On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 22:03:35 +0100
Andy Hall wrote:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 21:10:34 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:
=20

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 19:32:19 +0100, "Jackie"
wrote:

Hi I just found out today that my sister in law(a widow) is paying
Scottish
gas =A33500 to replace her old boiler and hot water tank central heat=
ing
system with a combi boiler. They will be removing the old hot water t=
ank
and
boiler etc that was installed about 20 years ago which supplied hot w=
ater
and radiators. Is this about a fair price nowadays or is Scottish Gas
taking
the ****?

Without all the details (and the devil is sometimes in that), it's not
easy to be accurate, because there may be a need to do a fair bit of
new pipework. However, if there isn't, this price is at the top of
the market.

At an educated guess, she could have saved anything up to 50% of that
figure by going to a local heating engineer.

Well, in all fairness, they give the price in advance, it's up to the
customer to say yea or nay.

Mary

=20
=20
Well yes, except that they are playing on their "safe" reputation as
"the gas board".
=20
That could reasonably command some price premium, I suppose, but I
think that they are abusing their position.
=20
Sooner or later, consumers will begin to wise up, and then,
justifiably, BG will be screwed. =20
=20
Form without substance works for a little while, but sooner or later
collapses like the house of cards it is, and usually spectacularly.

The problem for the consumer is that it always seems better to trust or
rely on a big company name, it is difficult to know for sure who is
the best deal, even first hand accounts from satisfied customers cannot
always be relied upon. The old saying you get what you pay for comes
to mind.


=20
=20
.andy
=20
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl