Peace of mind – is it always worth the price?

Just had a nightmare to try and have SCOTTISH POWER boiler engineer sougt out no hot water from a combi boiler. 3 different engineers { this is what they call themselves, came out to fix the problem .
Not one of them were in the house more than 15 minutes before they were making excuses why they could not fix the problem and would have to arrange another visit.MYSELF AND MY DAUGHTER SPENT A TOTAL OF 18 HOURS WAITING FOR THEM TO TURN UP. I could not put into print how I would describe
this pathetic excuse of a service they charge £16.50 a month for. The boiler was repaired by a local plumber!

Scottish Power was voted =” the worst power supplier in the UK ” by a rival social help website which I will not name but I have posted on it. I got shot of SP years ago for the same reasons as 1000,s of UK customers had. I will never return even if they gave free trips to the moon.

An Indesit 10 year guarantee on parts could be very useful if a machine would be expensive to repair, but obviously expensive if there were two or more minor faults.

My guess is I’d buy 3 Indesit dishwashers to last as long as one Miele. so they’d probably have an annual cost of up to 50% more. Or if one were repairable, how many visits at £110 a time might you need? We need to get some information of this kind to be able to make soundly-based decisions.

Well I can think of an organisation that could collate reported faults and costs …..

I would be more than willing to upload to a database with purchase data, usage data , and faults. It would be interesting if it was shown for instance how many ovens are delivered with thermostats out of whack.

There are so many bits of data that en-masse actually would be useful to consumers. As it stands vendors and manufacturers hold most of the information on call-outs and repairs and yet it is us who would benefit most from knowing.

I cannot envisage how it would be possible to calculate an annual cost of ownership for a household appliance because a breakdown can occur at any time. When the annual cost of ownership of a car is calculated, this probably takes into account fuel, servicing, VED and maybe an estimate of depreciation, assuming that there is no damage. It won’t take into account repairs because that is such a variable factor.

I have had products replaced within the first year and the same make and model has lasted ten years or more. The second motor in my washing machine has lasted over 20 years longer than the first one – same make and model. Insulation breakdown does not conform to any predictable behaviour. It would be fantastic if we could make useful predictions of the cost of ownership of household goods but it will take a lot to convince me that this can be done.

It would be interesting to compare the average costs of running an expensive repairable appliance with buying a cheap one and replacing it when necessary. Of course individual appliances don’t always conform to average behaviour.

You could look at reliability history for example to put a number on likely repairs, or likely life before a replacement is required. This needs information, something it is suggested Which? should begin to collate more comprehensively.
To put a cost on warranties would require similar information.

Malcolm rightly refers to house insurance and asks “how many have made claims that outweigh the premiums paid over the years?”. Apart from the fact that insurance is not an investment where you hope to get back more than you put in, insurance protects against catastrophic events that, while unlikely, could occur and would wipe you out. Various friends and colleagues over the years have whinged about the cost of contents insurance and its limitations, excesses and exclusions and concluded that they could do without it. I put it to them that if their neighbours’ house blew up – which does happen – and destroyed much of their’s, would they be able without insurance to replace all their household contents, as it would be no good relying on next door as they might not have any cover. However well you look after your own possessions they are still at risk from external events. This really is peace of mind that is worth paying for.

A breakdown need not be an emergency with a little forward planning. It’s a good idea to have a gas or solid fuel fire and a couple of fan heaters for when the boiler breaks down. Many homes no longer have a hot water tank, so there is no alternative means of heating water, so having an electric shower is well worthwhile.

The failure of a fridge might mean relying on the contents of the freezer and canned food for a few days. If a fridge-freezer will be your only means of refrigeration then a two compressor model will mean that the freezer will continue to work even if the fridge fails.

Hopefully we all have neighbours who would be prepared to do our washing until the machine is fixed. It might be worth making an arrangement before the situation arises.

Earlier generations managed without central heating, fridges, freezers and washing machines. There are people waiting to exploit those who panic so it is vital to plan for breakdowns and be confident about what to do and who to contact, so that an emergency becomes little more than an inconvenience.

I entirely agree. I am all in favour of forward planning and having contingency plans in place. Unfortunately some people don’t seem to think of it and get in a flap when something goes wrong. There’s not much that can be done to help such people – other than be kind to them in their hour of need – but it does strike me that there is a lack of self-reliance among the population these days. There’s a thousand feature articles every week in the popular magazines about how to achieve that perfect hair style, but never one about how to cope in a domestic emergency. As a nation we are less practical and the good advice that Wavechange and others of us might dispense is seen as smug and self-righteous. It is still possible to wash clothes by hand, do the washing up manually, put the milk and butter in a crate outside the back door in the winter, and use vacuum flasks to keep liquids cold. I think ours is one of the few households with only one oven, most people having a microwave also, but breakdown of the oven wouldn’t be a catastrophe as there are other ways of cooking and heating food.

Water heating is the most problematic issue but we found a couple of years ago when having to spend some time in a house where the heating system had packed up, it was amazing what you could do with a kettle to provide enough hot water for basic hygiene and cleanliness for a day or two.

The main thing is not to let the merchants of home emergency cover take unfair advantage and give little in return.

But John, “emergency cover” is almost the dictionary definition of an oxymoron.

Think about it.

If you take out “emergency cover” or any other maintenance type thing really, it implies that the person has the train of thought to imagine that something, at some point will go wrong as otherwise, what’s the point of taking the cover? And that, when it does, that they will need a mechanism to resolve the issue.

Therefore, logically, that would mean that the same person is forward planning for such an event. Albeit in a way that many contributors here might not agree with.

But, if you’d planned for it, why do you need cover?

The only reason I can fathom is that said person wants the cost fixed and the reassurance that, when it does go wrong that it’ll all get put right with no or minimum of hassle and inconvenience to them. Other than that, I can see no advantage being offered.

From my perspective and, solely in my opinion, a lot of it is probably laziness. One number, call it, get it fixed. Simples, done.

By extension then, the people that take such cover are the very ones that do plan and probably don’t/wouldn’t need it anyway. They probably just can’t be bothered with the hassle of doing all the “stuff” they’d have to do to sort it out themselves.

Whether these people know that or care, well, that’s a different question entirely.

It is important to bear in mind that, whilst you, I or Which? might not agree with it and in my own personal opinion, rightly so, there is not harm being done as such. The companies that offer these services aren’t failing to provide what they offer and, the people buying them seemingly want them. They are not taking advantage of the poorer members of society as, they wouldn’t spend that sort of money or most perhaps plan in that way either.

Like “service plans”, “home breakdown insurance” and a host of other things, it’s a numbers game.

Going to a casino and betting on black, red or a hand of cards is also a numbers game.

It’d be really interesting to see the chances of a win at each compared.

K.

British Gas generally fares poorly, for example in the recent Which? report on boiler servicing, but you are not the only one who is happy, Alfa.

I have always been very happy with the efficiency of Royal Mail’s service (less happy about the rising prices) but others find it very poor.

I assume that a lot has to do with local organisation and the efficiency of individuals.

Home insurance, travel insurance and car breakdown insurance are my top priorities.

Just a clarification. People who live in rented or leasehold property do not need to take out their own buildings insurance but they should nevertheless check that the landlord or freeholder has obtained adequate cover and maintains it year by year. Homeowners with a mortgage, or whose property has been offered as a security, are normally required under the terms of the agreement to obtain and maintain adequate buildings insurance cover for the property. People without a mortgage are not obliged to insure the building structure but they are taking a major risk if they do not. For some property, buildings insurance is not available on standard terms because of factors like location [e.g. coastal or flood plain], non-standard construction, or structural condition and maintenance, however the insurance industry has made a commitment to the government to offer cover in flood prone and coastal erosion areas [subject to structural satisfaction] and is usually prepared to cover other risks on a partial basis or on special terms or a combination of both.

wavechange, car insurance premiums vary hugely from one company to another. I’ve recently had quotes that differed by nearly 3 times. So clearly there is another factor in their assessment. Fewer factors I would have thought are involved in deciding a premium for a boiler for example. As for no claims I think a car is different – it involves accidents. A boiler will be dependent upon its age and reliability record.

That’s disappointing, Malcolm. I don’t see much difference between car insurance premiums these days and had hoped that the industry had improved their understanding of risk.

I make the suggestion of a no-claims discount every time I meet an AA or RAC representative touting for business but all the sector seems to have done is to limit the number of claims per year.

The difference in car insurance quotes may be a function of that insurers record with people fitting your profile or that of the typical owner of that type of car.

I cannot say this applies to the Xar insurance industry but certainly in conservative banks they would not lend money to certain sectors above a certain percentage of the entire lending portfolio.

Unfortunately not all Banks were conservative and there was some very ropey lending from those majors where the lending guys made the criteria rather than the risk guys.

In an obvious example would you be happy with a company that exclusively sold house insurance to properties in floodplain areas. …
Their premium profile would be different from a company with a broadly based pool[!] of households.

I did work for a general insurance agency and believe me I have seen premiums in the thousands for people they did not want to take on. : )

terfar, I believe a key reason for having an annual boiler service is to make sure the combustion is taking place properly. Is this safety aspect not worth the expense?

Patrick, All I can say is that Which survived for many years on members fees and provided a very good service. I have had several sole traders (plumbers, decorators and electricians) who have all said there is no way they can afford your charges.

As for reporting complaints on legal and mortgage services you are well aware that you have no choice in these areas, pity you have taken so long.

You have not explained why you do not publish a complaints procedure on your website.

Mike

Thomas most people use Google/Chrome and get “re-directed ” results if you want to see more of the World ditch it and get a smaller non-tracker search engine there are plenty about . There are plenty of -as you say- small companies about but in my travels working in a public service industry I have seen many to be unreliable -start up /shut down types of organisations . The big boys are the long term ones so whether unjustly or not the public gravitate towards them as they “know ” of them any small company must build up a reputation over a long period before it is accepted by word of mouth by public reputation so why should Which “take a chance ” like placing a bet on a small company when it might go under at any minute making Which look a bit foolish at least with the big boys Which has a steady large target to aim at.

As someone working in SEO, I have a pretty good understanding of how search engines work. Yes, there are a lot of ad results you’ll get through Google, but there’s plenty more to discover for people who will look past the first page.
I understand what you’re saying about the longevity of small start-up organisations, but when you’re talking about a broker that simply markets a product from a larger insurance company, then there’s next to no risk on the part of the customer or Which – even if the broker goes bankrupt, the customer will still have cover. In actually talking about these smaller companies, the only thing I could imagine Which sees as risking is the displeasure of the big players with the huge budgets who can pay to become a “recommended provider”, or however you’d like to phrase it. Reputation does still play a large part for consumers, but I’m afraid simply maintaining the status quo is just lazy from Which in my opinion.