+11
When customers join pure planet the could be given the choice of a less conservative algorithm to warn them that they may not be paying enough to cover their costs.
The default could be the normal algorithm, but customers could choose a less conservative algorithm which would generate a notification in an email with a suggested increase only implemented if they responded.
Of course if they didn’t respond the normal algorithm would take precedence once triggered as it does for all.
Thoughts?
I doubt the option would make much difference, if someone is not going to ensure their estimated annual usage is accurate when they sign up, or enter regular meter readings, are they really going to question whether they need the ‘conservative’ or ‘normal’ usage warning?
My friend went an entire year with their supplier telling them that they didn't need to increase their DD even though the DD being taken didn't agree with the supplier’s own usage estimates in the statements - ended up £400 in debt thanks to their supplier swearing blind they were ‘on track for the year.'
+11
You have to be inittowinit...innit?
What would I win? (don’t answer I love surprises)
+11
Thanks
The point at issue here is the no-win situation which companies find themselves in.
If their algorithm (or tightrope) is too aggressive customers would have their dd’s changed too often and that would cause anger and accusations of being ripped off (I know, I know...), but if too conservative, those who worry or who can’t budget easily retrospectively, find themselves in what they perceive as a bad place when (unsurprisingly) they’ve built up debt and have to pay it back.
What I’m suggesting here is a user-choosable earlier warning system to cover the latter part of the above. Not mandatory to choose earlier warnings, you can also choose to ignore them or opt-out, but for some customers it would prompt them to up their payment a little earlier and they would be happier
I think you may have seen the recent post of a customer complaining that after using more than the quote budgeted for, PP had the audacity to ask for an increased payment. The customer was taking absolutely no responsibility for their usage of for having to look at statements, but at least in a case like that with an early warning the customer would get the message earlier (although, he said shooting himself in the foot, given this particular case I think it would not have made a lot of difference other than if they were able to choose such an option at least PP would be able to say I told you so...)
+11
It depends on how it’s communicated, my thoughts are it could be a help to trap the more anxious customers (trap as in filter).
Good intentions. Quite confusing I think. Doubt people will engage. Sorry.
I’m in a short sentence mood today it seems...
Already have an account? Login
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
