ACCC takes Iselect to court for allegedly misleading consumers into paying more for electricity
The ACCC is taking Iselect to court for misleading consumers, alleging that, despite claiming it would recommend the most competitive energy plan, the comparison service instead recommended brands paying higher commissions.
Some consumers may have been paying more for electricity as a result, according to the regulator.
“We were particularly concerned with the issues raised about Iselect’s claims because we know consumers go to comparison sites to get the best deal, and for an impartial and objective comparison of complex energy plans. We allege they were not getting that so they may be paying more for electricity than they should be,” ACCC chair Rod Sims said of the claims, which have allegedly been occurring since at least November 2016.
Hate, hate, hate this industry, it’s a complete con job run by modern-day digital pirates. How they duped everyone by preying on consumer laziness due to the convenience of the internet astounds me. And when you have comparison sites whose sole reason to exist is to compare other comparison sites creating a ladder of lead commissions there can be no other result than consumers paying more in the long run.
A contact at BUPA (who has since left) admitted that if they didn’t need to compete with the other providers in the comparison site game the average health insurance premium would be between 8-13% cheaper.
It’s iSelect, not Iselect.
Hi Anon2,
From a branding and marketing perspective, yes, it is iSelect, as is clearly seen in all their communications (and the logo we have included in the story).
You will note, however, that we are trying to stick to normal rules of capitalisation when it comes to brand names – for example, we write Ooh Media, not the brand’s own oOh!media. When Network Ten was marketing itself as TEN, we instead often went with Ten (as the ‘E’ and ‘N’ don’t actually stand for anything, so don’t require caps).
I’m the first to admit we have been inconsistent with this, but where we can, we’re trying to keep it simple.
The bigger issue here, I would argue, is Iselect/iSelect’s alleged conduct, and the outcome of the proceedings.
Thanks,
Vivienne – Mumbrella
Over the past few years when renewing an agreement I have tried iSelect. Not once was it able to recommend anything better than I already had … and normally for more than I was currently paying, or less than I was currently receiving.
I had a phone call from iselect about health insurance and being disheartened with the one I had for thirty years agreed to change to another company, being told I had exactly the same cover. After a day stay procedure, I realised my mistake not only did I have a lower level of cover but my out of pocket expense was huge. On contacting iselect I was told I had a starter plus level (two levels down from what I had previously) . Nowhere on my paperwork did it say this. Needless to say I Immediatlely changed to a different health insurance and was put on a waiting list for cover after thirty years of continuous cover. Please do your own selecting, takes time but you will know what your getting.
I noticed this scam 3 years ago when iselect only had prefered partners in there comparison list. At one time when they FIRST started they had most but last 3-4 years absolutely they were after commissions only. like there’s only about 10 ATM when they should be comparing 50+