Another Ombudsman Joins The Industry

Looks like we're going to be dragging up the ombudsman issue again, as a GGF and FENSA backed scheme enters the fray, with their main rivals of course being the DGCOS. Here is the statement on their website:

The Glazing Ombudsman Scheme has been launched for the Glazing Industry covering the installation of replacement windows and doors, conservatories and roofline products. The Scheme, known as ‘The Glazing Ombudsman’, will use the services of The Property Ombudsman to provide the Ombudsman facility.

The Property Ombudsman (TPO) is a Member of the British and Irish Ombudsman Association (BIOA) and has been providing an ombudsman service for 20 years. The Ombudsman is completely independent of his scheme members and is accountable to an independent Council, ensuring that The Glazing Ombudsman scheme can provide a free, fair and, above all, independent service for dealing with unresolved disputes between customers and members of the Scheme (registered businesses).

The Glazing Ombudsman is sponsored by the Glass and Glazing Federation and FENSA to provide financial stability, but in the medium term the low fee structure for registered businesses will provide sufficient funds for the scheme to prosper.

Members must follow the Code of Practice set out by The Glazing Ombudsman and provide customers with a fair and clear Contract of Sale in addition to Deposit and Work in Progress Insurance and several other commitments of service.

The process for customers to complain to the Ombudsman will be simple and hassle-free providing a final award, if appropriate, of up to £25,000. The award will be binding on the members but customers will be free to refuse the award and pursue their complaint through the courts. Customers may only use the TGO Scheme to complain about the goods supplied or work performed by members of the TGO scheme.

The Ombudsman service is to be undertaken by Mr Christopher Hamer who has been The Property Ombudsman since 2006. Prior to this he held, over a number of years, a series of posts in various ombudsman schemes, such as The Personal Investment Authority Ombudsman Bureau. He therefore brings a wide breadth of experience to The Glazing Ombudsman Scheme.

The Glazing Ombudsman is a ‘no-frills’, straightforward Ombudsman Scheme which aims to provide the customers of registered businesses with a means of redress in a fair and ‘hassle-free’ way if things go wrong. Insurance, such as Insurance Backed Guarantee (IBG) cover, can be imported from a TGO member’s existing supplier, subject to minimum requirements being met. Consequently, the TGO member has a financial commitment to pay for the Ombudsman Scheme and does not have costs associated with other fringe services.

As with anything new, I like to question it. I ask why has this ombudsman been set up when we already have the DGCOS? My natural response would be that because this is one that is GGF and FENSA backed and sponsored, it will have more respect within the industry. It's also more likely to carry more confidence with a customer as they're already more likely to have heard of FENSA or GGF than the DGCOS - despite their marketing strategy.


Why would companies want to join? The ombudsman is funded mainly by FENSA and the GGF, which means there is apparently a low cost fee for joining. Markedly lower than some of the reports I've heard about how much the DGCOS want from you!


The vetting process might raise an eyebrow with some. The DGCOS said that they had a robust vetting system, yet serial phoenixers managed to slip through the net, so I guess we'll have to wait and see how successful that part of the business is.


The ombudsman sets itself out to show that it has teeth. DGCOS failed somewhat in following that promise up, lets hope that this one does manage to deliver on all fronts.


I'm sure I can count on some of you putting your point of view across!

Simple Solution

I'm wading in and back out of the DGCOS debate very quickly here!


You know, there wouldn't be a need for things like DGCOS (who claim to protect companies against non-paying customers) if companies conducted themselves in the correct manner. 


Think about it, it's simple. If the company does the job correctly from start to finish, the customer (assuming they are genuine people as 99.9% of them are), won't have a reason to hold back payment. If the installations company does things like:


1. Have polite, courteous sales people who fully explain the product and the proposed work.
2. Keep the customer informed and kept within the communication loop at all times. Making sure they know at what stage their installation is.
3. Install their products to the same standard as they saw in the showroom, without major defaults or problems.
4. Install products by fully qualified fitters, who are clean, tidy, efficient and fit to a high standard.
5. Provide a good after sales service after installation.


These are all simple steps, but ones which we carry out here and we practically never have a problem with customers not paying, as we don't give them an excuse to.


The other advantage is that you're less likely to collect the type of customers who are non-payers as they know they probably won't get away with it.


See! DGCOS rendered useless (in my opinion anyway!).

Pack Up And Go Home

This is just a very short note on the subject of DGCOS.


Simply, if you have to constantly defend yourself from this much criticism and scepticism, you have to take a long hard look in the mirror and realise that you've been rejected.


The best thing to do now is to go away, analyse every part of your operation and come back refreshed, more organised, more transparent and come back with something the double glazing industry truly wants. 

The First Test For DGCOS

One of the main principles of which the DGCOS was set up on, was to protect customers against rogue companies who go bust and phoenix time and time again. After all, this is the sort of practise that the industry wants to get rid of. So, when we heard of Croston Conservatories (one of the founding members of DGCOS) phoenixing again, most of us expected to see some form of action from DGCOS to show that they would be true to their word and not associate themselves with companies such as this one. However up to press there hasn't been a peep!

Maybe the fact that owner Steve Butler has shares in DGCOS Admin Ltd and the holding company. A little fact I know, but one that could put DGCOS in a bit of a compromising position if they don't take some sort of action soon.

This is the first test of the integrity of the DGCOS. Make the right decision by disassociating themselves with Croston Conservatories within the next week or so then their integrity stands. If they leave it any longer than a week, or choose not to do anything at all, then things will probably start to unravel for them. Since the DGCOS arrived in the window industry, many people were sceptical about their motives and credibility. The doubters of this scheme will have been looking and waiting for them to make their first mistake, and this could well be it.

One thing is certain, a hairy fairy press release from DGCOS won't cut it, they have cut the company loose.  

Not Much Left Of 2010

There is just about 4 working weeks left till we all pack up for the year and enjoy some well earned rest and partying. So I thought this might be a good time to start reflecting on the year we've had.


Uncertainty
The beginning of the year I think many will agree was a very uncertain one. 2009 was a very tough year for everyone, and not just in the double glazing industry. The country was just emerging out of recession, and everyone was looking towards the General Election in May to see which direction the country was headed. There was though a much more positive mood in the air. Everyone seemed more determined than ever to pull themselves out of financial trouble and get back to good trading again.


Up until the election we went a bit quiet. I think it was due to the fact people were hanging on a little to see what the result was going to be. Luckily, once the hype surrounding the coalition died down, consumers realised that things weren't suddenly worse now the Tories were back in office, and started spending again.


World Cup
This really did dampen the country's spending habits! I think everyone experienced a drop in leads and sales while the tournament was on. Despite England going out of the competition quite early, business didn't really pick up till after the Final had been and gone. 


The World Cup ushered in the second half of the year. And one which has been much improved on the first half. Leads and sales have been consistent. Conversion rates have shot up. I think this should be put down to increased consumer confidence. Maybe people finally realised that the economic world wasn't crashing down and they could afford to get things replaced.


On a personal note, I believe I have had some of the best months of my career so far. I feel as though something has clicked, which I know sounds strange for someone who has been doing the job for over four years. But I just feel I have managed to step up that extra level, and when I needed to most!


DGCOS
They emerged about half-way through the year and have given the industry plenty to talk about! They are the perfect Marmite comparison - you either like them or hate them! Whether or not you agree with their approach or not, one thing they should be applauded for is their marketing campaign. If anyone is looking to launch a new market strategy, they should look at what the DGCOS have done. It's been effective, clear, not cheesy and they managed to grab a well known consumer-rights TV champion to front their adverts!


DGCOS did get a lot of attention, probably too much. And I'm guilty of that also, by writing too many posts about what I and others thought. They need to be left now to do what they set out to do. If they prosper then they deserve a pat on the back, if they fail then it's not going to do the industry any harm.


Part L Changes
Well this was a sore point! And what a farce! September and October saw a mass panic by FENSA and the GGF when it realised that the WER scheme was shunned (wrongly shunned I want to add) by the industry, and so had to back-track to make sure that the Part L changes were valid, but in a way that didn't put about 75% of the industry in breach of it!


One of the biggest crimes was that companies had invested thousands of pounds in getting their own certificates to prove compliance, only to be told at the last minute they didn't need to go to those lengths to do so! As you can imagine this didn't go down well. 


My thoughts are this: we should embrace what is a fantastic selling tool instead of picking holes in the WER scheme. We have to be selfish and realise that we have jobs to keep. We have to keep selling windows and doors to pay the bills, and this is something which will help us do that. We have to forget the mess of the Part L changes and plough forward.


2011?
Despite the second half of 2010 being very positive, I see 2011 as being a very tough year. We have seen two massive social-housing firms collapse. Banks are continuing to make redundancies in the thousands. The Government's spending cuts are due to take effect as of January, as is the rise in VAT. This means very tough trading conditions, possibly to the effect of late 2008/early 2009. Of course I would love that to be wrong, but if you listen to all those in the know, what they are predicting isn't rosy.

The Real Reason Why DGCOS Hasn't Exploded Onto The Scene

An interview with Tony Pickup in the GGP Magazine revealed their tough qualification process for installers:


The Double Glazing and Conservatory Ombudsman Scheme (DGCOS), has released figures showing that 39% of installers do not succeed in gaining accreditation.

Launched earlier this year, the scheme has attracted many long established and reputable firms but many installers fail to meet what the organisation claims is its ‘high standards’.  “We consider every company that applies,” explained Tony Pickup, founder of DGCOS, “but many simply don’t have what we’re looking for. Every installer has to supply at least 10 home owner references from recent jobs, plus three supplier references. We also ask for copies of their health and safety policies, contract terms and conditions and public liability and employer’s liability insurances.

“Our dedicated accreditation team investigates every detail in a 12 point process,  (seewww.dgcos.org.uk/member_join). Where we can, we help companies with their procedures and policies to ensure they meet our standards but many applicants fail because of County Court Judgements, bankruptcies or multiple phoenixing.” Mr Pickup stated that the process is a continuous one.“One company was recently expelled because they didn’t disclose a phoenixed company which subsequently came to light,” he said. “It didn’t turn up in our initial investigation because the directors were different, so we now look up as many variations on company and owner names and addresses as we can.

“It’s very thorough process but the feedback from members who have made it – and their customers – has been remarkably positive. It keeps our standards high, and ensures home owners can trust the DGCOS brand.”


I can completely understand that DGCOS has to have a high standard that they want to create and breed, but the problem is the majority of companies in this industry have either become bankrupt or changed their name at some point in the company's lifetime. If they are going to stick by this factor, they are going to seriously limit the number of companies that are going to be able to join. Then they face another problem. If they do want to expand into the mass majority of the industry, they may have to start breaking their own rules in order to do so. But this will put at risk the credibility of the scheme itself.


So with this, as well as the other 12 categories in which companies need to qualify for, the conclusion is simple: even if an installer wanted to join, the likelihood is they wont. It's probably just too hard! 

The DGCOS Debate 2

I feel the debate about the DGCOS is due to run it's course sometime soon, and personally I'm starting to tire of the whole thing.

All of us with an opinion have made their opinions known, and most of those have been negative ones. It's too expensive. It's a gimmick. It's another unnecessary governing body. It will hardly be put to use. It creates an even more negative impression of the double glazing industry by creating the image that the industry as a whole is rotten. It's purely for profit.

Those are some of the reasons why most people believe the idea is flawed, most of which I agree with. But this is where I want to leave it. We won't be joining the scheme I don't think, I won't be writing about the subject again (unless I'm forced to!). If content about the scheme keeps getting published then I fear we will be travelling on the same roundabout for a while, and it's something not worth spending the time and energy doing so.

End.

Where Are We Now With The DGCOS Debate?

The DGCOS debate rumbles on. Tony Pickup has become more vocal on the GlassTalk website. More and more people have become vocal against the scheme. Yet the steady trickle of companies signing up to the scheme carries on.

The amount of companies that have signed up stands in the low hundreds, which on the face of things may seem quite reasonable. But when you think of the industry having tens of thousands of companies of all sizes, there is still a long way to go before the scheme starts to make any real impact.

The problem is that the industry is already clogged up with schemes, alliances, governing bodies, trademark accreditations and so on. This was a creation that has so far failed to capture the imagination of the double glazing industry, so much so that many have spoken out against it. Personally, I don't see how the DGCOS can give a company any protection or advantage when it costs so much to be part of. DGCOS says it has teeth, and when it comes to protecting the consumer or company, it's those teeth which get to work. But seriously, there are so few occasions that double glazing related cases ever get to court. They are nearly always settled before anything legal happens. So for me it's a total waste of time and money. Having the DGCOS logo plastered everywhere isn't going to win extra orders. Product quality, customer service and company history do that.

The DGCOS Debate

Last week, BBC Breakfast brought to the UK the new Double Glazing and Conservatory Ombudsman Scheme. And since that broadcast, the DGCOS, what they stand for and what they say have come under intense scrutiny from the double glazing industry.

The aims of the DGCOS according to their website is to help installers separate themselves from the cowboys of the industry, gives our customer genuine peace of mind, it's there to protect us against the customer just out to get what they can...and that's about it really.

Here's my thoughts, much of which has been said by the industry already. Firstly, it costs a hell of a lot of money. A company with a £1,000,000 turnover will have to pay £32,000 a year. This is an enormous amount of money, and the 'benefits' the scheme will provide do not justify a company paying out that much money. Secondly, using the term 'Ombudsman' has connotations of government, of which the scheme has no connection as far as I'm aware to the government at all. But it's the gravitas of the word that the DGCOS is spinning to their benefit. Thirdly, the scheme has used Nick Ross, who everyone knows is the face of consumer protection. As an industry, this type of gloss won't be taken quite as well as the public might take it. In fact they'll just see right through it and not even acknowledge it. Next, when you really read what they say on the website, it doesn't really explain in a detailed fashion how either the consumer or installer is any more protected. It says it law enforcing powers, but gives no examples. Sort of like the recent election campaign, a lot of slick talk and no substance.

The next thing the DGCOS has done wrong is to start threatening legal action all over the place. If the DGCOS wants to pick up installers, they have to take criticism on the chin, then do their bit to prove to the sceptics (of which there are a lot off) that the scheme is worth joining. They even threatened action against the BBC, the organisation they need to get publicity! Madness!

Personally, this is just another scheme, probably the most expensive one to date, created to make money for it's inventor. I can't see any real benefit to either the consumer or installer. Also, for those that do join, their certification logo will probably be added to an already large list. How is a customer supposed to know which scheme is the right one when there are all sorts of logos and certifications about now? One of the biggest issues here is the cost. I think if the cost was a minimal one like the others are then they will get more installers on board. But with a cost like the one mentioned above then no is really going to take this seriously. 

There has been this debate going on at the GlassTalk site for the last few days, and it looks like the DGCOS have written a few comments posing as customers (don't sue me DGCOS, it's just my opinion!). It's actions like this which aren't going to help the scheme gain any more credibility. 

It will be interesting to see how this debate develops over the next few days and weeks!