Loyalty costs many a lot

Taf · 19-12-2018, 10:46

Quote:

Loyal customers are being "ripped off" for mobile, broadband, savings, home insurance and mortgage deals.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46596162

Mr K · 19-12-2018, 11:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taf

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46596162

No surprise to anyone who has to ' renegotiate' with VM each year. I bet most of their customers don't realise they can negotiate and there's such a thing as being 'out of contract'. Dread to think what I'd be paying if I'd never negotiated over the last 20 years...

However they are all at it, insurance companies the worst. Autorenew and direct debits aren't for your benefit. It's a pain, but you have to quibble each year and don't let things renew with inflated premiums, most don't bother. You could say 'buyer beware' but most are being totally ripped off and it needs sorting out. It's the vulnerable/elderly that get most hit by this.

SnoopZ · 19-12-2018, 11:52

The problem with moving from VM broadband is usually a vast reduction of speed and with possibly having to move the phone line too.

RichardCoulter · 19-12-2018, 13:50

According to todays ITV lunchtime news, the bad news is that those of us who receive discounts are likely to lose them to pay for reductions to customers who don't negotiate a lower price.

They also said that they want to ensure that TV contracts are as easy to leave as they are to join, which is exactly what i'll be doing if they try to charge me the full listed prices.

It wasn't made clear if this meant effectively abolishing contracts or removing the loopholes/obstacles that companies put in place to prevent customers leaving.

nomadking · 19-12-2018, 13:57

Unless the number of new customers each year is substantial compared to the existing customer base, then any proposed changes will make little or no difference to the prices. The ones that would lose out would be new customers.

If these moronic regulators are going to adopt these principles, then surely they should insist that non-big six energy suppliers should also have the "green" taxes applied to them. Essentially they don't have them in order to attract new customers. What is the real difference. Then you have the continuing problem of new energy suppliers setting up with cheap rates to attract customers and then going bust because of it.

---------- Post added at 13:57 ---------- Previous post was at 13:54 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

According to todays ITV lunchtime news, the bad news is that those of us who receive discounts are likely to lose them to pay for reductions to customers who don't negotiate a lower price.

They also said that they want to ensure that TV contracts are as easy to leave as they are to join, which is exactly what i'll be doing if they try to charge me the full listed prices.

It wasn't made clear if this meant effectively abolishing contracts or removing the loopholes/obstacles that companies put in place to prevent customers leaving.

It costs money for companies to install with new customers. If those costs are not spread over the length of the minimum contract period then there would have to be large upfront costs instead. Do these people live in the real world?

djfunkdup · 19-12-2018, 15:02

I'm perfectly happy to pay the full price for my Vivid 350 as advertised on the website . i don't feel like i'm being ripped off in anyway ,in fact i'v said many times before on these forums BB is too cheap as it is !!

OLD BOY · 19-12-2018, 15:26

I don't agree with the way loyal customers are treated, but there has been enough publicity about this, so I guess you now have the choice of whether or not to get ripped off.

RichardCoulter · 19-12-2018, 17:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

Unless the number of new customers each year is substantial compared to the existing customer base, then any proposed changes will make little or no difference to the prices. The ones that would lose out would be new customers.

If these moronic regulators are going to adopt these principles, then surely they should insist that non-big six energy suppliers should also have the "green" taxes applied to them. Essentially they don't have them in order to attract new customers. What is the real difference. Then you have the continuing problem of new energy suppliers setting up with cheap rates to attract customers and then going bust because of it.

---------- Post added at 13:57 ---------- Previous post was at 13:54 ----------

It costs money for companies to install with new customers. If those costs are not spread over the length of the minimum contract period then there would have to be large upfront costs instead. Do these people live in the real world?

I don't think that the concept of minimum contracts will be changed tbh, I think they were referring to how easy they make it to join, yet they make it difficult to cancel.

nomadking · 19-12-2018, 18:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I don't think that the concept of minimum contracts will be changed tbh, I think they were referring to how easy they make it to join, yet they make it difficult to cancel.

The whole point about a contract is that it shouldn't be too easy to leave. Otherwise there is little point in having a contract.