Disgusted by The Consumers Assoc. (Which?)

James

Martin isn’t the only one disgusted by Which? (The Consumers Association), when it comes to Money Matters and misleading information.

September Which, Chip and PIN update must have been scribed by someone from the Chip & PIN organisation. Which are well aware of problems regarding PIN security, personal security, disputed transactions but most of all the lack of information about Chip & Signature cards. Which update states “If you forget your PIN, many retailers still let you sign. But this option will end, unless you have a disability that stops you from using a PIN.


OAPs are ending up without mone:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=84818

Information about Chip & Signature Card is almost non-existent.

Discuss!

Why an organisation such as WHICH? are failing consumers astounds me.

Other relevant Topics!
Chip & PIN – A Quick Guide Discussion Area.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=248

Getting Chip & Signature Cards vice Chip & PIN
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=45811

greenwich

I gave up on the CA years ago. Two things put me off. One was that they were running ads offering prize draws and free gifts etc. if I signed up for a free trial and gave them my bank details. That's the kind of marketing (hoping consumers will forget to cancel after the free trial is over) that the CA ought to be deprecating, not copying.

The other was that I thought some of their tests were a bit Mickey Mouse. I think once they got some volunteers around the country to post 120 letters and, on the basis of that ridiculously unscientific test, published some sweeping conclusions about Royal Mail's performance.

However, they appear to be well connected politically. They are now recognised in law as representing consumers' interests.

denys

Two worlds CA reminds me of: Readers Digest.

Words “voted by Which?/Readers Digest’s subscribers, recommended by CA, etc.” seemed to be used by some reputable organisations as if have some considerable value. I believe that in this case companies using them give CA and RD more than they worth therefore strengthening their image. (I wonder who pays who to use those little logos and wording.:silenced: – Here such wording as “recommended, approved, the best, top 1,2,3…” do the trick as oppose to actual image of the company whose logo or name are used) It is fair to say that their business success based on good marketing. It is done at the cost – just read their “negative” reviews; but you obviously cannot be good to everyone – you can simply give limited picture of the situation. “Dark” side of their business appeals to the same consumers who replying to Euro Lottery scams and calling premium numbers to claim “prizes” they won on those awful scratchcards we have in our newspapers almost every day. It is a pity that number of such people grows day by day, but we hardly can or need to educate them.:wall:

Overall it is just another big publishing company, which does not like cheapness and freedom of info on the net and uses its (fragile;)) image to make more revenues from different sources.

pioneer31

Damn!

I've just re-subscribed to Which? after having dumped them a couple of years back for having endless financial articles and zero product testing.

They appear to have changed. I am aware of their tests which need to be referenced against others (eg whathifi, whatcar).

I don't always think their tests are 100% accurate but they're better than going it alone, blind.

digp

they're a bunch of %^&$^$