DGCOS – The Double Glazing & Conservatory Ombudsman Scheme
Earlier today I received a telephone call from Michael Rigby, the business to business public relations representative of the Double Glazing and Conservatory Ombudsman Scheme (DGCOS).
He explained that DGCOS were taking legal action against the BBC for comments made on one of their programmes yesterday and hinted that we (GlassTalk) might be next. Frankly, we can’t be bothered so we have removed the copy.
The industry will judge for itself.
Andrew Glover.
Another hairy fairy scheme. I watched the first BBC Breakfast report about this and the journalists really have been taken in. Throughout I was thinking, ‘if you only knew how thin all this is!’
FENSA is still the only organisation which carries any gravitas with the public.
I’m not sure what I think about this…
Forget all the rights and wrongs about the scheme (which I do believe are important), I think it’s cost prohibitive.
When I went to the G10 event, I got talking to a chap who said that it would cost a company with a £250k per year turnover around £8k per year to be a member.
I can’t see how anyone could afford or justify this sort of cost. On that sort of cost, any company with a £1m turnover would have to pay £32k per year to join. I would imagine that’s a massive chunk of there annual net profit.
I think it’s all a storm in a tea cup and they will naturally disappear when they run out of money.
It looks like another certificate seller to me
i think they will disapear. good gimmick clever pr .
next week there will be real life guest blog. where do conservatories go when their owners abandon them, complete story and pictures next week.
and this sounds sad, probably the best 3 days i have had in the last few months,restored my faith in human nature.
Sound like another money spinner…..SBD anyone????
Yep but with a good PR company
Hi Phil, what’s SBD?
to be honest im not sure yet of the benefits or otherwise of the scheme. what i am sure about is they have ‘wheeled it out well’ and generated good publicity for the scheme. i have had people who know I’m in the conservatory business commenting this week after seeing it on the BBC, “what about all this then, how is it going effect you etc etc?” i think the blog is right, a combination of Nick Ross (who everyone knows sorts villians!), the term ombudsman and it being widely reported by the BBC has given it credence. im pretty sure retailers whom are members will benefit in the short term but it will be interesting to watch how it develops. as Andrew comments the costs do seem to be prohibitive, particularly for the medium + sized businesses. SBD??
Secured By Design – and agreed.
We’re perfectly at liberty to express our opinions and thoughts on the DGCOS, even if that does mean saying that – for now at least – we don’t believe the scheme will provide anything useful to consumers and industry members that hasn’t already been provided by other, respected organisations.
As long as we don’t say anything libellous, defamatory or knowingly untrue about them, Mr Rigby and his PR chums can, metaphorically speaking, take a running jump.
Of course, it’s unlikely that DGCOS’ hair- trigger threats of legal action will endear them to anyone, and if they get themselves a reputation for stifling criticism about their service you can bet that it would be more damaging than anything said on GlassTalk.
Incidentally, if Mr Rigby is in charge of B2B PR for DGCOS, I would have thought he would have been better off offering to explain the scheme to such a tightly focused audience as us on GlassTalk, instead of hinting at legal action. GlassTalk 1 – 0 DGCOS
This afternoon I’ve been asked by the BBC Radio Ulster in Belfast to come onto their consumer affairs show ‘on your behalf’ tomorrow morning to “go up againist” the dgcos (Mr Pickup) due to the fact I (wish I wasn’t) chairman of GGF Ireland. I will be working so declined the offer but provided the following statement.
The Glass and Glazing Federation (Ireland region) welcomes any initiative that enables the consumer to gain protection from unscrupulous people or organisations who operate in the double glazing and conservatory industry.
GGF member companies already offer the same type of protection, advice, conciliation and arbitration services referred to and have been doing so for many years.
The GGF is the UK’s leading industry organisation who speak directly to government on all areas covered by the glazing and related sector, not just conservatories and double glazing, and work hard to encourage more reputable companies within the industry to join the organisation.
All members of the GGF (Ireland region) strive to reduce the impact of rogue traders and unfair contracts and practices within our industry and feel the best way to avoid risk when making a purchase is to only buy from a properly vetted and professional company who subscribe to a proper code of conduct and ethical practice and work to the standards they advocate.
Graham Gibson
Chairman GGF (Ireland Region).
I don’t think they have any members over here or are they likely to. I think we could all do without this distraction.
You sound like a lot of worried people and so you should be!
Anybody who has taken the trouble to research the rock solid benefits to consumers of using an installer which is a member of DGCOS knows its a sure fire deal closer.
Stop moaning and join the scheme that is the best thing that’s happened to your blighted industry in years. Or perhaps you’re worried that you won’t be able to pass the accreditation to be a member?????
I have been reading your entries with mounting disbelief at the at the slovenly homework some people do. Some of the people on your blog are jumping to conclusions without taking the time to gather the facts.
There is a gaping hole in consumer protection offered by the so called ‘respected trade bodies’. Many who take the time to think this through already know it. In fact we all know it. There is non! I don’t know why some of you are bleating on. At last we have what we’ve all been on about for years. DGCOS has the answers.
Take GGF and FENSA for example: they say protection is already in place. What protection?. What if the customer has a justified grieveance? Optional conciliation? No teeth. The installer can refuse-point blank. What would GGF and FENSA do then? Suspend the member! Whoopee. Hardly putting the problem right, ensuring fair play and enhancing the reputation of us all. Mindblowingly insufficient! For everyone.
What if the complaint justifies an inspection? Yeah, GGF can introduce the customer to someone who will charge them between £500-£750 for a report which in all probability is not independent.
GGF say they have arbitration available via The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators. Fundamental flawed Why? Because the installer can refuse. Complaint dead in the water. GGF no power. Consumer left holding the baby. Our reputation damaged again.
Incidentally, both consumer and installer have to pay for arbitration if the installer agrees to do it. What happens if all parties agree to arbitration and the arbitrator makes a decision. And then the parties don’t honour it? What protection is there then for either party. Non. They must enforce judgement, pay for all of the costs. All with a very uncertain outcome. Again, all of this type of behaviour does not endear us to consumers.
DGCOS has all of this covered. Did you think they thought all this up last week? Get real. They have spent many years working with solicitors, independent inspectors, mediators, installers and one of the top arbitrators in the country to put this all together. Not to mention Nick Ross.
Nick Ross does not endorse commercial products. Do you think he would damage his reputation as a highly respected investigative journalist without believing in DGCOS or doing his homework. You must be mad if you think so.
So. in conclusion, you should all get behind this excellent body and drive it forwards. The idiots wont get in. If you want a say apply to be on one of their regional or even national committees. You all say you want a body with teeth, that vets its members before being given a badge and constantly vets it members. You say you want it to provide peace of mind to consumers. You say you want protection against professional complainers. You say you want it to have great publicity (unlike all the bodies inc Trustmark) who fail to live up to the mark and consumer champions rubbish! Publicity is how you get the consumers back on board.
Well, DGCOS is here. And its about time too.
Game, set and match. DGCOS
PS- Fensa dont have any dispute resolution facities…at all!!! Now that is a buy-a-badge outfit.
Why do poeple always look only at the addon costs. These costs I am sure can be met by increased leads, coversion rates and profit margins through offering a well publicised benefit to the consumer.
We are all looking for the USP and I am sure when the knockers start to lose business to DGCOS registered companies they will result to the tried and trusted DROP THE PRICES AND SELL AT ANY COST antics. Those with a little forethought will sign up and give it a good old whirl.
Be happy!
Research and be surprised I was, I have to agree with Steve Butler
Its what we have been calling for but maybe not all actually want?
True and upfront legal and binding for both consumers & us the installers
Its a great scheme and I’m happy to pay the little extra for the peace of mind and qudos I believe it could give the whole industry if the sceptics allow it to evolve!!
The merchants of doom need to do their homework. Those complaining about prohibitive costs and the effect on bottom line really are missing the point! What about opportunity and reputation! My guess is the Anglian’s and Safestyles of this world don’t like the idea of being effectively policed and monitored.
If you’ve got nothing to worry about in terms of your operations and posess the credentials to join the DGCOS then do so, or be left behind. Don’t say you weren’t warned!!
Fair play , It looks like this blog has been spammed
Indeed it has! Excellent work once again – on the PR. Nice one.
Blimey, did the DGCOS send a mail out, looking for supporters:)
It’s just like big brother, they’ll have spies watching all of us incase any of us say something even slightly against the scheme!
Did the DGCOS just write them all itself??
So far you have those who seem frightened of DGCOS and those who are either involved with DGCOS or have subscribed to what they have to offer. What about some middle ground opinions? Does it do what it says on the can? If so it could be a good idea – if not, it won’t last. People are not duped for long – give it a chance!
I give the DGCOS no more than two years. Hardly protection for consumers then. Anybody fancy a wager?
I will be middle ground as I am neither frightened of DGCOS or involved with them , but I have seen certificate sellers come and go , and I am sure we will see more
Kevin, I did get an email off there PR stating they don’t sell IBG’s although it states on there site that they do…
Our retail conversion rates prior to DGCOS registration were 35.9% and since we have been registered are showing a healthier 42.2%. Obviously it is too early as yet to assume that this is soley down to DGCOS but the signs are very optimistic.
If more quality companies take the scheme on board the public will question those who haven’t and the quality companies will reap their just rewards.
Kevin, that’s very impressive. When did you join?
Do you really think that that is the only change, or could it just be the climate at the moment? our conversion rates have gone up considerably this year, which I put down to the market being quite good for us at the moment. We have gone from 54% to 57.4%, year to date (excluding may!) And without trying to be argumentative, our only change is that we push the GGF.
Hi Kevin Greenfield,
I find it HIGHLY unlikely that in the very short space of time that the DGCOS has been around and that you have been registered with them, that you have seen the increases of conversion as a result of this.
More likely discounted pricing has had a bigger effect on this perhaps??!
Most people in the flippin industry haven’t got a scooby-doo about this scheme, so so insinuate that the consumers are all clued up and searching for company’s who have stupidly handed over tonnes of cash for another “Industry consumer champion” is just nuts, plain and simple.
the biggest load of bollox i ve read in my life . mike rigby must have a lot of spare time on his hands making up all these comments and ficticious people.
is this the same mike rigby from mike rigby associates? if it is hes just gone down in my estimation, perhaps hes desperate for work in the recession!
if anyone needs insurance back guarantees we have the wonderful paul glover to buy off he he. thats one less pint i owe hom now
DGCOS why don’t you pay your fee and come along to Glass Talk and network with us all if it is what you say it is hell you may just make a ton of money.. It’s a no brainer really…. THATS IF IT IS WHAT YOU SAY IT IS….. Remember your trying to sell to an industry who has been lied to time and again…
They may be trying to sell to an industry that has been lied to time and time again , but let us not forget that the industry has also been guilty of lying to the consumer time and time again . If they have any teeth and any degree of honesty I would like to see them tackle the lie of the WER system and how the consumer is being mislead and lied to, however I fear there is no money to be made in it , so it might not bother picking up that one.
I dont like wasting money! But I have joined as this is the sort of thing the small to medium companies could do with, providing they can get in.
In reply to Matthew, I will take you up on the wager.
I love it. Two years of increases in manufacturing costs (especially energy) a recession tougher borrowing terms for expansion/investment in business.
But of course what we don’t need is to spend 3% of our turnover on pay-rises to ensure that the skilled, hard-working, long-suffering staff who have stuck by us don’t now leave. What we need to do is spend that same 3% (actually 3.2% for 250k turnover I believe) on joining another trade body with no proven track record or history…….
Hi Kevin,
I can’t speak for other companies but I have never lied to a customer of mine to get a deal EVER I can’t say that for my sales guys though as I have had to give them a rocket on the odd occasion for elongating the truth, but I feel you are right when you say that there are alot of bad companies out there who will say whatever it takes to get the deal.
DGCOS time to show up at the event I think for £95.00 you could dispel all these comments and it’d be cheaper that paying MRA to send all these testimonies in.
Hi Andrew,
I received an email off MRA yesterday, saying that Tony Pickup will not be able to attend the next event, as he has a prior arrangement.
Mike did mention that they may send someone though. Personally, I think it needs to be Tony, though.
I guess this counts as a step forward – DGCOS and its supporters engaging in an open debate on GlassTalk rather than issuing veiled threats of legal action against the hosts of that debate.
Simon – great get in touch and we’ll sort out the wager.
I’m actually sat around a pool in Portugal thinking about the DGCOS. Fair play to the marketing team so far. The GGF could learn a lot…
@ Andrew Green
I absolutley respect your call with regards honesty , However , you do promote the WER scheme on your website and while you do not appear to be making some of the silly claims of the scheme , you are by association promoting a scheme that is misinforming the consumer , and may well have been designed for that very purpose !
I appreciate what you are saying Kevin with reference to the WER system and I respect your view on the calculation and it would be good if we could get to the bottom of it, but until then the majority of companies advertising the information are doing so to the best of their knowledge, so I don’t feel that is misleading people.
I should be a politician, preferably an MP , now there’s a job genuinely misleading the public.
Graham Gibson from GGF Northern Ireland sounds like a really nice chap.
Naive maybe. Brainwashed by HQ into thinking GGF actually do provide consumer protection. Very probably. Press ganged into towing the party line. You bet!
He says “GGF member companies already offer the same type of protection, advice, conciliation and arbitration services referred to and have been doing so for many years”
This is incorrect. They do not have anywhere near the type of protection offered by DGCOS.
Protection: No. Advice: maybe. Conciliation: perhaps- but toothless. Arbitration: optional.
What about independent inspection? What about a mandatory scheme with teeth? What about enforceable awards. They provide none of this. They are a toothless tiger.
No wonder they are worried
Robin, what part of the DGCOS is independent? It is a scheme that people pay money it to, just like the GGF. How independent does that make them?
They have to survive as a business and if they rule against there members, there members will leave!!!
Where exactly are the teeth of the DGCOS? If you do a credit check on them you will see that there credit score is Zero.
We have used the protection and the advice from the GGF and have both been very good, which is why we are members and happy to pay our subs!!
Cheers
There seems to be a great deal of comparisons being made about totally different types of organisations.
DGCOS will offer an element of consumer protection against those companies that are Members, but not the whole Industry as the title seems to suggets and it is ultimately a lead generator. FENSA is a Competent Person Scheme, set up after the change to Part L of the Building Regulations in 2002. It allows a registered business to self certify compliance to Building Regulations.
It was never designed as a consumer protection organisation. The Glass and Glazing Federation is a Trade Federation, whose main driver is promote technical and ethical standards. For those GGF Members who interface with the consumer there is a noticeable benefit for the consumer in choosing them. Deposit protection, quality of work, promotion of IBGs and should something go wrong, a proven conciliation service. Last year GGF Members were responsible for something in the region of 300,000 installations. The GGF received 131 complaints and after the necessary action was taken, received 32 letters of thanks and no referrals to arbitration.
How GGF Members perform is of paramount importance to the GGF.
Nigel , sorry to hijack the thread and particularly your response , however I do wish to quote you , ” The Glass and Glazing Federation is a Trade Federation, whose main driver is promote technical and ethical standards ”
With that in mind would you kindly show what technical and/or ethical merit the BFRC WER scheme has going for it, as I believe it is fundamentally flawed . I have for some time been asking for the reference source of the 218.6 solar flux figure, Giles was corresponding on a different blog but either doesn’t appear to know the answer or is reluctant to tell me . If you could remind him for me I would be most grateful, many thanks.
Andrew,
Sorry this is a long entry but DGCOS takes some research to understand.
In a recent entry you mention: the independence of the ombudsman and the credit rating of dgcos.
To help you understand I respectfully forward you this information:
DGCOS is a not for profit members organisation. It will have 7-9 regional membership committees who put forward 1 member for each region to the national membership committee. These committees can interface with the board of directors and make recommendations to the board- eg costs of membership, vetting, rules, IBG’s, marketing, PR, spokesmen etc.
The Ombudsman is Dr Ronald Barham. He is one of the most experienced arbitrators in the UK. His title is The Quality Assurance Ombudsman. To ensure impartiality and independence he is not allowed to be on the management board of DGCOS or any organisation supplying DGCOS.
The members have no interaction with him (other than in a dispute resolution capacity) or pay him any fees. He is completely independent of member organisations and DGCOS. He will report annually to an Advisory Council. The Ombudsman’s report will be published annually to the industry and the press.
DGCOS was conceived from in 2005 and set up in 2006 as a members organisation, company limited by guarantee An original team of 7 all worked, part time, for free, meeting every month to help develop the scheme. In mid 2006 Mr Pickup started working on the scheme almost full time, with little remuneration to help take the ideas of many people forward. He is a real believer and a stalwart.
The pilot scheme was set up in 2007. West Yorkshire Windows was approached to have input at this time but refused a meeting. Further extensive market research was carried out with 68 installers in 2009 to establish if there was an appetite from installers for DGCOS. There was an overwhelming positive response and DGCOS were asked to take the scheme forward by many installers.
The DGCOS credit rating is low. This is because the scheme has, until now, been in development.
It is due to make its first profit in 2011/2012. Any profits will be retained for the benefit of promoting members and consumer protection.
Should DGCOS cease to be in existence every customer will still left with a 10 year insurance backed guarantee (from a specially negotiated policy with IWA not DGCOS) which is secured by the UK Financial Services Compensation Fund.
Consumers who use DGCOS Installers will have extensive protection.
The Ombudsman is totally independent and has robust powers.
Installers have a great scheme they can be proud of.
I hope this helps clarify some points for you.
Perhaps we should be asking who stands to lose by the success of DGCOS?
Consumers don’t get protection from trade bodies. Neither do installers.
Current bodies are weak and ineffectual at consumer protection.
Perhaps they will be exposed at last by the discussions surrounding this topic.
DGCOS has done its homework and put the legalities, structure and marketing into place to solve this problem
Kevin
I appreciate that your point was not related to the discussion on the DGCOS, but felt it needed a response. I am somewhat surprised by the statement that “you have been asking for the reference source for some time”. I am reliably informed by my staff that this was conveyed to you quite some time ago. The fact that you may not agree with the research of Dr Rob Lowe of Leeds Metropolitan University, is a totally different matter, but you have not been ignored.
Can i ask a question?
Glasstalk published a defamatory article about DGCOS which was obviously incorrect which DGCOS, justifiably, asked to be taken down.
There appear to be 4 organisers of Glasstalk. Andrew Glover. Matthew Glover. Paul Godwin and Jon (?).
Is it not true that Andrew Glover and Matthew Glover are associated with GGF?
Isn’t Paul Godwin the PR guy for GGF?
Isn’t it true that one of the Glover brood, Paul, actually owns an Insurance Backed Guarantee provider?
My question is this: Why, when many journalists, Nick Ross, lawyers, installers, editors, etc are taking the time to understand DGCOS, its power and implications for the industry, and are strong advocates, are the people around Glasstalk so eager to be disingenuous about DGCOS?
Perhaps we should consider discussing this?
Nigel
Again probably in the wrong place , and if the mods want to create another blog for this dialog it may help to highlight the discussion, I digress.
Many thanks for your response , however I beg to differ with the reliability of your staff reports regarding the answers I have requested . If you wish I can forward E-mail copies of the correspondence between your staff and myself to show this.
You may also see the online dialog between Giles and myself at this blog http://www.glasstalk.co.uk/blog/the-bfrc-window-energy-rating-scheme/2010/03/#comments and further commented upon at this blog http://renegadeconservatoryguy.co.uk/i-agree-with-kev/ .
The name Rob Lowe is interesting as I have not seen him referred to in the BFRC paper which purportedly shows the derivation of the formula , still as we now seem to be getting somewhere may I ask if you would kindly furnish me with the paper in which Dr Lowe calculates the 218.6 figure and the source of the climate data that he uses.
I cannot possibly disagree with Dr Lowes research unless I can study it, but if you are arguing that the formula is actually the work of Dr Lowe and not Dr Robin Kent as the published document seems to suggest , well yes I disagree, it is plain factually incorrect.
The response that you provide should certainly help allay my fears that your organisation is ignoring me with regard this issue , but as you may have noted if you have read the blogs I refer to , that according to the dictionary , the lack of response could be construed as being ignored.
Again , many thanks in anticipation of Dr Lowe’s paper and the source of the solar flux data .
Kevin
Ian
You’re at a clear advantage having such a good knowledge of my ‘brood’ yet I know absolutely nothing about yours.
Yes, you are correct. The four organisers of GlassTalk are indeed myself, Andrew, Paul Godwin and finally Jon Twigge (who is the Sales Director of RPS).
You are also correct to suggest that Andrew and I are brothers and have a father in the IBG business, although I’m not aware that my father has even heard of the DGCOS so I can guarantee there is no influence there.
Yes, Paul is the PR Guy for the GGF, and both West Yorkshire Windows and Conservatory Outlet are members of the GGF. Indeed, you may have heard recently that Andrew is taking a more active role.
To infer that there is any type of conspiracy, though, is wide of the mark. From my point of view I’m critical of various elements of the current GGF offering, and have concerns about the BFRC WER scheme which I have not kept a secret.
To answer your question: I think journalists, TV celebrities and the like do not fully understand our industry. People on the GlassTalk website will take a bit more convincing.
I am naturally sceptical of the scheme as someone who has spent most of my life in this industry. However, I am open to understand more about the scheme and have agreed with Mike Rigby that I would like to meet Tony Pickup and find out more. I haven’t had a response as yet, but look forward to one.
And, obviously, the offer for Tony to attend GlassTalk and take part in an ‘on the couch’ session is still open for him to explain the benefits of the DGCOS to the guys behind GlassTalk, and members of the wider industry as a whole.
Regards
Matthew
i just wanted say a word about the discussion on dgcos . BOLLOX
Ian and everyone working at the DGCOS. Obviously you feel you have a good and worthwhile product.
Surely rather than making enemies with people in the industry who could be very useful for you to network with it would be better to just turn up to Glass Talk and explain excatly what you are all about.
You may find that it would prove a good thing to do, the window industry is turning into a group of companies who want to change the percieved views of our potential clients, and client service levels are getting better and better.
The guys who will do shoddy work will never join your network because they are not interested, but the guys on Glass Talk obviously have a vested interest in their clients so rather than pissing them off you’d of been better in the first place for Tony to have arranged a meeting with Matthew.
hi in my opinion companies normally have a go at another company when they are running scared, lets be honest this industry needs something new, someone to help the installers as well as the public, not just take the money and run, and a company that we can talk to and can get involved with, and company that is not a very exclusive club, come on chaps give them a break, they have done more for my business in a few months than the others have done in 12 months.
I think it’s great news that Tony and his crew are coming to Glass Talk I think it’ll be great for all of us because if I / we don’t agree at least we can all have a civil chat and a few beers and at least respect where we are all coming from with our view points.
Who knows it may be the the start of a fruitful partnership.
This message is not intended in any way to criticise anyone or disagree with any persons opinion. Rather this is my view based on experience and what would appear to be the truths of the double glazing industry.
More people seem to fear the risks, (both financial and due to below expected quality of workmanship), when ordering new windows or conservatories than with any other form of ‘home improvements’. Obviously this is partly down to industry reputation and also the associated high cost of such improvements. The other major risk to the customer in current times, is that after putting down a considerable deposit up front (which most firms seem to request), that the firm goes out of business before completion of the job. In the current economic climate this concern is extremely real and is a bigger risk than ever before.
However this is the point. The reasons are, in effect, irrelevant. If members of the public could purchase, and have installed, double glazing, with genuine certainty that regardless of whether the job is carried out to a below par standard or even if the firm they have paid monies to ceases to exist, they genuinely would have access to an arbitration process, WITHOUT having to fork out further monies or incurring extra costs. And critically, that the installers would be OBLIGATED to adhere to putting any poor workmanship right if they were found to be the party in the wrong, then that would surely boost the industry two fold.
Firstly more of the cautious consumers would be willing to purchase double glazing. Long term, this would clearly have a positive effect on the industry’s turnover. and secondly if nationally recognised, it would ensure the so called ‘industry cowboys’ are forced out as they would not wish to partake in a scheme that can actually force them, through legal means, to carry out an acceptable standard of job.
DGCOS even insures the consumer if the firm goes out of business. There really is no longer any risk to the consumer as long as they order through a DGCOS registered firm.
Now why would all the other trade bodies have an issue with DGCOS looking at the above facts? An increase in industry turnover would surely benefit all in the industry. And if they object in an increase in consumer protection, (the very thing they are supposed to campaign for), then I think that speaks volumes.
Historically I have had personal problems with a poorly installed conservatory in the past. I was given no protection and paid all the legal costs myself. With the likes of DGCOS it would have saved me eighteen months of concern and substantial costs.
NO-ONE else in the industry offers this level of protection, even the government backed schemes – FACT.
A last comment on Andrew Greens input which at best was not thought through. You state that ‘The guys who will do shoddy work will never join your network because they are not interested’. That is the biggest reason why DGCOS works. DGCOS do not want firms of such stature on their books and neither do the public. By only using a DGCOS registered firm the public can correctly assume they are using a reputable company.
This has to be one hundred percent better than a toothless body that signs up every main installer in the UK?
The other trade bodies, by criticising DGCOS, confirms my already proven belief and the wider publics concern, that their interest lies with the industry and not with consumer protection. If continued, and without the likes of DGCOS, this backwards way of protection will have devastating long term effects on the industry.
Hi Matthew,
The comment was thought through, the point I was making was that shoody companies woudn’t want to join DGCOS so don’t go pissing off the companies who are more likely to join and talk to us rather than threaten us.
Is that clearer.
Threaten meant in a court case way just to be clear not threaten us as in well I think the get the general idea but if it’s not clear then let me know and I’ll clear it up for you is that clear.
Thanks
Matthew Rowne – Reading your last blog reply, there`s several things that are not clear to a working fellow like myself.
What experience is all your knowledge based on? (who are you) without telling us who you are, what you do.Why would i want to listen to “your experience and truths of the double glazing industry” !!
Fensa/certass both make us insure deposits taken,your making it sound a new idea.Finally what can you” force me through legal means” are you a Police Man ??
nige if your like myself. i have 30 years in the business i am a time served joiner and all at the tender age of 48. i dont need an outfit like dgcos to tell me i m a good tradesman i already know. i also wouldnt give any money to any outfit so arrogant and ignorant.
anyone with half a brain knows that insured deposits are a load of bollox. they would just tout around to get the job done 10% cheaper and with a firm you dont know. the truths of the double glazing industry. there are crap firms and good firms. lets face it 2 of the best know firms in the industry fit crap. but through the power of advertising and very high pressure selling they sell millions every year .
lets face it no one knows if dgcos works its in its infancy. and its set up to make money not as a charity. perhaps they should donate all there profits to HEAL to prove there good intent
i used lets face it too many times ha has
umm wasnt fensa supposed to stop industry cowboys? i seem to remember tat little buzz word touted around when fensa was setup
andrew
i m not clear on what wasnt clear. can you make the point clearer so i can be clear and the matter will much clearer on what wasnt clear. then everything will be clearer for us all
hi, maybe i am missing something !!! companies are vetted to assess whether they are eligible to become members ,so the ones who are eligible are more than likely be ones who do a decent job.
Therefore the customer who needs help regarding poor work etc are going to left in the lurch as the shoddy outfits are not likely to be registered or accepted in the first place.
As pointed out 3.2% as we all know equates to £96 nett (£113 ish gross)on a 3k order for something customers know little about, I as a small company only have FENSA as accreditation and that gets me the business all the time.
I think most customers would sooner have the £96 in their pocket and as a small business am not prepared to spend that sort of money for somethiong which i in effect i am having to sell to the customer , at the end of the day windows are hard enough to sell never mind selling this new scheme to customers .
I for one will let my customers keep the £96 for now and if and only if in time there is a demand for this (customers asking me ) will i reconsider.
THERE ARE TOO MANY PEOPLE WANTING TO STICK A FINGER IN THE PVC PIE
Matthew Rowne said: ” And if they object in an increase in consumer protection, (the very thing they are supposed to campaign for), then I think that speaks volumes.”
Matthew, I don’t think anyone is criticising the detail of the scheme itself, including how it operates and what ‘teeth’ it has. Reading all the comments on this board, the most common things people seem to be saying are that:
1. DGCOS may be ‘just another scheme’ – because we’ve all seen schemes come and go, and – quite naturally – people are wary of a new one until it’s been proven
2. although everyone at DGCOS is at pains to point out the difference between their organisation and existing ones such as FENSA and GGF, there are areas of crossover, so it’s natural to question the need for a new one.
Ultimately, I would like to see DGCOS work because – as several people have pointed out – if it fulfils its aims it has the potential to improve our industry’s image and trustworthiness for consumers (and thus our turnovers). That’s the potential gain. The risk is that, having handed over several grand to DGCOS, it turns out to be ‘just another scheme’ that doesn’t last, and we lose our money.
It’s down to DGCOS to demonstrate its worth, its seriousness and – crucially – its longevity. If it can do that, then it should get the momentum it needs to convince everyone that it’s a serious player. I don’t think the veiled threats of legal action or spamming of this forum were a very good start, but by showing up at GlassTalk, by properly engaging on the debate on this forum and through the seminars that were mentioned, DGCOS seem to be taking a more positive – and welcome – approach.
Where has this 3.2% come from Lee?, I have just reconciled our last £232,000 of retail order input and the DGCOS cost works out at 1.26%. I think unlike FENSA where we are being dictated to by the government, this scheme will be as good as the membership wishes to make it. If the cowboys are allowed to join it then the scheme will fail. The more good guys that join and make it work the more cost effective the scheme will become. Yes a lot of items the scheme offers are available elsewhere but the scheme is well packaged and as far as I can see at this stage cost effective.
Blog Hijack Alert
I was just wondering if Nigel Rees is still reading this blog. If you are Nigel, would you be able to pass me the info and data requested on the 13th .
I know you are not ignoring me, its just that if you can give me the data I can analyse it in time for Glasstalk.
Many Thanks
Blog Hijack over ( for now )
I guess that DGCOS will be more of a marketing tool then , as has been said, the companies that the public need protection from will not get in, and companies that do get in will generally be the sort that will look after their customers. As far as legal teeth , I have the occasional customer that decides to change the rules when the invoice turns up , and even the legal courts route has no teeth , so what magic can these guys do ?
As we have said before, we don’t want to join in with any claim or counter-claim about any faction in this discussion. But we must challenge the repeated suggestion that no other organisation offers any effective consumer protection when our entire 14-year history stands as testimony to our achievements in this field.
That said, we are flattered that not one of the DGCOS supporters in this blog has drawn any direct comparison with Network VEKA. I will not steer readers to any conclusion that I am sure they can reach without my help.
hi kevin greenfield,
The figures came from andrew glover (second reply to this post) who was given them by someone else saying that 1.26% still seems steep to me , if it works for you that is great and as i say if i am wrong i will reconsider when proven and marketable to the masses. Regards lee…
[...] up all over the internet (including on the Energy Saving Trust website) and quite a lot of debate on the GlassTalk website (not all of which is entirely [...]
Blog Hijack Alert
I was just wondering if Nigel Rees is still reading this blog. If you are Nigel, would you be able to pass me the info and data requested on the 13th .
I know you are not ignoring me , but any sort of response will do, its just that if you can give me the data I can analyse it in time for Glasstalk.
Many Thanks
As someone who has experienced very shoddy work by a supposedly qualified local installer who had in turn been recommended by a supposedly reputable local builder, I can’t see why some people are so against this scheme.
I would welcome such a scheme that gives me protection against characters like that in the future. Also I can’t see why any truly reputable company would not want to join this scheme. Surely it adds more power to their sales efforts?
QUOTE….
“Nigel (Rees CEO of the GGF ) says:
May 13, 2010 at 9:10 am
Kevin
I appreciate that your point was not related to the discussion on the DGCOS, but felt it needed a response. I am somewhat surprised by the statement that “you have been asking for the reference source for some time”. I am reliably informed by my staff that this was conveyed to you quite some time ago. The fact that you may not agree with the research of Dr Rob Lowe of Leeds Metropolitan University, is a totally different matter, but you have not been ignored.”
OK so the GGF don’t understand WERs, but tell me which dictionary do they use to determine the meaning of the word “ignored”
Ha! havent read this thread for a while but see that DGCOS are proffering legal action. Against the BBC. How much money have they got?! I reckon that would be like throwing money into a very large legal hole. I mean they are the champions of free speech and opinion. I’d also wager their legal teams would perhaps have fought off a few disgruntled firms before. Mmm could you see where your contributions could be going……….
It is a high risk strategy suing the BBC unless you have very deep pockets. The issue will be settled on a number of things – Did the BBC defame DGCOS? If so what is the financial value of the defamation? If DGCOS sue and win they will get damages and costs. If they sue and lose it will be expensive. More likely they will threaten to sue in a blaze of publicity, then quietly withdraw before spending too much on legal fees – having secured the oxygen of further publicity and positioned themselves as the “injured party” standing up for the rights of blah, blah, blah…
I for one could not give a flying DGCOS at a rolling doughnut.