Dickens wrote that his arch-miser Ebenezer Scrooge was “a squeezing,
wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous old sinner!” We received
hundreds of responses when we asked readers to nominate the companies and
institutions that best lived up to that description for Times Money's
Scrooge of the Year award.
Votes went to bodies as varied as Manchester City Council, Oxford Brookes
University and Thomson Holidays. But here are our top five meanies by number
of nominations.
1 Norwich Union
This year's winner, and Scrooge by a big lead, is Norwich Union. Readers felt
that the insurer's 1.1 million with-profits policyholders had been treated
badly after it missed deadlines related to the distribution of windfalls
from its £5.5 billion inherited estate, raising fears that they won't
happen.
It has agreed to hand out £2.1 billion of the surplus capital in its
with-profits fund to policyholders as a “special bonus”, but readers were
angry that some policyholders will not benefit in full as it is being phased
over three years.
Dominic Lindley, of Which?, the campaign group, says: “Norwich Union is a
worthy Scrooge of the Year. By paying special bonuses over three years, it
penalises about 50,000 of its most loyal customers whose policies mature
before January 1, 2010.”
One reader, F. Daly, wrote: “Having held CGU policies [CGU merged with Norwich
Union in 2000] for the full 20 and 25 years we have been ripped off. It
appears that no one - regulators nor Government - can stop them. It should
be called the Great With-Profits Robbery.”
A Norwich Union spokeswoman says: “It seems odd that a tiny number of
individuals should be able to brand as Scrooge a company that has worked
hard to pay billions of pounds to about one million policyholders.”
2 Gordon Brown
In a year of economic meltdown, many readers rounded on the Government. While
some attacked the Labour administration, and others slated the Chancellor,
the majority saved their venom for the Prime Minister.
John, for example, wrote: “No contest: Scrooge goes to Gordon 'son of the
Manse' Brown and his 'fiend' Lord Mandelson of Europe.”
Cliff, meanwhile, explained his nomination, writing: “Gordon Brown, for
perfecting the art of entering recession with massive government debt after
ten years of mismanagement and spin, and then encouraging us to rack up more
to get us out of recession. Presumably on the basis that he won't be around
to foot the bill.”
Others cited more specific grievances. Phyllis Gordon wrote: “Getting rid of
the 10p tax band was mean. I realised when it was announced in the Budget
that it would hit everyone in my household - two pensioners and a low-income
civil servant. I could never forgive him for that and would never vote
Labour.”
3 npower
Energy providers were another popular target. Some readers were irked that
falls in the wholesale gas price had not translated into cuts in bills.
Others said pricing structures were opaque and unfair. Several companies
were named, but the frontrunner in the Scrooge stakes was npower, which is
being investigated by the energy regulator after allegations, in these
pages, of unfair billing.
One reader, IL, wrote: “I nominate npower. For deliberate and underhand
pricing structures which make it almost impossible to properly understand
rates and check bills.”
Nick Jones detailed his experience, writing: “My monthly bill went up from
about £70 to more than £330 as they claimed that I'd gone into arrears.
After negotation, it was reduced to £220, subject to review after 12 months
when the deficit had been paid off. Nearly two years later, I'm still paying
£220 a month.”
An npower spokesman says: “In recent years npower has won a number of awards
for customer service. But we acknowledge that 2008 has not been a great year
for us. Our main ambition for 2009 is to return to our award-winning ways
and ensure we never appear on this list again.”
4 Ryanair
The Irish low-cost airline came fourth in our poll, with readers attacking
extra charges above advertised fares. Euan Robertson wrote: “I nominate
Ryanair for refusing to show the full price upfront, misleading advertising,
and a nasty cancellation and change policy. How does it get away with a
no-refunds policy, extra charges, and miserable customer service?”
A spokesman for “The World's Favourite Airline” says: “Our advertising is in
line with regulations and lists achievable prices. People may pay extra
because they carry more than one bag, for example, or use a non-Visa card,
but that is their choice.”
5 Standard Life
Homeowners have had a tough few months so, unsurprisingly, mortgage lenders
came under attack. Readers singled out Standard Life for passing on just 0.8
per cent of the latest 1 per cent cut in the Bank of England base rate to
borrowers on its standard variable rate (SVR). At 5.79 per cent from
December 31 it will remain one of the most expensive SVRs on the market.
Angela wrote: “Other banks have passed on more than 1 per cent. Standard Life
ignored the November cut and have now reduced by only 0.8 per cent. This
means that when I go from my fixed-rate deal on to the SVR my payments will
still go up, which can't be right when the base rate is 2 per cent.”
Standard Life says that the 0.8 per cent cut in the bank's SVR takes into
account both the November and December cuts in the base rate. A spokeswoman
adds: “We have reviewed our SVR to respond to volatility in the retail
savings and wholesale funding markets. This has allowed us to strike an
appropriate balance across our customer base.”
'There are still good guys around'
Enough humbug. Through the year, readers have also sent us stories of good
customer service for inclusion in our “On the bright side” slot. Last month,
for example, Alison Thomas, of Guildford, reported that the tour operator
Activities Abroad had sent her an unsolicited 5 per cent refund because the
company was making more money than expected thanks to the exchange rate
between the pound and the Norwegian krone. “It's unbelievable,” she wrote.
“There are still good guys around.”
And in October Claire Williams, of Cheshire, told us how her two-year-old son
had damaged a Bose CD player. The company arranged for a courier to collect
the machine and transport it to Germany. It then fixed the player and gave
it a complete overhaul before returning it, with no charges at all.
“Fantastic service,” she wrote. “Bose equipment is expensive, but certainly
worth the money.”
Surprisingly, perhaps, readers also praised rail companies. Elizabeth
FitzGibbon, of Elgin, Morayshire, for example, said that Virgin Trains had
refunded her fare from Rugby to Elgin and given her £30 in vouchers when her
train was four hours late. “On the train, we were served free sandwiches,
bottled water and as much coffee and tea as we liked. Also there were
officials on the train and at the station to help and advise.”
In another instance, Sue Norman, of Buckingham, said that First Great Western
had paid for a taxi for her son when he missed a connecting train because of
a cancellation. “Thanks to the company for helping a young student to get
home with minimal delay or hassle,” she wrote.
Luggage companies came out well, too. Colin Rose, of London, reported that
Eminent had delivered replacement keys for a suitcase to him promptly and at
no cost. And Eleanor Hardingham, of Peterborough, said that Samsonite had
sent a free replacement when a suitcase lock was damaged by airport baggage
handlers.
Case study: Anger at Norwich Union
Raymond Hague, pictured with Molly, started a 25-year with-profits policy with
Commercial Union in 1987 to cover mortgage repayments. This became his and
his wife's savings nest egg after the couple, who live in Waddon, South
London, cleared their home loan early.
“We had good returns with Commercial Union and - after its merger with General
Accident - with CGU,” says Mr Hague. “After CGU merged with Norwich
Union in 2000, there was one year of reasonable returns, but since then we
have been disappointed.”
The retired City worker, 69, adds: “In 1992 Commercial Union declared a
regular annual bonus of £723.34. The sum total of bonuses declared by
Norwich Union for the years 2002 to 2007 was £714.50.
“We are angry about the inherited estate cash mountain. The reattribution of
this appears contrived to obtain a large amount of capital for the
shareholders. We are also unhappy that the special bonus money will be paid
in three parts. Why not one lump sum?”
