from First Utility

FreddieFrugal

victor2 wrote: »

For a number of years I have been helping out with a group that shows senior members of our society how to use a computer. To this day, I have yet to meet one whose objective is to be able to compare services available. Most just want to get to grips with email, use social media because of pressure from their offspring, and just get an idea of what is meant by "The Internet".

That's very positive stuff. I applaud you for that. :T

It isn't necessarily an age thing though. Computers have been around for a very long time now. My Granddad has been using computers for years. In fact he had one at his house before we did.
He's well into his 80s

He mainly uses his for writing sermons for his local preaching or talks that he gives to schools or the WI!

To be fair though, even he has a funny thing about the internet. They refuse to have it, although they're happy for my Dad and his brother to use it on their behalf.

They talk about it like it's some sort of taboo. Oh no we don't want the 'internet' in this house!

I'm sure they would have laughed at their parents being ridiculous about eletric light bulbs :rotfl:

bohica

FreddieFrugal wrote: »

indeed, but why on earth would a business recommend another company's tariff over their own?

It's not something to get angry at them for, it would be ridiculous to expect them to.

If people can't be bothered to look around, considering the huge amount of publicity that switching has had in the News, on TV - watchdog, on websites like this. Then that is their fault for being ignorant. I managed to figure it out as soon as I first lived in my own place, but no family member or friend told me about it, the saturation of information about switching was obviously so high that despite never being interested in anything remotely to do with homeowning, I knew about switching. There's no excuse for it anymore.

If you went and bought a laptop from Currys for £399, then found later on that day, that the same laptop was available online from another retailer for £349. You wouldn't complain at Currys for not advertising their rivals prices would you?

You might feel miffed about paying over the odds for it, but at the end of the day it was your fault for not looking around for the best deal beforehand.

I don't expect an energy company to recommend a product from another company but I do expect them to be honest, straight forward and not to mislead people. The email I received is at best misleading as it suggests I can save £225 but in reality I would be spending a lot more than I was. I can well imagine someone clicking on this deal thinking they were going to save £225 and then being very confused when their DD went up substantially.

You must be very happy you've figured it all out and so your not one of the "ignorant" people you refer to. I'm willing to bet quite a few people who are not ignorant (though, given, they won't have shopped around) fall for this.

Your analogy with the laptop is not even close to this situation.

FreddieFrugal

bohica wrote: »

The email I received is at best misleading as it suggests I can save £225 but in reality I would be spending a lot more than I was.

"There are only a few days left before your tariff expires. On 1 October you will move onto our iSave Everyday variable tariff and you could be paying more than you need to for your energy.
To ensure this doesn’t happen, you can now extend your price protection for three years with the market’s cheapest 2018 fixed tariff** iSave Fixed September 2018."

How is that misleading. They've very clearly said in the email that the saving is coming from you fixing again rather than just going onto their standard tariff!

Can't believe you've got me defending an energy company but there is absolutely nothing misleading about that email.

It's good that they alert you to the change. Up to you to search around.

bohica

FreddieFrugal wrote: »

How is that misleading. They've very clearly said in the email that the saving is coming from you fixing again rather than just going onto their standard tariff!

Can't believe you've got me defending an energy company but there is absolutely nothing misleading about that email.

It's good that they alert you to the change. Up to you to search around.

Your definition of "very clearly" and mine are a world apart. However, I do agree it is good that you get an email alerting you to the fact your tariff is ending; but it should not be a marketing opportunity with misleading claims. A simple, your tariff is ending on X and after X you'll switch to our variable rate which is currently Y would suffice. What First:Utility are doing is using this as a marketing opportunity to switch you onto a poor rate just slightly less poor than what would happen if you did nothing. They are working the system proscribed on them into a money making scheme.

What a wonder that I "Can't believe you've got me defending an energy company", there is hope for you eventually. However, you seem to see things from a more informed point of view and I think it would benefit you to stand back and see this for what it is. Most people don't read the *1, *2, *n notes next to each claim, they just see the "you can safe £225". Your point seems to be that if you read every last line of the email and do your research you would not fall for this but that is my very point. You should not be tricked into a non saving and on the face of it (without reading all the fine print) this is misleading as it suggests you could save £225.

What I basically object to (and I think is misleading) is the big bold in your face print in the email suggesting you could save £225. If you really think that is not misleading then the argument is done - you are a lost cause, you read every last line of every T&C and you are never duped - lucky you. Most people are not like that, you obviously are not and so you cannot understand it when people are not like you.

Today I received another of these emails now saying I could save £227 - which I didn't read that carefully, but I presume the extra £2 is because their variable rate has got worse yet again.

System

bohica wrote: »

Your definition of "very clearly" and mine are a world apart. However, I do agree it is good that you get an email alerting you to the fact your tariff is ending; but it should not be a marketing opportunity with misleading claims. A simple, your tariff is ending on X and after X you'll switch to our variable rate which is currently Y would suffice. What First:Utility are doing is using this as a marketing opportunity to switch you onto a poor rate just slightly less poor than what would happen if you did nothing. They are working the system proscribed on them into a money making scheme.

What a wonder that I "Can't believe you've got me defending an energy company", there is hope for you eventually. However, you seem to see things from a more informed point of view and I think it would benefit you to stand back and see this for what it is. Most people don't read the *1, *2, *n notes next to each claim, they just see the "you can safe £225". Your point seems to be that if you read every last line of the email and do your research you would not fall for this but that is my very point. You should not be tricked into a non saving and on the face of it (without reading all the fine print) this is misleading as it suggests you could save £225.

What I basically object to (and I think is misleading) is the big bold in your face print in the email suggesting you could save £225. If you really think that is not misleading then the argument is done - you are a lost cause, you read every last line of every T&C and you are never duped - lucky you. Most people are not like that, you obviously are not and so you cannot understand it when people are not like you.

Today I received another of these emails now saying I could save £227 - which I didn't read that carefully, but I presume the extra £2 is because their variable rate has got worse yet again.

As I have said before, the supplier is only complying with its supplier's licence conditions. If you feel that that the methodology is flawed then complain to:

consumeraffairs@ofgem.gov.uk


Ofgem will acknowledge your e-mail but do not be surprised if it defends its policy robustly. The Ofgem methodology is only flawed for customers wishing to look at switching with LESS than 12 months to run on an existing fixed rate tariff.

victor2

Hengus wrote: »

.... The Ofgem methodology is only flawed for customers wishing to look at switching with LESS than 12 months to run on an existing fixed rate tariff.

Which is of course the vast majority of people looking to switch, as those on longer fixes are less inclined to look until the end of the fix approaches. OFGEM really excelled themselves with their "simplification" of utility tariffs.

molerat

victor2 wrote: »

Which is of course the vast majority of people looking to switch, as those on longer fixes are less inclined to look until the end of the fix approaches. OFGEM really excelled themselves with their "simplification" of utility tariffs.

Anything that OFGEM does to make things "clearer" or "simpler" usually ends in the reverse. Their wonderful "only 4 tariffs" idea has now been worked around by offering targeted market offerings open through selected channels and not promoted by the supplier themselves and changing the available tariffs several times a year.

I am agreement with the OP here that the messages from the suppliers are not that clear to the uninformed, the headline saving is usually much bolder than the explanatory text.

System

molerat wrote: »

I am agreement with the OP here that the messages from the suppliers are not that clear to the uninformed, the headline saving is usually much bolder than the explanatory text.

I agree that the Ofgem savings methodology can cause confusion; however, this is not the fault of the supplier (in this instance). If consumers are unhappy, then they should keep complaining to Ofgem.