BT Don't Get Done Get Dom

I've been fighting consumer battles for years

but there are still many companies trying to do one over on you.

They don't care. As long as the cash register's going ching-ching,

that's all they care about.

Thousands of you are still subject to unfair treatment

from poor customer service to hidden small print and faulty products.

What can we do? Make a complaint maybe, that'll get lost in the telecommunications abyss.

These companies simply don't seem to care and are causing you

the consumer a lot of unnecessary stress.

Never fear.

I'll take want your consumer battles to make sure you don't get done.

Coming up on today's show,

BT could stand for Bad Times

as gripes about their complex contracts

and careless customer service mount up.

I've got over 60 different BT complaints in my inbox.

We had no service whatsoever to get any sort of phone line.

I had to walk half a mile to a phone box.

After I entered BT, my bills was coming at nearly four times as much.

Why is that?

We see how you guys have been fighting your own battles

with a visit to one community hero who single-handedly fought

the council over his council tax banding.

When you did the maths you could see it.

26,000 and 40,000 in two and-a-half years?

There was no way that I could believe that was right.

And we hit the high street to discover whether you ladies and

gents of the UK know your consumer rights from your consumer wrongs.

That would be useful, yeah. I didn't know that.

When I was a kid, and I'm not talking about that long ago,

making a call with BT was fairly straightforward.

PHONE RINGS

Hello?

Hello, is Dom there, please?

Never heard of him.

But today, it's all about contracts, order forms, direct debits.

-PHONE RINGS

-Hi. Is Dom there, please?

I said I've never heard of him!

With all that paperwork and contracts,

inevitably there are going to be a few crossed lines.

And someone who knows crossed lines of communication only too well

is 50-year-old Tony Rodgers from Nottingham.

Tony has run his family restaurant for 12 years.

We are a Mediterranean Italian restaurant and we serve fish,

steaks, pastas, pizzas.

But like any small UK business, the recession has meant

looking at all possible ways to save money and in October 2010,

one well-known phone operator presented an offer he couldn't refuse.

I had a number of phone calls from British Telecom

and I kept talking to them but refusing.

The lady says,

"Can we look at your bills and let us see what we can do for you?"

So Tony sent BT his bill and they responded promising

their package could save him an impressive 16% every month.

I looked at the contract and I was extremely happy with the deal

I made with the British Telecom.

I was told it was a 24 month contract.

I signed it, e-mailed it back to them

and hoped everything would go smoothly from then on.

Not quite smoothly.

After taking a whole week to get Tony's restaurant landline

up and running, things got worse.

Several months down the line, the promise BT made of a monthly 16% saving just wasn't ringing true.

After I entered BT my bills was coming at nearly four times as much.

Why is that?

BT eventually accepted they'd put Tony on the wrong calling plan

and credited his account.

But even with this rectification, Tony couldn't understand why

he wasn't seeing the savings BT had promised.

He wasn't yet at the end of his contract period

but rang BT to tell them he wanted out.

Cue yet another nasty surprise.

I was in a conversation with one of their staff

in New Delhi and he told me it was not a two year contract,

it was five years.

It was a great shock to the system. Horrifying.

Even more shocking were the cancellation fees

BT told Tony he'd have to pay to leave.

The stress was starting to take its toll.

I feel that as a restaurateur,

I was spending too much time on the phone.

Hours after hours wasting my time

for something I was hoping was going to save me money and hassle free.

I ended up in hospital twice because I had suspected heart attacks.

Because of so much anxiety.

I admit, I have shouted at them, they shouted back at me.

I put the phone down on them, they put the phone down on me.

I believe that Dom could help me to get out this contract,

to relieve my family, myself and my restaurant

from stress that we never wanted and we never deserved.

Sounds like Tony is having a Bad Time with BT.

I think it's definitely time for some serious intervention

so I travelled 130 miles to...

Nottingham.

Home of Robin Hood and Tony Rodgers, who runs this restaurant

and has got a problem with BT.

-How are you doing, Tony?

-Nice to see you, Dominic.

-You've got a problem you want to talk about?

-Yes, I do.

-Can we do it with a coffee?

-Yes, of course.

-Thank you, I'd love that!

-You're welcome.

First, I know Tony wants to leave BT

because even after his calling plan was corrected

the savings they promised never happened

but how far from the truth are we talking?

It is, in the last bill I've had is £106.43.

Prior to that, from Virgin, was around £40.

It's gone from a supposed saving,

-to it's actually costing you more money.

-Yes.

'And Tony's bills weren't the only thing

'that didn't make sense to him.'

As far as you were concerned, what contract were you in?

I was in a 24 month contract, as far as I was concerned.

So, when did you realise that, actually, you weren't?

I would say after a couple of months of arguing with them.

-And that was the very first you ever recall hearing it?

-Yes, yes.

And you were shocked? How bad?

-I ended up twice in hospital after talking to BT.

-Why?

I got angry, I shouted because nobody was listening.

At that point, did all you want was to get out of the contract that you had signed

and just go back with who you were with before?

-Yes, I tried very hard.

-You obviously asked them for that?

-Yes, I did.

-What did they say?

One of the managers told me that I had to pay £1,000.

-A grand?!

-Yes.

'I can hardly believe my ears.

'£1,000 to get out of the contract

'that unexpectedly turned from two years to five years?!'

Before I came down today I contacted BT

and I asked them for a copy of the contract that they sent you.

Now, this is what they said you signed.

Have a look through this

because, I mean, there's tons and tons of small print and terms and conditions, etc, etc.

Just read that section up there. What does it say?

"The committed period is 24 months."

OK. Which agrees with what you're saying. You are committed for two years.

-Would you say that's black-and-white?

-Yes.

No confusion there at all, is there?

'But things are never that simple, are they?

'As squirreled away in the small print is a distinctly longer commitment period.

'Three years, in fact, for the line rental side of his deal with BT.

'But owning a small business in a fickle UK economy

'means Tony has to be careful what he commits to

'and he has always been well aware of that.'

Five years is far too long, in this day and age,

to commit yourself and my company.

For the sake of 16% it wasn't me while to make that decision.

'Sensible words.

'It seems it would have taken a hell of a telesales pitch

'to get Tony to agree to any contract of that length

'but he did put pen to paper.

'I think Tony has signed the contract

'not noticing the longer commitment period was there.'

-What would you be happy with?

-I just want to cancel my contract.

-OK.

-I am not after any money, I just want to be left alone,

to go back to what I had.

Yeah, you want out and I think, you know, I don't blame you at all.

'While I investigate I've also asked Tony to do some research

'on what kind of contract lengths other companies are offering.'

I tell you what, it seems like between BT and Tony

there is a few crossed wires

and a very lengthy contract that Tony doesn't want to be in.

Let's see if I can get him out of it.

But it's not just Tony who's having a BT battle.

A quick glance at my inbox shows me

that there are many more angry customers.

So, I've decided to take on two more cases,

including the plight of Annisa and Michael Stennett from Durham

and the uncalled for cancellation charges.

And Stuart and Trudie Wilson from Weston-super-Mare

who've also received charges for services they never wanted.

BT's complex contracts have enabled them to be hit with these unexpected fees

and BT customer services aren't budging.

More about them later.

First, time to get the ball rolling with a sternly worded e-mail

outlining all three cases I want BT to look into.

But what will BT's response be when I grill them

about their customer service standards and confusing contracts?

He believes he was always on a 24 month contract

so I just need to query whether it was clear

that one part of it was 60 months and one part of it was 24 months.

Birmingham, the city said to be the birthplace of heavy metal

and once home to the famous band Black Sabbath.

It is now home to over one million consumers

who may be headbanging when it comes to the subject of consumer law.

Does the average Brummie know their Sales of Goods

from the Trade Descriptions Act?

If not, they should and so should you.

We're in a busy shopping district

and my researchers are about to find out

just how clued-up you, the general public, are.

First question, "Something Fishy".

"You buy a goldfish from a pet shop

"but unfortunately it dies within a fortnight, what can you do?"

Flush it down the toilet!

I don't think you can do anything, really.

-Take it back.

-Take it back, yeah. Try and get my money back.

Well, I'd say that you could take it back

and demand a new goldfish or your money back.

Correct, but a mixed bag of answers there.

Provided you treated the fish correctly,

buying a pet entitles you to the same consumer rights

as any other product.

Meaning a refund or a new goldfish.

However, the shop could ask you to produce the dead goldfish

and a sample of the water in your aquarium in separate bags.

-OK.

-Don't flush it down the toilet then!

Don't do that, it might come back and it you on the bum!

Next up, it's, "Electric Shocker".

"The fuse box breaks in your house, leaving you with no electricity.

"You call out an electrician who replaces the fuse box

"but presents you with a huge bill.

"You disagree with the price

"as you think he has charged too much for parts and labour,

"what can you do?"

There must be someone you can complain to?

I don't know who though.

If it's a main company,

I would definitely go to the company and complain.

-I'd probably just pay it!

-I'd just pay it and...

-Just be like, "That's how much it costs."

-..be annoyed for two days.

Get a receipt, obviously, and go to Citizens Advice.

-Probably compare it to somebody else or...

-Yeah, see what they can do.

Correct, three out of four of them are along the right lines.

You should pay the bill

but write, "Paid under protest," on the cheque you pay with

or the company's documentation.

You should then immediately write to the organisation in question

to dispute the price charged.

You should also get quotes from other electricians

to see what they would charge for similar work.

I didn't even know that.

Never happened to me yet!

Who knows what the future holds? Hopefully, now, HE won't get done.

Final question, "Horror Holiday".

"You choose to fly to Spain in three weeks

"but the airline calls cancelling your flight.

"It can't transfer you to another flight

"but just refund your ticket price.

"All other flights are exceptionally expensive at short notice.

"Should the airline pay you compensation for the difference?"

If they've cancelled it

then, surely, they should help you out to get your holiday.

Well, I think they should but I don't think they would!

They've given a refund already, so...that's more than enough.

Correct, two out of three, not bad.

If you've been given two weeks notice,

the company only have to refund your money and nothing more.

With a flight cancellation

you'd be entitled to a refund of the ticket price,

a re-route as soon as possible

or a re-route at a later, convenient date

BUT if you bought travel insurance when booking

check these terms and conditions because you may be covered.

They seem to be a law unto themselves, don't they?

Most of the time regulations in place are fair to the consumer,

so know your rights.

I'm glad that my hard work in educating you is slowly paying off

and less of you are getting done!

Earlier on I met the restaurant owner Tony Rogers from Nottingham

who, after being promised a deal 16% cheaper, switched to BT.

The reality was that his bills increased and when he went to cancel

BT presented him with yet another shocker.

Instead of the two-year contract he thought he was on,

the small print stated something else.

The darkest moment of this process

was when I found out that I'm in a contract for five years with BT.

And, what's more, BT wanted £1,000 in fees to cancel this contract.

I couldn't afford, I still, today, can't afford £1,000.

I was hoping to save 16%,

which would have been six pounds a month.

In cases like this with big companies,

it always pays to know who you are up against.

So, time for me to do some research.

BT should know better.

They are the major provider of telecommunications networks and services in the UK.

Despite being one of the big boys

and making £1.7 billion before tax last year,

they claim one of their main priorities

is to be the brand for business in the UK.

I'm sure Tony would have something to say about that one.

Listed among their brand values are to be trustworthy,

helpful and straightforward.

But as far as some of their customers are concerned,

they're not living up to their promise.

There's no doubt about it,

when it comes to BT, Tony is not a happy chappie.

And, unsurprisingly,

his problem is not the only one clogging up my inbox.

I've already sent an e-mail to BT letting them know I've taken on Tony's case,

but also the cases of two other couples who have suffered at the hands of BT.

Stuart and Trudy Wilson, from Weston-super-Mare,

were also tempted by a good-looking BT offer.

This time for their landline and broadband connection.

We cancelled the Sky contract.

We didn't want to have the television any longer,

so we wanted to go from Sky to BT. It seemed like a cheaper option.

So, on 1st August 2010, they placed their order

and were told the changeover would happen three weeks later on the 25th.

But it didn't.

So, we were left without any connection whatsoever.

And when we contacted BT they told us it could be two to three weeks

before a re-connection could be made.

Two to three weeks?! With no phone line or broadband!

BT had another go at fixing the problem but failed again,

leaving Stuart with only one option.

To get any phone line I had to walk half a mile to a phone box.

Stuart made countless trips to his nearest phone box trying to get the issue rectified.

The Wilsons found BT to be a communications company

who were a nightmare to communicate with.

You are just bashing your head against a brick wall all of the time.

BT failed a second time to connect them,

so they cancelled their contract and went back to Sky.

But a few days later, against their wishes,

BT went ahead with the connection and proceeded to bill them.

And then if we did try and get out of being with BT,

they wanted £150 cancellation fee of the contract we didn't have.

So, like Tony,

the Wilsons were struck with a stiff cancellation fee.

Not a grand, but still £150 for an unwanted service,

and it didn't stop there.

From October 2010 until May 2011,

BT continued to send bill, after bill, after bill.

The Wilsons were horrified that they were being asked to fork out

for a service they simply didn't want from BT.

They refused to pay, so BT sent in the heavies.

They started to put these bills over to a debt collection agency

who were phoning us up until 10pm at night, every night.

They were writing us letters. It was just beyond belief.

I have been in tears on several occasions.

They've now reached a stalemate with BT.

We need Dom's help because we've taken it as far as we possibly can.

The Wilsons have a final bill of £371.85 for a service they didn't want.

And, like Tony, they found dealing with customer services

as painful as pulling teeth.

All because they signed on the dreaded dotted line,

meaning BT can charge what they want regardless of the service provided.

I guess I am a glutton for punishment,

because I'm also going to help out one more couple,

Anisa and Michael Stennett from Durham,

who shortly after signing a new BT contract,

decided to cancel as nothing was working.

Regardless of a lack of service, they too were hit with charges

and cancellation fees to the sum of £368.58.

Just like the Wilsons, their complaints were ignored by BT.

And just like the Wilsons, they had the debt collectors set on them.

Seems to me the common dominator in all of these cases

boils down to one thing - customer service.

People are being promised one thing,

yet being given something completely different.

And when customers quite rightly complained about not getting the savings or service promised,

BT quote the terms and conditions in their contract,

throwing common sense out of the window.

So, I've already sent an e-mail to BT outlining all three cases.

And BT have responded saying the cases are dead, over and done with.

Well, not in my book. Time to get on the blower.

Hi, good afternoon,

my name is Dominic Littlewood, I'm calling from the BBC.

First up, Tony's confusing contracts.

Much to his surprise he was tied into a 60-month commitment period

for his line rental, when his call package was just 24 months.

When he would have taken this on board, would that have been

a telephone sales call, they normally are?

Can I request a copy of that phone call, please?

He believes he was always on a 24-month contract,

so I just need to query whether it was clear one part of it was 60 months,

and one part was 24 months.

I doubt I'll get it but it's always worth asking for a recording

to see if they can prove what was sold on the phone.

BT now say the cases are no longer dead

but they need time to investigate everything further.

Until then, there is some legislation they need to adhere to

regarding the debt collectors hounding the Wilsons and the Stennetts.

In accordance with UK law, can you call off the bailiffs now?

Because until the dispute has been resolved,

it actually becomes illegal for anybody to be pursued for money

with bailiffs or debt recovery agents.

I am dealing with a woman in the BT Press Office, which is fine,

but I also want a direct contact for customer services.

I will come to you in all cases, but just for my record,

who is the head of customer services?

OK, but obviously I will always come to you first.

OK, I'll get back in touch with you very, very soon.

And can you let me know about that conversation soon? I appreciate that.

Bye, bye.

Now, she doesn't want her voice to be recorded,

but she has basically said, these cases are not dead

and now you're involved, we will re-look at them.

I asked who's in charge? She said, "Send everything to me."

I said, "No, who is in charge?" And I got the name.

Well, now I've got that,

should I need to take things further I shall just go direct to him.

Get those names, get those numbers wherever possible.

Almost immediately after this call, I get an e-mail from BT

stating they have put the dreaded debt collectors on hold.

Which is brilliant news for the Wilsons and the Stennetts.

That's one less sleepless night and one small battle won.

But, while BT mull over my other case questions, I have asked Tony

and the Wilsons to do some research to help me build my argument.

I want the Wilsons to take a look at some online forums to see

if other BT customers suffer poor customer relations

and a service not being provided in a timely manner or at all.

"Dear BT, I am pretty appalled at the service I have received.

"The line is still not working despite the many attempts

"I have made to report the fault.

"Your operatives have hung up on me unintentionally mid-call,

"usually while transferring to another of your million departments."

That is about right!

Obviously a different complaint, but the thing about

"I should be billing you and not vice versa" rings true, doesn't it?

What the Wilsons have read are unsubstantiated claims

but it's strange that so many other customers seem to have been bitten by the same BT bug.

It is reassuring to know we are not the only ones.

So, from poor customer service to poor contracts.

In Nottingham I have got Tony looking at other companies' contract lengths.

What is a normal commitment period?

Five years seems a bit excessive to me.

I have just been on the phone with other phone providers.

The longest term of contract is two years, 24 months.

It seems BT's five-year contract was unusual.

But as we know, Tony thought he was on a two-year deal.

It was only when he tried to cancel that he found the small print bound him for five.

Contracts can be confusing and I wonder if the Great British public agree.

My research team have hit the streets to find out your views

on complex contracts and tricky terms and conditions.

I think contracts, it's not fair they're getting longer and longer.

I think 12 months maximum is all that's needed, really.

It's always going to be difficult negotiating with a big company

as to how long you should be tied into a contract for.

Pretty much, you have to take what you're given, so it's not fair.

What if you are given a document with pages and pages

of terms and conditions and small print?

If you are older, you need to get the glasses on to read the small print.

But nobody reads it, it's only afterwards you might go back

and look at the second page and you get bored witless.

It definitely needs to be made more clear.

It's like you are signing your life away. You don't know what to expect.

And she is not wrong.

While looking at BT standard contract wording,

I've spotted something worrying.

Let's see if these guys are as shocked as I am about what seems an outrageous clause

but quite a common one in contracts with big companies.

BT can change the conditions, including the charges at any time.

I suppose if they got desperate,

they could charging 500 quid for a telephone call, couldn't they?

According to that.

That's totally wrong.

I thought because they're a company that go way back...

That has really shocked me, actually.

This means they can basically charge you what ever they want at any time

and you would have no say. That is just crazy.

It is wrong. Isn't it? It is inequality, they can set the terms and conditions

and we just pretty much have to accept.

We should do something about it.

Well, you just heard the Great British public are not too pleased

about BT's great big contracts and tyrannical Ts&Cs.

It's got me thinking about the bigger issue.

More and more companies are pushing us into longer and longer contracts.

Mobile phones, phones, broadbands and even gyms.

But are they really that necessary or have we created a contract culture?

What I'm really trying to say is, do we need all of that paperwork and small print?

What do you reckon darlin', nuts or bananas?

Oh, bananas, every time.

You sure? I was thinking nuts myself.

You would, wouldn't you?

Indeed I would but, laughter aside, I want to get to the nuts and bolts of this issue.

So, we've arranged an interview with Ofcom,

the regulators for the communications industries.

Why do we even need contracts?

You would always have a contract for your phone

because that protects both parties.

It helps both sides

to know exactly what is expected of the provider

and what is expected of you.

OK, fair enough,

but what if there is a lack of clarity in the small print?

How do you know what to expect?

All key aspects, the price, length of the contract,

there are rules that say they have to be made very clear and upfront.

I would advise anybody to make sure they ask those questions.

Don't wait to be told, make sure you ask the question.

If you ask the question and you are either lied to or not told,

then your case is much stronger.

It seems BT may have not stuck to the rules.

Tony was adamant he was sold a two-year contract on the phone,

not a five-year one.

Hence why I have asked for recording of the call.

And, as we have seen Tony is not the only angry one.

My team has spoken to numerous members of the public

who are appalled by one particular clause on BT's standard contract.

Most contracts will have a term that say providers can change the terms

and they do need to be able to do that.

But there are rules which stop them from doing just what they like.

There are rules which say if they are changing a term and it's going to be likely to be of material detriment,

then they have to notify customers and give them one month's notice.

OK, but me and the people we spoke to find it ludicrous

that clause appears on BT's contract in the first place.

I don't think the caveat is good enough.

What rights do customers have within their contract

if a company like BT don't provide the service they assured?

Certainly, if you have not received what you were promised,

there has been a failure to provide the service at all,

you should be able to cancel that contract without any penalty.

Right, so essentially Tony didn't get savings,

even after his calling plan correction and the Wilsons

and the Stennetts did not get a service within an adequate timeframe.

Yet, they face big fees and charges.

How can BT get away with this?

If it is a delay, then that is slightly more difficult

because it will depend on what your contract actually said you are entitled to.

So, if the service was guaranteed to be provided on a certain date,

then maybe you would have a right to cancel.

But if it was a provisional date, it is slightly more difficult

and it would come down to how long the delay was and whether it was reasonable.

So they look at things on a case-by-case basis

but I also discovered something else.

It turns out that although the selling

and cancellation of landlines is regulated, broadband isn't as yet.

I think this should be addressed

as these contracts commit people for a very long time.

For any contract for telecoms, whether it is mobile,

landline or broadband, there is a rule which says

you cannot have a contract for more than 24 months, minimum contract period.

That explains why during Tony's research he could not find

any other companies offering contracts for longer than two years.

Good news for you consumers but not good for Tony,

because he signed his contract before this ruling came in.

I do feel Ofcom cleared a number of things up

and I feel I have a very strong case against BT.

Tony's five-year tie in wasn't clear to him and the Stennetts

and the Wilsons have been charged for services that were not received

within what I would consider a reasonable timeframe.

And I'd like to think Ofcom would agree it was unreasonable too.

It is clear, there are still some issues that are muddy.

Because the world of telecoms is so complicated,

not everything is regulated.

For me, the bottom line is,

BT should forget the crafty contracts and get some common sense.

They didn't deliver the goods,

so they shouldn't penalise their customers.

I am going to let them know what I think.

Whether you were able to go round

and sort it out or not is slightly irrelevant.

The fact is, once it was cancelled

they still got these charges for a service they never received.

More and more of you are becoming consumer savvy nowadays

and by putting your knowledge to the test,

you are getting some cracking results against the big boys.

And here is how you did it.

With some 23 million homes in the UK,

the Government rakes in around £26 billion a year in council tax.

Since 1993, we have all had to pay this tax under certain bandings,

from 'A' the lowest amount, to the highest at band 'H',

based on property valuations as of 1st April 1991.

It's the Valuation Office Agency to tell local authorities

how much you have to pay.

But what happens if you dispute the band you have been placed in?

You could find yourself having the door slammed in your face.

Meet 54-year-old, Bob West.

He's lived in his three-bed semi-detached council house

for a very long time.

I was born in 1957 and I've lived in this particular house since 1958.

That's 53 years.

When Bob and his family bought the house in 1988,

it was valued at around £25,000.

But when council tax was introduced in 1993,

Bob was given a 'B' banding for his home.

He believed it should be in the lowest bracket, 'A',

for houses worth less than £40,000.

I knew this house was not worth between 40 and £52,000.

I put an appeal in about 1993.

But fearing the Council may make him pay more instead of less,

Bob, withdrew this appeal.

However, a few years later his suspicions over his banding

were aroused once again.

I left it until about 2009, I think it was.

At that particular time there was a neighbour of mine

that called and said I have had a knock on the door from a company

that say they can get a council tax reduction for me.

I thought it was a scam at that time.

I thought somebody was just trying to make money out of it.

I didn't think no more of it.

But a few days later, after I had spoken to the lady,

I thought, I am not in the right tax band.

In September 2010, Bob decided to get the ball rolling again.

So I thought, no, I'll have a go at this.

I'll actually phone Durham valuation office up.

I suggested to them that I may have been in the wrong band,

I should have been in band A.

On 30 September, Bob received a written response.

Two or three weeks down the line,

the lady from the valuations wrote me a letter and said, no,

I'm sorry, Mr West, we've examined the facts,

we definitely think you should be in band B.

Unhappy with the valuation office's frank rejection of his claims,

Bob didn't give up, and sat down to compose his case.

Once you look at the letter properly,

there was more holes in it than an old nightshirt.

And effectively what they were trying to say to us was that my house

had gone up in value from 25,000, which was the value at the time,

to above 40,000 pounds,

which was the start limit for the band B council tax band.

When you did the maths, you could see, 26,000, to 40,000, in two

and a half years? That's 68%. And there was no way that that was right.

So, what I did was, I composed this letter

and sent it off to the valuation office, and I also asked them for

a valuer to come out to the property to have a look for themselves.

Nice move.

Bob's attention to detail in his letter obviously struck a chord,

and, a few weeks later, a valuer came round.

He did his survey, looked round, took about 10-20 minutes

and says, "I'll get back to you, Mr West."

And, after patiently waiting,

Bob's concerns over his council tax banding were finally cemented.

About three weeks later,

I was fortunate enough to get a letter saying,

"I am pleased to tell you, that you have actually gone from band B, to band A."

-His efforts had certainly paid off.

-I got a refund of £2,000.

I was quite surprised, actually, because it went back to 1993.

I was paying £170 per year less.

But, Bob wasn't quite ready to give up his fight.

He also helped some neighbours with their cases against the council

and, one by one, they were rebanded and refunded.

It was quite a substantial amount of money, and I can't thank him enough

for all the help he has given us.

We couldn't have done it without Robert's help. Not any way.

Bob is a community hero.

If you feel that you're in the wrong council tax band,

the valuation office, they're fair,

they will look at things, but you have got to push it.

If you think you're right, you have got a chance of winning.

You really have.

Her Majesty's Revenue And Customs said...

Have you noticed that nowadays,

you can't walk down the street without being taxed for something?

I am always in favour of those people who are trying

to put wrongs right, and good Samaritan Bob did just that,

not just himself, he also did it for his neighbours, too.

Good on you, Bob.

I'm taking on telecoms giant BT

for three sets of customers at their wits end.

Tony Rogers from Nottingham.

I spent hours and hours on the phone trying to resolve this problem,

but no-one helped.

Trudie and Stuart Wilson from Weston-super-Mare.

I think BT's customer service absolutely stinks.

And Michael and Annisa Stennett from Durham.

That's three cases, three complex contracts

and three lots of cancellation fees

for services and savings that never materialised.

I've been dealing with BT for three weeks.

E-mails have been going back and forth about all three cases,

and things are looking positive.

But they still haven't answered

some of the most basic questions I've put to them.

It's Dominic Westwood from the BBC. Good afternoon to you.

I want to see if they stand by their questionable customer service.

Complex contracts, and where their common sense is

when dealing with customers.

I did get your e-mail, thank you very much for that.

I just want to fine tune a few things.

This is probably one of the last times you'll be hearing from me,

you'll be pleased to hear, I'm sure.

The Stennetts.

Can you just explain to me

why they were charged a termination fee for a service they never got?

'After all, Ofcom said,

'if there's been a failure to provide the service,

'you should be able to terminate the contract without penalty.'

What I'm querying is, they tried to cancel this service

because they weren't happy for whatever reason, that's fair enough

and, whether you were able to go round and sort it out,

is slightly irrelevant.

The fact is, once it was cancelled,

they still have got these charges for a service they never received.

The charges came after it was all cancelled.

I think that's a bit unfair, don't you?

'This "computer says no" attitude doesn't bode well with me.'

'Customers are human beings and, as such, we should be treated as one.'

I think we will be going round in circles on that.

'You win some, you lose some.'

'Next, I want to know about Tony Rogers and his commitment period

'that he thought was two years, but was actually five.'

'Ofcom rules say all key aspects, including length of contract,

'have to be made very clear and upfront. And BT claim they are.'

'But I beg to differ.'

The majority, that's two years, is clear enough.

The 60-month one, you have two really look down and see.

It doesn't even say five years. And it doesn't say 60 months.

At the top section it's got period of contract,

and further down, it says 60.

It's only then, when you really study it, that you realise,

hang on a second, one package is five years, one's two years,

and I think it's very misleading of BT to do it that way.

'Ofcom thought five years was excessive,

'which is why they banned it, and as we discovered, quite often,

'terms and conditions are unclear,

'to Tony and the Great British public.'

'This is why I asked for more evidence.'

The other thing,

I did request a transcript or copy of the DVD

with the phone conversation on it.

He's very sure on the fact that he always thought

this was a two-year agreement, never a five-year one,

and I've had this sort of thing myself,

and it is how a lot of it could be said or explained at the time.

'What a shame.'

'It seems they don't have a recording of Tony's call

'and I don't think I'm going to get much more out of BT.'

'They just won't answer my awkward questions about

'their contracts and customer service.'

Bye-bye.

'A few more e-mails go back and forth between me

'and BT to thrash out the finer details.

'And in the end, we come to three decisions

'that I hope are good enough for my families.'

Time to hit the road and deliver some news.

First, a great positive outcome for the Wilsons.

"BT would like to apologise to the Wilsons for any inconvenience caused

"and will not be charging for the service they were unable to receive.

"Their outstanding balance on their account will be completely cleared."

Well, I'm absolutely shocked!

All I can do is say a massive thank you to Dom.

Michael and Annisa Stennett also came up trumps.

BT released them from their contract without charge

and apologised for any inconvenience caused.

And now, it's back up to Nottingham for one final delivery.

Now, last time I met Tony,

he was really passionate about getting out of this contract.

And I've got some news for him

which I think he's going to be more than happy to hear.

Tony? How are you doing, buddy? All right?

-Getting ready for a busy night?

-Yes, hopefully.

Right, you want to find out what's happened, don't you?

Yes I do, please.

I've been in contact with BT and it all boils down to

that 60-month contract you've got there, and the 24-month one.

-Whatever happens, you want out of this contract, don't you?

-Yes, I do.

And it's caused you a lot of distress and a lot of worry, etc.

60 month contract, tear it up.

Yep? Oh, I love this. Very good.

Right, 24-month contract. Don't tear it up.

BT have agreed to release Tony from his contract after two years -

with no penalty.

"We would also like to offer a goodwill gesture of £50."

-Are you happy?

-Yeah, yeah!

You look very happy, which is a good thing!

You're getting a bit... Aw, I like you!

Thank you!

Sorry.

Don't worry. How'd you feel?

I want to kiss you right now!

You're a very passionate man, I know that, Tony,

but that's out of the question!

I'll have a glass of vino with you, but no kissing, all right?

BT issued us with a final written statement.

They said...

I am feeling over the moon.

I am gobsmacked! Thank you!

Crikey, I was not expecting a reaction like that!

But it just goes to show, how passionate Tony was

about getting out of that contract.

And there's a lesson there for all of us.

We've got to be so careful what we are signing up for,

even if it's on the phone.

Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd