:00:00. > :00:00.Now on BBC One, Angela, Gloria and Julia are putting
:00:00. > :00:00.the consumer world to rights in their special live
:00:00. > :00:12.Thank you very much, and thanks, of course,
:00:13. > :00:16.to all of you at home for joining us on another of our special live
:00:17. > :00:20.And this morning we really have packed the programme full of tips
:00:21. > :00:23.and nuggets on the subjects you've asked us to tackle on your behalf.
:00:24. > :00:26.So whether it's your broadband speed, charges that don't make sense
:00:27. > :00:28.or businesses that haven't delivered, stand by for 45 minutes
:00:29. > :00:47.We asked you to tell us what has left you feeling ripped off and you
:00:48. > :00:50.contacted us in your thousands. We are all just numbers at the end of
:00:51. > :00:56.the day, profit is all that matters. You asked us to track down the
:00:57. > :01:00.scammers who stole your money and investigate the extra charges you
:01:01. > :01:05.say are unfair. Why can't they just give you the price it should be?
:01:06. > :01:10.They just try and charge you as much as they can. You have come to us to
:01:11. > :01:13.stop others falling into the same trap. When it comes to customer
:01:14. > :01:18.services, it is dreadful. So, whether it is a blatant rip-off or a
:01:19. > :01:22.genuine mistake, we are here to find out why you are out of pocket and
:01:23. > :01:32.what you can do about it. Your stories, your money, this is Rip Off
:01:33. > :01:34.Britain. Hello and welcome to
:01:35. > :01:36.another morning of putting And we're very much hoping you'll
:01:37. > :01:40.want to get involved - as of course you've been
:01:41. > :01:42.doing all week. We'll be catching up
:01:43. > :01:44.with more of the comments And as you'll see, our item
:01:45. > :01:48.yesterday on smart meters really Let's see which of our stories today
:01:49. > :01:56.prompts a similar response. I think you know how to get in touch
:01:57. > :02:00.by now but just in case, And we're also on Facebook -
:02:01. > :02:08.at BBC Rip Off Britain - which leads us seamlessly to a story
:02:09. > :02:10.we'll be looking If you buy something after seeing it
:02:11. > :02:16.on Facebook and it all goes wrong, does the social media site have ANY
:02:17. > :02:24.responsibility to help? I imagine we'll hear strong views
:02:25. > :02:27.on both sides of that And we'll be returning to a subject
:02:28. > :02:31.that always gets you fired up. And why you don't always get
:02:32. > :02:34.what you're promised. Plus - we sent one man
:02:35. > :02:37.and his daughter to try and make sense of the inconsistencies around
:02:38. > :02:40.child prices, after his nine-year-old daughter was charged
:02:41. > :02:42.the full adult rate for a haircut. On top of all that,
:02:43. > :02:44.singer Lesley Garrett reveals her own unpleasant
:02:45. > :02:46.brush with fraudsters. And we'll be back outside
:02:47. > :02:48.with the experts at our Personal finance expert
:02:49. > :02:55.Sarah Pennells is with us again, along with technology guru David
:02:56. > :03:01.McLelland. But first, the social
:03:02. > :03:03.media giant Facebook. Its name pops up in a fair number
:03:04. > :03:06.of the stories you send us. But could that be because sometimes
:03:07. > :03:09.we're that little bit too trusting on a site where it seems everybody
:03:10. > :03:24.wants to be your friend? In the UK, 60% of us now have a
:03:25. > :03:27.Facebook account. While that has revolutionised how we stay in touch
:03:28. > :03:34.with friends and family, perhaps inevitably, it has also opened up
:03:35. > :03:39.new ways for us to lose our cash. They know who they are, the friends
:03:40. > :03:44.who convince asked to do this, by this, and talk to him... But the
:03:45. > :03:49.site is also home to a busy marketplace, where all manner of
:03:50. > :03:52.goods and services are sold. And with the site so successful in
:03:53. > :03:56.encouraging us to treat everyone as friends, some fear we might be drawn
:03:57. > :04:01.into purchases we would otherwise approach with caution. And if things
:04:02. > :04:06.do go wrong, you may not always be as protected as you would hope. Amy
:04:07. > :04:12.spotted a Facebook page called South Shields Day Trips, which was
:04:13. > :04:15.offering excursions to families. Because she could see friends had
:04:16. > :04:22.clicked onto the site, she was keen to have a look. People had booked
:04:23. > :04:25.trip is and they all looked great. And then I saw that they were
:04:26. > :04:35.offering a deal to go to Disneyland Paris. This had been a dream for Amy
:04:36. > :04:40.and her children. And, with the reassurance that the trip was being
:04:41. > :04:43.offered by a local woman with a good track record, Amy paid ?300 for
:04:44. > :04:48.their weekend away. Probably would have been more hesitant if it was a
:04:49. > :04:54.faceless person who was hundreds of miles away. I knew from reading the
:04:55. > :04:59.post on the Facebook page that people who lived in her street had
:05:00. > :05:03.booked with her, some people went and played at her house in cash.
:05:04. > :05:07.People had her address, her mobile number, I did not really have any
:05:08. > :05:11.concerns because I saw so much good feedback. But as the day of the trip
:05:12. > :05:17.approached, all that changed. Somebody had posted on the Facebook
:05:18. > :05:20.page that I think they had tried to confirm the booking at the hotel,
:05:21. > :05:26.and the hotel had no record of the booking. When this was queried with
:05:27. > :05:30.the woman who ran the page, she was instantly reassuring. She said not
:05:31. > :05:40.to panic, she said she had the booking details and she would sort
:05:41. > :05:50.it all out. But just hours before they were due to travel, Ashleigh
:05:51. > :05:53.Turbitt declared that the trip would not be going ahead. She posted a
:05:54. > :05:57.message initially, to say that she had been conned. But in fact,
:05:58. > :06:05.Ashleigh Turbitt had pocketed the money herself. When it all came
:06:06. > :06:11.about that it was a con, that was three coach falls of Islay is that
:06:12. > :06:14.was supposed to go, all local families who could not afford to
:06:15. > :06:20.lose that money. It turned out that the dream holiday Amy had seen on
:06:21. > :06:26.Facebook had never existed. It would have been my son's first time
:06:27. > :06:31.abroad, and was a big deal. I just think, if you're going to concoct a
:06:32. > :06:35.way to con money out of people, that has ought to be one of the most
:06:36. > :06:39.wicked ways, to upset children by telling them that their dreams are
:06:40. > :06:44.going to come true. And they've been shattered. In March this year,
:06:45. > :06:48.Ashleigh Turbitt was convicted of fraud by false representation and
:06:49. > :06:53.giving a two-year suspended sentence. 151 people had booked
:06:54. > :06:58.nonexistent trips to Disneyland Paris, and there were other families
:06:59. > :07:02.who had paid for trips to different destinations. Now, Amy had paid
:07:03. > :07:06.using PayPal which does usually offer protection if a purchase goes
:07:07. > :07:10.wrong. But as so much time had passed since making the payment, she
:07:11. > :07:14.was outside the time frame in which PayPal allows you to raise a
:07:15. > :07:17.complaint which means it is unlikely that she will get her money back.
:07:18. > :07:22.Because Facebook itself does not offer any protection in this kind of
:07:23. > :07:25.situation. And while you might assume that the site has
:07:26. > :07:30.responsibility for what you see advertised there, as far as the
:07:31. > :07:34.deputy head of Action Fraud is concerned, very often, it may not be
:07:35. > :07:37.much different to buying from someone you have just met in the
:07:38. > :07:41.pub. When you are buying from social media, you're not protected at all.
:07:42. > :07:45.Essentially you have no idea who you are buying from. It's not like
:07:46. > :07:50.online shopping, where you know who the retailer is, you are directed to
:07:51. > :07:52.their websites. Because it is a local environment that you're
:07:53. > :07:55.dealing with, you're almost treating these people as a friend, and you're
:07:56. > :08:00.not doing the checks that you would normally do. But with more than a
:08:01. > :08:04.billion people using Facebook every day, should we really expect the
:08:05. > :08:10.company to take responsibility for the contracts we make through the
:08:11. > :08:14.site, if they turn out to be not what we think? In some ways,
:08:15. > :08:17.Facebook works in a similar way to classified ads, in other words,
:08:18. > :08:21.buyer beware. But we do often hear from people who tell us that they
:08:22. > :08:26.feel disappointed, or even that they have lost out as a result of
:08:27. > :08:32.responding to ads on the site. For example, shallots from Epsom was
:08:33. > :08:33.drawn to a company with a particularly strong presence on
:08:34. > :08:37.Facebook, Perfectly Precious Pearls. It offered jewellery made with
:08:38. > :08:42.high-grade saltwater. Part of the sale was a special pearl party for
:08:43. > :08:46.customers during which the pearls they had ordered were opened in a
:08:47. > :08:49.live Facebook stream. People who place orders on that day have their
:08:50. > :08:55.oysters open to live on Facebook. It was more the thrill of seeing the
:08:56. > :09:00.colour, the size and the value of it. Charlotte says it was partly
:09:01. > :09:04.this live stream that drew her in, and she ordered five items of
:09:05. > :09:11.jewellery, costing ?172. At that stage they seemed really, really
:09:12. > :09:15.genuine, I thought I was getting the pearls, really high quality, worth a
:09:16. > :09:19.lot of money, very desirable. The first order didn't turn up, but the
:09:20. > :09:24.second order, for my sister-in-law, my mother and my daughter, did
:09:25. > :09:28.arrive but with the wrong pearls and the wrong lettuces. The company
:09:29. > :09:31.offered to put things right but as Charlotte continued to check the
:09:32. > :09:36.companies Facebook page, she began to worry. I noted that a lot of bad
:09:37. > :09:40.reviews were being posted, people not receiving their jewellery, that
:09:41. > :09:45.they were genuine, and then I started to wonder what was going on.
:09:46. > :09:48.Charlotte says she tried contacting the company on numerous occasions,
:09:49. > :09:54.but didn't receive the replacement goods she was promised. Because
:09:55. > :09:58.shallots hasn't had paid using PayPal she HAS had most of her money
:09:59. > :10:02.back, but she has been left wary of responding to anything she sees on
:10:03. > :10:08.sites like Facebook again. If I see adverts on Facebook now, or
:10:09. > :10:11.generally online, I will not buy, just because of the risk you take.
:10:12. > :10:14.But adding to her frustration is the fact that the pearls she had ended
:10:15. > :10:23.up with were not actually the ones she was promised. Instead, she was
:10:24. > :10:27.sent something far less valuable, as the president of the British Pearl
:10:28. > :10:33.Association confirmed. Very low quality, in my opinion hugely
:10:34. > :10:39.overpriced, and I was expect to pay about ?2 for something like this,
:10:40. > :10:46.such a low-grade quality. Based on the peachy colour of this pearl and
:10:47. > :10:52.the lay around the pearl, I am confident that this is a freshwater
:10:53. > :10:56.pearl, not an Okoye pearl. When we got in touch with the Company, it
:10:57. > :11:03.says its supplier was responsible for providing the wrong pearls. As
:11:04. > :11:06.soon as it found out, it updated its Facebook page accordingly, it said.
:11:07. > :11:10.Although the company accepts it has experienced teething problems come
:11:11. > :11:13.it says it has been the subject of a hate campaign on social media, and
:11:14. > :11:17.the vast majority of its customers are happy. It says it has never
:11:18. > :11:21.misled customers, was transparent about issues with the supplier, and
:11:22. > :11:27.all refund requests will be processed via PayPal, as long as
:11:28. > :11:31.customers return the goods. While Facebook is not directly connected
:11:32. > :11:34.to the many businesses that you will find on it, there are many people
:11:35. > :11:38.who would say that their confidence in those businesses comes from the
:11:39. > :11:45.reassurance of having found them on such a familiar, friendly site. But
:11:46. > :11:49.some people think that is a mistake. Be very wary of what you are buying,
:11:50. > :11:55.look closely at what it is and do some market research, see what those
:11:56. > :11:58.goods look like from a genuine online shopping site. There are
:11:59. > :12:02.elements of, if it looks too good to be true, it definitely is. Good
:12:03. > :12:05.comment. Well, Facebook didn't directly
:12:06. > :12:08.comment on any of this, but referred us to its commerce
:12:09. > :12:12.policies and community standards, which it says
:12:13. > :12:14.all sellers must comply with. And it DOES have plenty
:12:15. > :12:16.of publicly available advice Our technology expert
:12:17. > :12:19.David McClelland is with us. David - not all the purchases
:12:20. > :12:22.people complain to us about were actually
:12:23. > :12:35.made ON Facebook. It is a bit like an advertisement in
:12:36. > :12:42.a newspaper, or a postcard in the newsagents, they are just telling
:12:43. > :12:45.you about it. So do they have any responsibly at allit doesn't, its
:12:46. > :12:48.role is to facilitate communication between someone who wants to sell
:12:49. > :12:52.something and someone who wants to buy that thing. Once those big
:12:53. > :12:56.people have made contact, Facebook is out of the game. So how can you
:12:57. > :12:59.check that accompany you are dealing with is genuine? Often you are not
:13:00. > :13:04.dealing with companies, you are dealing with individuals. All you
:13:05. > :13:07.have got to go on on Facebook is their profile. There are ways of
:13:08. > :13:11.looking at people's profiles on Facebook but obviously you can only
:13:12. > :13:14.see what people want to share. If somebody's profile goes back for
:13:15. > :13:19.years, you might have more of an idea that they might be genuine, but
:13:20. > :13:23.it is very difficult to tell. Said it yourself, lots of other people
:13:24. > :13:26.are talking about it, Facebook is a place where you have lots of
:13:27. > :13:29.friends, so does that mean you let your guard down a bit because you
:13:30. > :13:35.think it is a friendly site and if somebody else has said it is OK, it
:13:36. > :13:38.is bound to be? I think so. Facebook is a social network, people are
:13:39. > :13:43.sharing things, that makes it better for business for Facebook. So, we
:13:44. > :13:46.need to be careful, essentially, unless they are a friend on
:13:47. > :13:50.Facebook, they are not a friend. They may try and be your friend, but
:13:51. > :13:55.you have got to be so careful. And very briefly, how can you protect
:13:56. > :14:00.yourself? I beware, treat everything with suspicion, be very cautious.
:14:01. > :14:03.Let's catch up on some of the emails you sent
:14:04. > :14:07.You'll remember we looked at smart meters and how they may not stay
:14:08. > :14:13.But lots of you have raised other concerns with them, too.
:14:14. > :14:16.In particular, whether or not they'll work if you have solar
:14:17. > :14:20.Brian Exley, Carol Bolton and John Morris are just some
:14:21. > :14:26.of the people to tell us it doesn't seem that they do.
:14:27. > :14:30.Carol says that when the engineer who came to fit her meter saw
:14:31. > :14:36.that she had solar panels, he made clear it wouldn't work
:14:37. > :14:39.Well, we asked Smart Energy GB about this -
:14:40. > :14:42.that's the body which does all the PR for the smart
:14:43. > :14:47.It's all a little complicated, but it seems the smart meter
:14:48. > :14:49.basically will clock the energy you take from the grid,
:14:50. > :14:52.but they won't recognise the energy you put in -
:14:53. > :14:56.in other words what's generated from your solar panels.
:14:57. > :14:58.Smart Energy GB also responded to a question asked
:14:59. > :15:00.by Sheila Mayberry, among others - does a smart
:15:01. > :15:06.meter make you more vulnerable to cyber attack?
:15:07. > :15:08.The answer we're told is no, and these meters have been
:15:09. > :15:18.specifically designed to stop that happening.
:15:19. > :15:24.But we'll give the last word on this for now to Martin Leeming,
:15:25. > :15:27.who emailed with the very sensible point that smart meters
:15:28. > :15:29.are only useful if you take notice of the readings.
:15:30. > :15:32.And they're not a magic way to save money.
:15:33. > :15:35.And we had a flurry of emails when we said we'd be talking
:15:36. > :15:41.His house has been "speedchecked" as being able to receive 79
:15:42. > :15:46.But in fact, he only gets 2.7 megabits.
:15:47. > :15:54.And Gloria is with a man who won't like that at all.
:15:55. > :15:56.Yes, Pete Moorey is from the consumer
:15:57. > :15:58.organisation Which, which is campaigning
:15:59. > :16:14.To be promised 79 and only get 2.7 is pathetic and it shows that three
:16:15. > :16:19.quarters of household are doing the same thing, being promised something
:16:20. > :16:23.they are not getting. That's right and sadly that story is all too
:16:24. > :16:27.familiar. We hear from people who struggle to do some of the basic
:16:28. > :16:32.things, sending e-mails, accessing bank accounts, working from home,
:16:33. > :16:37.and even watching this show on the BBC iPlayer because they have such
:16:38. > :16:42.bad speeds. That is why we have launched our campaign because we
:16:43. > :16:47.want to fix bad broadband. Sometimes with the advertising I feel it is
:16:48. > :16:52.misleading because a lot of the ads promised the world in terms of speed
:16:53. > :16:57.but we don't get it. You might see adverts that promise is 80, 100
:16:58. > :17:01.megabits, but the rules say that only one in ten people have to get
:17:02. > :17:08.the speed promised in those adverts. So what is happening about that? Is
:17:09. > :17:13.the advertising standards agency getting involved? They are reviewing
:17:14. > :17:18.these rules and they say that new rules will come in which means that
:17:19. > :17:21.a majority of people hopefully will receive the speed promised. But we
:17:22. > :17:24.need to make sure people are able to sort out the problems they have with
:17:25. > :17:29.their broadband now and not wait for the rules to change. You have a lot
:17:30. > :17:34.of information from Which which is on your website and on ours. Before
:17:35. > :17:39.we go, a couple of good tips about how we can improve things for
:17:40. > :17:43.ourselves? Personally, check your speed, make sure you're getting the
:17:44. > :17:49.speed that they are promising to you. Secondly, look into what you
:17:50. > :17:53.can do yourself. You might need a new route, to move the route, and
:17:54. > :17:58.also go to the company to see what they can do. Maybe they can help.
:17:59. > :18:03.And finally, if they can't, you can get out of your contract. All of
:18:04. > :18:08.that information is available on our website and we want people to use it
:18:09. > :18:12.so they can fix bad broadband. It took me two months to get a new
:18:13. > :18:16.route are sorted out so it's not always easy but thank you very much.
:18:17. > :18:23.Even with these early starts, I don't feel a day over 30.
:18:24. > :18:28.I guess that makes me a proper grown-up!
:18:29. > :18:31.But for those so young they're not yet an adult,
:18:32. > :18:33.it seems some companies want the magic of childhood
:18:34. > :18:40.to end a little earlier than you might expect.
:18:41. > :18:46.Every parent knows that children can be pretty expensive so it is always
:18:47. > :18:50.a relief when you're able to pay less for a child than for an adult
:18:51. > :18:55.but when does a child become an adult? Legally it is 18 but ask a
:18:56. > :18:58.teenager and they will tell you they are there already. We took to the
:18:59. > :19:03.streets to find out what you think. I think a child becomes an adult
:19:04. > :19:10.when they are 18, legally. But maybe 16 to 18, a bit of a grey area. In
:19:11. > :19:13.this country 18 is the legal age and that is when they should be
:19:14. > :19:17.responsible and mature enough to know right from wrong. I would say
:19:18. > :19:22.about 16, when they leave senior School. But as you have been telling
:19:23. > :19:28.us, things are not always so clear cut. And different companies can
:19:29. > :19:34.have different ideas as to when those child reductions should end,
:19:35. > :19:37.as Richard discovered when he took his nine-year-old daughter Jasmine
:19:38. > :19:45.for a simple haircut at a salon they had used before. On that day we were
:19:46. > :19:52.out shopping and we decided to get her hair cut at Supercuts. The first
:19:53. > :19:57.thing the girl asked was how old she was and I said she was nine and she
:19:58. > :20:01.said she was an adult mouth. I was taken aback by that asked her to
:20:02. > :20:06.explain why that was and all could save was that it was company policy.
:20:07. > :20:10.I was not prepared to play adult prices for a nine-year-old child
:20:11. > :20:14.when she is not even double digits. Faced with paying almost doubled the
:20:15. > :20:19.price, Richard went elsewhere, but the later checked the Supercuts
:20:20. > :20:22.website which confirmed that childhood does indeed end at age
:20:23. > :20:28.eight in its view. It seems such a price hike to go from eight to nine
:20:29. > :20:34.years old and they almost double the price. I tweeted them to ask why.
:20:35. > :20:39.Even then all I got back was that it was company policy. They were not
:20:40. > :20:43.prepared to explain themselves at all. When we got in touch with
:20:44. > :20:47.Supercuts, it explained, telling is that children eight and under
:20:48. > :20:51.generally only require a trim when they visit but as they get older
:20:52. > :20:55.they can be spend more time consulting with the stylist to
:20:56. > :20:59.decide on the best cut for them. Supercuts said the whole process can
:21:00. > :21:03.take just as much time as an adult's appointment. The headers Simtek
:21:04. > :21:09.added that as a child prices are displayed clearly both online and in
:21:10. > :21:13.salons -- at the hairdresser added. We have come across confusion in the
:21:14. > :21:18.past with child pricing. In 2015 when Caroline wanted to take her
:21:19. > :21:21.newborn baby on a cruise, she was told she would have to pay the full
:21:22. > :21:27.adult fare for the child, which she considered ridiculous. Obviously
:21:28. > :21:32.they can't see the shows, they can't take part in any of the activities,
:21:33. > :21:38.so you expect that the baby would have a minimal fee. When it comes to
:21:39. > :21:42.pricing there are no rules on exact what age a child becomes an adult
:21:43. > :21:46.and there is nothing illegal about charging different amounts. But
:21:47. > :21:50.Richard is keen to get his teeth into this issue so he and Jasmine
:21:51. > :21:53.are going to compare all sorts of price policies they might come
:21:54. > :22:03.across as a family. Firstly, flights. This is British Airways.
:22:04. > :22:13.The adult price of to Alicante is ?58. Young adult is 58 pounds, child
:22:14. > :22:20.is ?58, it is all the same for a 12-year-old as it is for an adult.
:22:21. > :22:23.Is that fair? No. There are discounted seats for children on
:22:24. > :22:27.some British Airways reads like long wool but generally you are classed
:22:28. > :22:30.as a child up to the age of 11 and after that you are classed as a
:22:31. > :22:36.young adult and any reduction may be smaller. It is similar on other
:22:37. > :22:39.airlines. Ryanair, Richard found a seat for Jasmine would cost the same
:22:40. > :22:47.for an adult before taxes and fees. The same amount of money as an adult
:22:48. > :22:53.for a child is ridiculous. Again, you might find additional child
:22:54. > :22:58.discount offered by Ryanair but we wanted to know white airlines often
:22:59. > :23:03.charge the same and adults so we asked. They didn't really want to
:23:04. > :23:06.tell us. Ryanair said there are security and information reasons for
:23:07. > :23:11.the age categories. The Ellen told us that it is crucial to identify
:23:12. > :23:18.each customer at an adult, teenager, child or infant so it can ensure
:23:19. > :23:21.that no child under 16 who is travelling alone is seated in an
:23:22. > :23:26.emergency row or pays passenger duty. Head to the high street and
:23:27. > :23:32.you will find plenty more examples of how policies on child pricing can
:23:33. > :23:42.vary. We are keen to find out what the pricing policy is at different
:23:43. > :23:45.restaurants. Fancy going to Nando's? The children menu caters for those
:23:46. > :23:52.under ten. At Frankie and bennies, the kids meals are designed for 11
:23:53. > :23:56.and under. At Pizza Express they are for anybody under age ten but all of
:23:57. > :24:01.these restaurants said that these ages were a guide and anyone with a
:24:02. > :24:07.small appetite can order from the kids menus. Meanwhile, Pizza Hut
:24:08. > :24:10.advised its kids meals were only suitable for 12 and under but when
:24:11. > :24:15.we phoned some local branches we found this policy is not always set
:24:16. > :24:21.in stone. With their tummies full, it was time for a spot of
:24:22. > :24:28.entertainment. How about if we try out the cinema to see what prices
:24:29. > :24:36.they charge? Maybe go and see Beauty And The Beast. Cineworld's prices
:24:37. > :24:40.vary across the country but they were charged at 14 and under but at
:24:41. > :24:46.the Odeon child might apply only up to 12 when the chain as a separate
:24:47. > :24:50.team rate and the same is true at Vue and don't expect child tickets
:24:51. > :24:55.to be half price although he could get a bargain on special weekend
:24:56. > :24:58.family screenings. This man works for the British youth Council which
:24:59. > :25:03.has long campaigned on the issue of child pricing. We would like to call
:25:04. > :25:07.on the UK Government to get some companies around the table and
:25:08. > :25:14.really think about how we can ensure that this issue is an issue of the
:25:15. > :25:17.past. What is important for us is some kind of standardisation, it is
:25:18. > :25:22.clear that across the country this huge disparity on the age at which
:25:23. > :25:28.young people are having to pay adult prices, and we would like to see
:25:29. > :25:36.some sort of parity across the country. After a busy fact-finding
:25:37. > :25:40.day, what have our pair learnt? I get the picture we got is that it is
:25:41. > :25:44.all pretty confusing. There doesn't seem to be any set rules, it could
:25:45. > :25:50.be they decide a child is nine, ten, 14, 16. It is confusing for the
:25:51. > :25:56.consumer to know exactly if you're getting a discount or not. We are
:25:57. > :26:05.all left in the dark. What is a consumer? That's you and me,
:26:06. > :26:07.shoppers! Love I think Jasmine could be a good reporter! A consumer
:26:08. > :26:10.Reporter. Incidentally, we mentioned BA's
:26:11. > :26:13.child prices in that film. But it's worth flagging
:26:14. > :26:16.that the airline's just launched a summer offer where, on six routes,
:26:17. > :26:20.kids can fly absolutely free. We've been scouring today's papers
:26:21. > :26:27.for consumer stories and I was struck by this headline
:26:28. > :26:30.in The Times, "Air pollution in Britain worse than Mexico,
:26:31. > :26:34.global health body finds." That's a report on new figures
:26:35. > :26:40.from the World Health Organisation. Using the same data,
:26:41. > :26:43.other papers report that deaths from air pollution
:26:44. > :26:46.here are apparently 64 times more likely than in the cleanest
:26:47. > :26:55.European country, Sweden. That is an appalling figure. And you
:26:56. > :27:04.might be interested in this. And The Mirror says,
:27:05. > :27:05."Cheapie sun creams Tests by the consumer
:27:06. > :27:08.organisation Which? offered the sun protection claimed
:27:09. > :27:11.on the label. You may remember we did
:27:12. > :27:13.similar tests on our holiday series last year,
:27:14. > :27:16.so as we head into summer, remember you won't get better
:27:17. > :27:18.protection by splashing out But they don't smell as nice! That
:27:19. > :27:29.is true. Well, all week we've been
:27:30. > :27:31.tackling your problems Whenever I've been out
:27:32. > :27:34.there, it's rained. But Julia's enjoying
:27:35. > :27:39.a bit of sunshine. That is because I did my son dance
:27:40. > :27:45.last night! And over here is personal finance
:27:46. > :27:46.expert Sarah Pennells, along with Nick Fewkes,
:27:47. > :27:49.who got in touch with a problem involving
:27:50. > :27:56.the high street chain Next. He was actually buying it through a
:27:57. > :28:01.third-party company which went bust and he didn't get his kitchen and
:28:02. > :28:09.Next said nothing doing. A terrible situation. Very sad, it left that in
:28:10. > :28:14.a lot of problems. How did you go about approaching Next? I have
:28:15. > :28:17.written to them a few times to get them to accept that responsible at
:28:18. > :28:23.the what they advertised which was not what we received. What is your
:28:24. > :28:26.take? I can understand why Mick was reassured by seeing the details on
:28:27. > :28:30.the Next website, it seemed many people were, but he was buying from
:28:31. > :28:34.a separate kitchen company. My advice would be that if you think
:28:35. > :28:38.you're buying from a company do you know and trust and you start dealing
:28:39. > :28:41.with somebody else, ask some searching questions about what
:28:42. > :28:45.happens if there is a problem and where the buck stops. And where does
:28:46. > :28:49.this leave him in terms of his money? The company has stopped
:28:50. > :28:52.trading and around 1500 people are owed either a deposit or full price
:28:53. > :28:56.and the illustrated say they are unlikely to get their money back. It
:28:57. > :29:01.is worth pointing out that if they had paid the deposit or full price
:29:02. > :29:05.by credit card they would have been protected -- at the administrators.
:29:06. > :29:09.Next has made it clear it is not accountable and it did not get any
:29:10. > :29:12.commission on the sale. He was dealing with a separate company
:29:13. > :29:15.which they say both the contract and a payment went to the kitchen
:29:16. > :29:19.company and it was three months after they had stopped dealing with
:29:20. > :29:24.them. They said they understand if he had made a payment of ?3000 to
:29:25. > :29:28.accompany that arose from the ashes of the supplier, a good about his
:29:29. > :29:33.kitchen fitted. Presumably you did not fancy paying any more cash? We
:29:34. > :29:37.didn't and it was more than the original quote. I doubt that I can
:29:38. > :29:41.add a tiny ray of sunshine to this, but here goes. This is what
:29:42. > :29:48.Tabernacle is saying. It is not a complete solution -- what Next is
:29:49. > :29:51.saying. It reiterates it has no legal responsible at the end without
:29:52. > :29:56.admitting liability is offering a goodwill gesture of ?3000 which is
:29:57. > :30:00.the amount you could have paid the successor company. What do you think
:30:01. > :30:03.about that? I'm very surprised and thank you them every bit helps, we
:30:04. > :30:08.are in a difficult situation with the money we've lost so to get that
:30:09. > :30:09.much back is very nice to know. I'm glad that you came along and we were
:30:10. > :30:15.able to help out. Thank you. Well, that certainly leaves Nick
:30:16. > :30:17.in a better position And we've also heard of positive
:30:18. > :30:34.developments on some stories we've Just last week, we reported how
:30:35. > :30:41.Josie from County Down was among those caught out by Anne Ewing
:30:42. > :30:44.creasing the common scam. She received a call saying that not only
:30:45. > :30:47.did she know more than ?900 in backdated tax, but that she could
:30:48. > :30:53.face prison if she did not pay it immediately. I thought I was going
:30:54. > :30:56.to jail, I thought, what is going to happen to me here? It was
:30:57. > :31:00.terrifying, it was really terrifying. Georgie was told the
:31:01. > :31:03.quickest way to settle the debt was to pay using iTunes vouchers, which
:31:04. > :31:13.are normally used to purchase music and films online. I said to him, is
:31:14. > :31:17.this a scam? That's when he said, if I was scamming you, I would be
:31:18. > :31:21.asking for your bank details. I am trying to help you so you don't have
:31:22. > :31:25.to go to court tomorrow. But the whole thing WAS a scam. These
:31:26. > :31:30.vouchers are increasingly being used by fraudsters because they work
:31:31. > :31:33.effectively in the same way as cash. They are difficult to trace and once
:31:34. > :31:38.you have handed over the vital number on the back, you have lost
:31:39. > :31:43.your money. Josie was not the only one the fraudsters got their claws
:31:44. > :31:48.into. A hoax caller persuaded Peter from Sheffield to hand over ?500 in
:31:49. > :31:54.iTunes vouchers in order to secure a loan. I have tried to recover the
:31:55. > :31:59.?500 in vouchers that I paid them, but obviously all of my requests
:32:00. > :32:03.were denied. Making it worse was the fact that he borrowed the money to
:32:04. > :32:06.buy the vouchers from friends and family. This is really upsetting,
:32:07. > :32:20.no-one likes to see the family upsets. And... Sorry! And it has
:32:21. > :32:25.really upset me. Well, since that report went out, the company that
:32:26. > :32:28.produces iTunes vouchers, Apple, has told us about new measures it hopes
:32:29. > :32:31.will make things harder for the fraudsters. It has limited the
:32:32. > :32:35.amount of vouchers that can be bought in any one day and added a
:32:36. > :32:40.warning to the cards and packaging to make clear that they can't be
:32:41. > :32:46.used for anything other than iTunes purchases. And Apple has reiterated
:32:47. > :32:50.the advice, to ignore any calls you may get trying to get you to pay in
:32:51. > :32:55.this way, because they are simply a scam. Next, some good news on a
:32:56. > :33:00.story we featured on our Holidays series earlier this year. Harold and
:33:01. > :33:04.his partner had to cancel their crews to South Africa after she
:33:05. > :33:11.received some life-changing news from her doctor. She said, sorry,
:33:12. > :33:19.it's cancer. And I just started shaking, the tears rolled down my
:33:20. > :33:25.face and I thought... Oh, my god, I have got to tell my husband! She was
:33:26. > :33:30.advised by her doctor not to travel, so Harold set about trying to cancel
:33:31. > :33:38.the ?4200 trip with the company they had booked with, called Infiniti
:33:39. > :33:41.Cruises. But as we often hear in similar situations, the company said
:33:42. > :33:45.that in line with its terms and conditions, it was non-refundable. I
:33:46. > :33:50.could not understand why a company should behave like that, somebody
:33:51. > :33:55.with a genuine illness, and traumatic stage of their life that
:33:56. > :34:01.they are going through... But things aren't as simple as that
:34:02. > :34:04.non-refundable line might suggest. This retired barrister told us he
:34:05. > :34:09.had successfully challenged a big name on the same point, arguing that
:34:10. > :34:15.as the company had ample time to resell the holiday they had no right
:34:16. > :34:22.to hold onto his money. It smacks of profiteering, out of somebody else's
:34:23. > :34:27.personal calamity. Well, at the time we featured the story, after we made
:34:28. > :34:35.exactly those points to Infiniti Cruises, gave the couple back ?1750.
:34:36. > :34:40.And now, after Rip Off Britain contacted the company again, it has
:34:41. > :34:45.given the couple an additional ?216 to cover the cost of some of the
:34:46. > :34:49.flights they were not able to take. It told us it was happy to have
:34:50. > :34:52.refunded the money and apologised for the way the situation was
:34:53. > :34:57.handled, and added that it is contacting the couple to explain how
:34:58. > :35:02.the cancellation process works. Staying with treble, in 2014, we
:35:03. > :35:06.reported that a growing number of people travelling from the UK to
:35:07. > :35:12.Mecca for the once-in-a-lifetime Hajj pilgrimage for finding that the
:35:13. > :35:16.travel arrangements they had booked failed to materialise. It is a
:35:17. > :35:21.spiritual journey which every Muslim is expected to make if they can. But
:35:22. > :35:25.each year, hundreds of people find their trip simply doesn't happen,
:35:26. > :35:30.including a specialist eye doctor who was left thousands of pounds out
:35:31. > :35:39.of pocket. It was a disappointment, leave alone the financial
:35:40. > :35:44.indications. In January this year, the director of the company he had
:35:45. > :35:48.booked with, was jailed for 14 months for fraud. It appeared that
:35:49. > :35:52.an increasing number of the companies that have sprung up to
:35:53. > :35:59.organise Hajj trips don't end up supplying what was promised.
:36:00. > :36:01.Well, now's the time of year when bookings for most Hajj
:36:02. > :36:03.pilgrimages are made, so joining me are
:36:04. > :36:06.Rashid Mogradia from the Council of British Hajj, and David Clover
:36:07. > :36:08.from the Civil Aviation Authority, which runs the Atol
:36:09. > :36:28.It is a very special thing for people of the Muslim faith, it must
:36:29. > :36:35.make them open to fraud? Absolutely, people aspire all their lives to do
:36:36. > :36:43.the Hajj. With an economy package costing ?4500 per person and 5-star
:36:44. > :36:47.packages around 6000 or a ?7,000, it is not surprising that people will
:36:48. > :36:50.try and defraud people carrying out something which is part of their
:36:51. > :36:54.faith. And we are sometimes talking about whole family is going, so you
:36:55. > :36:57.can multiply that considerably? Absolutely, and our main advice is
:36:58. > :37:04.that people should book with Atol-protected holders, and people
:37:05. > :37:07.should have a Hajj license well. But is it not a problem that people are
:37:08. > :37:13.unhappy about making complaints about something which is a
:37:14. > :37:15.pilgrimage? There is an embarrassment within the community
:37:16. > :37:19.and we need to get beyond that. What is more surprising now is reports of
:37:20. > :37:23.intimidation and some people actually being threatened, if they
:37:24. > :37:27.were to go to law enforcement, we have got to break that taboo, we
:37:28. > :37:32.have got to encourage people to go out and report these fraudsters, who
:37:33. > :37:36.are working amongst our communities, so that the authorities can take the
:37:37. > :37:39.necessary action. And indeed, we have had a very successful case at
:37:40. > :37:44.the beginning of this year but only absolutely right. It demonstrates
:37:45. > :37:48.the severity of the situation and it sends a strong signal to the
:37:49. > :37:52.community, that this is something they should work with us on. The
:37:53. > :37:57.company involved claimed to be Atol-protected, which is that gold
:37:58. > :38:02.standard, and indeed they weren't. How can people double-check? It is
:38:03. > :38:07.very simple, the Atol has all the information you need to check
:38:08. > :38:10.whether a company is a genuine Atol holder. But in the number, the name
:38:11. > :38:15.of the company, if it rings true, though ahead, if it doesn't, don't
:38:16. > :38:20.book. So, having checked that, I suppose the advice then to make sure
:38:21. > :38:25.you don't lose your money is much the same for the Hajj pilgrimage as
:38:26. > :38:30.it is for any holiday, and that is, check how you pay for it? Yeah, and
:38:31. > :38:40.there's two ways, one is a bank transfer. Or pay by card, but the
:38:41. > :38:43.Atol protection scheme will provide financial protection in the event of
:38:44. > :38:46.that company failing, and you will not be stranded abroad as well.
:38:47. > :38:52.Unfortunately this is something which is on the increase, so you
:38:53. > :38:54.have got to get the message across? Yeah, we are working with the
:38:55. > :38:58.authorities to reinforce the message. The important message is
:38:59. > :39:02.that people should look for unlicensed companies, and pay by a
:39:03. > :39:08.card so that they are getting protection from that. On our
:39:09. > :39:11.website, the Council of British Hajj, you can get information. As
:39:12. > :39:13.well as going to the Atol website as well. Thank you both of you very
:39:14. > :39:18.much indeed. Now, all week some well-known faces
:39:19. > :39:23.have been spilling the beans And today it's a good friend
:39:24. > :39:34.of mine revealing a really She's one of Britain's best-known
:39:35. > :39:41.female sopranos, winning critical acclaim and an army of firms. Lesley
:39:42. > :39:46.Garrett has appeared in Opera, musical theatre, concerts and on
:39:47. > :39:50.television. And she's a familiar face on BBC Proms, as well as songs
:39:51. > :39:55.of praise. But can she hit the right notes when it comes to all things
:39:56. > :40:00.consumer? As a consumer, would you rate yourself? I think I am pretty
:40:01. > :40:06.poor, actually. I think your programme, Rip Off Britain, was made
:40:07. > :40:09.for me, because I am so easily ripped off, I am so trusting of what
:40:10. > :40:15.people are trying to sell me. Have you ever been ripped off? Quit a few
:40:16. > :40:19.years ago, our debit card was cloned and our account was completely
:40:20. > :40:24.emptied, and so was our overdraft facility that we had never touched.
:40:25. > :40:30.We lost about ?25,000. We got it back. But I think we have just got
:40:31. > :40:34.to be very aware now that these things might happen. Again, it
:40:35. > :40:40.didn't occur to me that that could happen. I am much more will now
:40:41. > :40:46.about keeping sight of my debit card or credit card, much more careful
:40:47. > :40:53.about not letting people see my pin number. There are sharks out there,
:40:54. > :40:56.that is the point, and you ought to protect yourself? Yes, I think it is
:40:57. > :41:01.important for all of us to protect ourselves from our scrupulous
:41:02. > :41:06.people. And I do try, I am trying to be a bit more streetwise. If things
:41:07. > :41:10.are not quite right, are you a good complain? I have to be very polite
:41:11. > :41:15.if I complain face-to-face. I have to say, I'm sorry to have to ask
:41:16. > :41:19.this, but I am just wondering how you arrived at that figure, could
:41:20. > :41:23.you just break that down for me? I make it a constructive thing, I'm
:41:24. > :41:28.sure you don't realise this, but... But I do think we are put off
:41:29. > :41:32.complaining, certainly by telephone, because as we all know, if you want
:41:33. > :41:35.to get through to talk to somebody, it is all most impossible. You have
:41:36. > :41:41.to press various buttons and wait for hours. But I have written the
:41:42. > :41:45.odd complaining e-mail. I am much more assertive in that situation.
:41:46. > :41:51.Did it bear fruit? Alan in fact I think I might complain more often!
:41:52. > :41:53.Sohaib Maqsood me a new, assertive goal coming up! She always says it
:41:54. > :41:56.with a smile! Sarah Pennells and David McClelland
:41:57. > :42:06.are here to answer This one says, once you have bought
:42:07. > :42:09.an appliance like washing between or a freezer, is it good to get
:42:10. > :42:17.additional insurance, once the initial guarantee has expired? Now,
:42:18. > :42:21.this is often called an extended warranty, a few years ago, they were
:42:22. > :42:25.very expensive and often mis-sold. Personally I think it is more
:42:26. > :42:28.important to buy a reliable brand in the first place, and I would also
:42:29. > :42:32.buy from a retailer which takes customer service seriously. Having
:42:33. > :42:35.said that, if you want to buy one of these policies, shop around, because
:42:36. > :42:38.there is quite big difference in price. You do not have to buy them
:42:39. > :42:44.the retailer you by the appliance from. There is also a difference in
:42:45. > :42:48.what the policy might cover. Yes or no, in the end? Personally I would
:42:49. > :42:55.go more on the brand, than buying such a policy. And David, a howl of
:42:56. > :42:59.pain, this one, he says, I received scam letters from all over the world
:43:00. > :43:03.in my post, how can I stop this? I guess first of all, the mail
:43:04. > :43:07.preference service which only works with companies which adhere to those
:43:08. > :43:10.rules. But also, to try to stop it in the first place, be careful where
:43:11. > :43:13.you leave your address, be careful which forms you fill in online,
:43:14. > :43:17.because those details can go anywhere just people might even
:43:18. > :43:22.start sending out physical mail to you from anywhere in the world, so
:43:23. > :43:25.watch out where you give your address in the first place. And lots
:43:26. > :43:32.of people have sent us comments about the child pricing item that we
:43:33. > :43:35.had, saying that on and a craft or in a cinema, a child takes up
:43:36. > :43:39.exactly the same space, so why shouldn't they pay the same amount?
:43:40. > :43:43.And also, on broadband, this person has said, he is not even getting 1
:43:44. > :43:49.megabit per second, which he says is a disgrace! And Charlotte says she
:43:50. > :43:53.would like her broadband company to send out an engineer. Anything you
:43:54. > :43:55.can add to this? There are any number of reasons why you might not
:43:56. > :43:59.be getting the speed which you paid for, but get in touch with your
:44:00. > :44:04.broadband provider and put the onus on them to try to fix it, maybe a
:44:05. > :44:07.new route IS the solution. But you need to tell them that you've got a
:44:08. > :44:10.problem in the first place. We have to stop it there.
:44:11. > :44:14.We'll be back tomorrow for what - all too soon -
:44:15. > :44:19.We'll reveal the vital consumer resource under threat
:44:20. > :44:23.and why some say that puts millions of us at risk.
:44:24. > :44:25.We'll also take a look at examples of all-too
:44:26. > :44:27.convincing fake ID and unravel why some
:44:28. > :44:33.airlines seem so keen on overbooking their flights.