Episode 16 Rip Off Britain

We asked you to tell us who's left you feeling ripped off...

I think this is very, very, very wrong for what they have done.

The bank passed charges, upon charges, upon charges...

Legally, it was right.

Morally, that's where the question and doubt comes in my view.

..and you contacted us in your thousands.

By post, e-mail, even stopping us in the streets,

and the message couldn't be clearer...

You don't get a straight answer, they' just fob you off.

-I'm not happy with them at all.

-There's always that very small print

with the clause in that you didn't realise.

We are being ripped off big time.

Whether it's a deliberate Rip-Off,

a simple mistake or a catch in the small print.

We'll find out why you're out of pocket

and indeed, what you can do about it.

Keep asking the questions, go to the top if you have to.

We do get results, I mean, that's the interesting thing.

Your stories, your money. This is Rip-Off Britain.

Hello and welcome to Rip-Off Britain,

the programme that looks into your consumer complaints

to discover whether or not you've been ripped off.

We're here to tackle the issues you've asked us to investigate on your behalf

and get your problems sorted out if we can.

Today, we're looking into the extra charges and expenses

that you can find yourself saddled with if you own a home.

Believe it or not, but there are 25 million homes in the UK

of which seven out of ten are owner-occupied.

With such large numbers, it's not surprising

so many of you have contacted us

with absolute horror stories about things that have gone wrong,

and indeed, the difficulties you've had in getting them resolved.

One case we will hear about

-has rumbled on for an unbelievable six years.

-Crikey!

I know. We're on an absolute mission to speed things up.

Also coming up on today's show -

the things you wouldn't want a home survey to miss.

What can happen when it doesn't investigate every nook and cranny.

We moved this floor board

and under here we revealed literally thousands and thousands of rat droppings

and a couple of dead rodents.

Plus, how we gave hundreds of you expert advice face-to-face

at the Rip-Off Britain pop-up shop.

You shouldn't have to take this to the ombudsman service,

but do persevere because it's free

and I do think you'll get your money back.

Buying a house is probably one of the most stressful things you can do,

and as it's also the single most expensive purchase you'll ever make,

it's vital to get things right.

A crucial piece of information when deciding whether or not to buy is the survey.

You hope it' will pick up anything about the house that's not quite right,

but there's a choice of surveys you can get

and they may not always turn up everything you would expect.

Like whether your potential home is already occupied.

Meet Sally and Tim Rogers and their children,

two-year-old Evie and ten-month-old Pip.

This is their dream family home -

a three-bedroomed Victorian mid-terrace which they bought back in 2010.

It was really the only house that we've ever fell in love with,

when we walked through the front door,

so we both walked out and went, "Yes, I think so."

And the timing couldn't have been more perfect

with the completion date falling one month before baby Pip was due to be born.

So, here we are on Friday 13th!

-First time in.

-'It was all coming together.'

We were going to get everything out for the new baby,

everything was sorted at last, it was great.

-Evie! Hello.

-'Before buying, they'd done the sensible thing'

and decided to get a survey carried out on the house.

When we got the documents through about the survey,

we thought quite long and hard about what kind to go for.

It wasn't a rush decision.

We were trying to decide between the homebuyer's

and the building survey, which is a structural survey.

We took the decision to pay £600 for the homebuyer's survey,

believing it would pick up anything majorly wrong.

The survey didn't throw up any big problems

and keen to get into the house before the baby was born,

they went ahead with the purchase.

I like what they've done with the curtain pole - it's beautiful!

Let's hope that Friday 13th is NOT an omen.

But those words came back to haunt Tim

when Sally noticed something.

I started to feel just slightly uneasy and it was almost like...

..I just had that feeling that something wasn't quite right.

There was a strange smell.

Nice bit of mould down the back of the fridge.

-Lovely.

-Any droppings?

-I'm sure there are, yes.

-Yeah, there are.

Behind where the fridge had been, there where rat droppings.

Underneath the sink, where the dishwasher had been,

there was what looked like an old bait trap and some droppings.

Then after about ten minutes, we realised there had been a problem,

even just in the kitchen area, we hadn't even been upstairs.

They contacted a local pest controller, Sean Whelan.

When I first walked into the property,

immediately I could smell dead rodents and droppings

and definitely an odour of rodent activity.

We then came over and moved this floor board here,

which exposed dead rodents, loads of flies

and also thousands of droppings.

It was very clear that there was a major infestation right from the word go.

To have had the keys the day before and then for him to come in and say

that we had quite a big problem with rodents was a big shock and very disappointing.

The next area visited was this floor here

and straightaway, we moved this floor board

and under here we revealed

literally thousands and thousands of rat droppings

and again a couple of dead rodents.

The rat infestation in this property

has to have been one of the worst I've ever seen.

The infestation was actually significant enough

that we made the decision not to live here.

I mean, Evie was not even two

and I was eight months pregnant with our second baby.

So, I just said, "I'm not happy to bring my children

"into this environment."

If this jeopardises this pregnancy at this stage,

I couldn't live with that outcome. It just wasn't an option.

So, instead of moving into their new house

in time for the arrival of their second child,

they ended up renting somewhere else.

We eventually moved into the house three months after we'd bought it

and in the meantime it had cost us extra storage, rent.

Treating the rats had actually cost us nearly £6,000.

Now, you may be thinking,

"Hang on, they had a survey done," and they did,

but you need to be careful when it comes to surveys.

They don't always do what you think.

In fact, there are three very different types of survey

with the most basic valuation costing between £100 and £300.

The first one is not a survey at all it's the mortgage valuation,

commissioned by the mortgage company

and basically trying to work out what the market value of the property is.

The second one is a homebuyer's survey which is much more detailed

and much more structured, but again has its limitations

because it depends on what the surveyor can see on any particular day.

Then the third one is a building survey,

which is much more detailed and may involve opening stuff up,

looking more closely at potential defects and so on.

That more thorough survey probably would have uncovered the rat infestation,

but it would have cost more - up to £1,000.

Tim and Sally had gone for the middle homebuyer option at £600,

but with that one, surveyors don't move heavy furniture or carpets

to examine the property in detail.

For that reason, when Sally and Tim complained to the Ombudsman

that the company doing the survey was at fault,

their appeal was rejected.

All of which has left them wondering whether they made the right choice

and if next time around, they'd choose something different.

I'd either go for no survey whatsoever and just assume

the mortgage valuation was all right and just play it by ear,

or pay top notch for a full structural building survey.

I'd just recommend to people looking to buy properties

just to put in the back of their mind

that there could be a problem there.

Just one in five homebuyers currently gets a building or condition report

according to the Residential Property Surveyors Association.

That's a quite shocking statistic.

The rest rely on just the valuation, which may not be enough.

As we've seen, a survey isn't always exhaustive,

but failing to get one could set you up for thousands of pounds worth of unexpected repairs.

So, do consider it very carefully

and when making such a big investment,

get as much information as you can.

At a time when money is tighter than ever,

you need to know that your cash is working hard for you.

Avoiding Rip-Offs and sharp practice along the way.

We've put together a booklet of tips and advice

to help safeguard your hard-earned money.

You can find the link to the free guide on our website.

Or, if you want to receive a copy in the post,

send an A5 self-addressed envelope

to the address we'll give you right at the end of the programme.

Now, we don't just take out insurance for buildings, of course.

We also buy cover for treasured belongings

so that we're safe in the knowledge

that if they're lost, we can replace them,

but that's not always straightforward either.

It seems that an increasing number of insurers have their own view

on what replacement actually means,

not to mention where and how you can buy it.

As this couple discovered after losing something that couldn't have been more precious.

There's lots to think about when you're getting ready to jet off somewhere.

Keeping an eye on your baggage, checking your passport three times, listening for announcements.

It's very easy for things to go wrong.

We were going to Italy last September

and when we arrived at Gatwick Airport,

I had actually had an infection in my ring finger, sadly.

So, I actually had my wedding ring on the outside of this bone

and my engagement ring on this finger.

We met absolute chaos in the check-in at Gatwick

and my ring must have come off.

Engagement ring was still there but wedding ring had gone.

With the flight due to leave

and Liz's wedding ring nowhere to be found,

Tony and Liz were left with a difficult choice.

Well, panic set in of course and...

I got a sick feeling as it would be when something like that happens.

Added to that, of course, we were also having to rush for our flight

so we had to make a decision -

are we going to go for the flight or do something about the ring?

We didn't want to have to miss the flight

in order to try and look for the ring or just even report it missing.

With just enough time to report the loss to the airport,

they got on the plane and tried to enjoy their trip,

but Liz was gutted to have lost the precious wedding ring

that she'd been wearing for 36 years.

Having an engagement ring, but no wedding ring was just weird,

that's the only way I can describe it.

Yes, it's faded slightly, but look at those hats.

Tony and Liz were married in Edinburgh in 1975.

Tony had bought the ring from a small jeweller's

for the princely sum of £65.

On their arrival back to the UK,

Tony couldn't bear the thought of Liz not having a wedding ring

and immediately went out to buy a replacement.

We went to a local jewellers, we wanted to have a look and see what was on offer.

It's a well-known jeweller around here and they gave us good advice

and we found a ring that suited Liz.

It was £295.

Tony then put a claim in with his insurance company

letting them know that they had already purchased another ring.

We didn't expect there to be any problem at all with the insurance

because our previous experience with the same insurer over 35 years -

we'd made one buildings claim and one contents claim

and it was just a case of, "Well, you tell us what you've lost

"and you provide some proof and we'll pay out."

We assumed it would be the same process again,

we'd be talking about a cash settlement.

But the insurance company had other ideas.

They offered Tony vouchers for a jewellery store chain to the value of £220.

That was the value of his claim for the new ring

which was £295, minus his excess,

but because Tony had already bought a replacement ring,

he didn't want vouchers

and he asked for a cash settlement instead.

We thought the settlement was mean

and that what was the point of giving us a voucher

when we had already bought a ring.

To make matters worse, Tony had had the original wedding ring valued

using his wedding photos as evidence.

He was told that his original £65 ring

would now be worth over £600 at today's prices.

So he went back to his insurers again.

The insurance company said, "We can provide something closely matching that for £430."

Fair enough, but then they said,

"However, as you want a cash settlement,

"we're only going to give you £196."

Insurance companies often prefer to pay out in vouchers rather than cash.

It's all there in the small print and it can be better value,

because they can negotiate discounts with preferred suppliers,

but Tony and Liz aren't the only people who have told us that

they find that frustrating and they'd much rather have the cash.

For Tony, the final straw came

when he received his updated insurance premium.

The final insult, as far as I was concerned, because I'm interested in the money side of it,

was that they said we are going to increase your premiums

by £61 a year with immediate effect,

which meant that, when you do the maths you'll see,

that we were going to repay in full the paltry cash settlement

over a three-and-a-half-year period.

Tony gets his insurance through his bank who told Rip-Off Britain

that, in fact, vouchers can often be worth more to customers than cash.

They insist they have acted in Tony's best interests throughout

and advised that to avoid a similar situation,

you should always contact your insurer

before buying replacement goods,

as the retail price can be much higher than they can get from their suppliers.

But Tony and Liz don't agree, as far as they're concerned,

whether they took cash or vouchers,

they felt they were being offered less than the original ring was worth.

We decided the best way to do it was to just take the cash settlement

and walk away from the insurance company after 35 years.

An emotional journey for Tony and Liz

and one I'm sure they don't want to repeat,

but to avoid the same sort of pitfalls

James Daley from Which? has advice on how to get the best results

when you're claiming through your insurance.

If you need to make a claim, contact your insurer as soon as possible,

don't put it off, don't leave it.

Next up, don't buy any of the products yourself, until you've talked to your insurer

and you've gone through their processes

because they might not pay out if you make a purchase before you've contacted them.

Finally, make sure you gather all your receipts and documentation together

so you've got as much evidence as possible

about how much you've spend on items that you need to replace.

When you come to make a claim

you might find that you get paid out in vouchers,

but it's important to remember that you don't have to accept that.

If your insurer has promised to make a like-for-like replacement

for any items that have been damaged

and you can't replace them at the store they've given you vouchers for then it's your right to reject that

and ask them to come back with a better offer.

If you're not happy with an offer made by your insurer

and you can't get them to improve it

then make sure you make a formal complaint to them in writing.

if they promised to replace your items like-for-like

and they haven't done that, then they are contractually obliged to do so.

If you don't get the response you want from the complaint

then take it on to the Financial Ombudsman service, that's an independent free service

and there's a very high chance that your complaint will be upheld

and you will get is that payment out in full as you expected.

Still to come on Rip-Off Britain,

we asked you to tell us how you feel you been ripped off

and we've been inundated with your stories.

We'll hear more of your home and property disasters.

We could've saved pounds and pounds and pounds on our electricity

just from waiting for those panels to be fitted.

Plus, we and our experts met some of you face-to-face

to try to sort out the things that are bothering you.

Now, if you own property, then, unless you're very, very lucky,

it's probably going to be your greatest asset

and if you need to access the equity in the bricks and mortar

borrowing money against it can be one of the cheapest options,

but many of the people who signed up to one particular way of doing that

now bitterly regret it

because the loan they took out has had a very costly sting in the tail.

Roger Westley prides himself on being really good with his finances.

It's a family trait picked up from Ted, his late father.

He was very careful with his money,

he used to come down to Devon on holiday

with a fiver in his pocket, he used to tell me.

We're talking shoestring stuff, really, but he survived and he did well, he got on with his job

and life improved from thereon, but he was a great dad.

Originally from Devon,

Ted and his wife Mary had decided to move the family back there

when Roger was a teenager.

And when they'd retired in 1978

they bought this bungalow a few miles from Dartmoor.

There's another shot of the bungalow from the road.

20 years later, when they needed some money,

they made the fateful decision to borrow £15,000 against their home.

The loan was used for mainly double glazing

and then, of course, they were getting older

and the bath had to go and a shower unit was put in with all the grab rails

and all the paraphernalia that comes with getting older.

The remainder of the money was put away for a rainy day.

Ted's bank Barclays had offered him two types of loan,

a regular secured loan, which he'd pay interest on every month

or what's called a shared appreciation loan,

which would have no monthly repayments.

That seemed like a very attractive product for retired Ted.

-Good morning, Karen, how are you?

-Good morning...

Solicitor Hilary Messer explains how they work.

A shared appreciation mortgage is an arrangement where a homeowner

can borrow up to 25% of the value of their home

and when they come to repay that borrowing

they also have to pay up to 75% of the increase in value of their home

as well as the original loan,

but the loan itself is on a 0% fixed interest rate.

So, no payments at the time,

but a share in any increase in their home's value later on.

Now, to Ted, whose bungalow was mortgage free and worth £62,000,

it sounded perfect.

On the advice of the bank he also ran it past a solicitor,

as well as his only son Roger.

He showed me the detail, er, he showed me what he'd done

and how he'd run it by his own personal solicitor

and on paper, to me, it looked OK.

It meant they'd be in the property until the end

and then the deal would be done with Barclays and the money repaid.

Ted passed away in 2005 and when Mary died last year

Roger inherited their bungalow, but thanks to the property boom of the late 90s

its value had increased more than expected.

So, when he sold it for £175,000

he wondered how much of that would go to Barclays.

My expectation was, at the end of the mortgage

and the house being sold to clear it,

I thought, "£15,000, 10 or 11 years,

"probably somewhere in the region of 50,000 or £60,000 to pay back,

"including the initial 15,000."

But Roger was in for a very nasty shock.

Barclays told him he'd have to pay them £82,000.

Now, that's a whopping 72% of the increase in their home's value

and on top of that he also had to pay the initial £15,000,

which his parents had borrowed.

So, all in all, £97,000.

I'm going, "Excuse me?!

"My father borrowed 15,000 and you want 97 plus back?!"

"Yes, it's all legal, that's it, done and dusted.

"Your father got it checked out, yes, it's fine, he signed, yes, it's a deal, contract."

They were right, the details were there in black-and-white on the paperwork,

Ted had signed and they'd been approved by his solicitor,

but Roger doesn't think his father fully understood the product

or indeed its risks.

He was 80 when he signed up for this deal,

I couldn't understand the formula when I looked at it, that they used,

the formula for calculating the repayment.

The problems associated with the product

come as a result of the almost exponential rise in property prices

and when people come to repay their loan,

because they are paying back a share of the appreciation,

they end up with, normally, less than half the value of their home

and so, essentially, they can't re-house themselves.

The typical cost of a home loan these days works out at between four and eight percent,

but Roger has paid a staggering 540%.

Thousands of other homeowners who took out this type of loan

could actually be in the same position or worse,

trapped in properties they can't afford to sell.

Furious at what he's lost,

Roger tried and failed to get the money back.

Barclays, who basically told us,

"Talk to the solicitor who authorised it with your dad," you know?

They are relinquishing all responsibility

and think it's all fine.

I mean, legally it was right, morally,

that's where the question and doubt comes, in my view.

We spoke to Barclays...

who said that shared appreciation mortgages

was sold for just three months back in 1998

and that safeguards were built in

to ensure customers understood what they were buying.

For example, the insistence on taking legal advice.

The bank was comfortable that it did everything it could

to make things clear at the time,

but say that no-one could have predicted

the unprecedented rise in house prices over the next ten years

and they point out, if prices had gone the other way

customers would've ended up only repaying the original loan.

But Roger believes that Ted,

who'd banked with Barclays all his adult life,

would never have taken out the loan

if he'd known how much it would end up costing.

So, at the end of the day, yes, I have an inheritance.

It's a lot less than we all anticipated

and sadly I've been unable to provide, at this time,

for my children and grandson as I had wished

and also as my late parents had wished because that was in their thoughts,

that they wanted to provide for us all.

You know, so many of you contacted us with all your gripes and your confusions

that we decided to open, on Rip-Off Britain, our own pop-up shop,

here at the Trafford Centre in Manchester.

We've teamed up with BBC learning,

who have set up an interactive maths area.

Maths buskers, as we call them, are entertaining the crowds.

There are demonstrations on the Skillswise website.

And people of all ages are finding out about ways they can gain confidence with their maths

to help avoid those Rip-Offs.

Brenda and her partner Brian have come to speak to James Daley

who is the money editor of Which? magazine,

about a problem they've had with their insurance.

Let's start at the very beginning then, it's a very good place to start.

Booked a holiday at the beginning of the year, to travel to Morocco in May,

erm, and then in March I was diagnosed with breast cancer

so I had to cancel the holiday.

I'd bought travel insurance, as I always do,

and have never claimed before,

and when I put in my claim they said I hadn't paid an extra premium

to be covered by breast cancer so they didn't pay me back for the holiday.

And you said, I didn't have breast cancer when I booked a holiday.

Exactly, I said, you know, I declared all that I had, which was nothing, on my original premium.

So, what did they say, then, when you pointed out that

when you booked the holiday you did not have breast cancer?

The insurance company had said,

"Why didn't you cancel right at the beginning?

"You should have told us the minute you get the diagnosis,"

whereas the last thing you're thinking of is your holiday terms and conditions.

I can't believe that insurance companies,

when you could have medical advice or medical letters to say,

"She didn't know she had cancer when she booked this holiday," why they wouldn't accept that?

Well, sadly, the financial services industry

has a habit of trying to protect its profits

and always putting the customer at the bottom of the pile.

You're one of the millions of people who end up having to fight that.

You shouldn't have to take this to the Ombudsman,

but persevere because it's free and I think you'll get your money back.

So, what would be your advice generally?

It sounds so cliched, but it really is true,

you've got to read all that small print in there before you buy it. However, something like this,

-I think you're in the right, that's the bottom line...

-As we say in the programme, be a terrier,

just keep on going because, you know, it's very easy to be fobbed off.

We're delighted that you're one of the survivors of breast cancer,

we're very thrilled for you and you deserve a good holiday.

So, we wish you well and sorry you've had all the angst!

I'm sure you'll all be delighted to know that with the help she received from the Rip-Off Britain team,

that perseverance paid off,

Brenda has received the full £240 back from her insurance company.

Now, another way to shave a bit of the cost of energy

is simply to create your own.

More than 30,000 people are now thought to have looked to the skies for salvation

and installed solar panels on their roof,

but some of those people, like Arthur and Maureen Clark,

have found there are a few companies out there

who seem to be making heavy weather of the job.

Catching a few sunrays makes great sense to the Clarks.

Like more than 64,000 other homeowners so far this year,

they thought they'd save some cash

and help save the planet as well

by installing solar PV panels on their roof.

But as you might spotted, there's nothing up there but tiles.

A couple of years ago I decided to put solar panels on the roof of my bungalow

because the roof does actually face south and it would receive a large amount of light.

I got a quote for a job and it was £14,000,

which I'm not going to get paid back inside my lifetime,

however much free electricity I have.

So, when I saw this offer in the local advertiser

to pay £500 and they would completely cover my bungalow in solar panels,

if my bungalow was suitable, I jumped at it.

The scheme on offer from a company called Energy Saving Group

was one where Arthur wouldn't have to actually buy the panels himself.

Some companies now offer to fit their panels for free

or, as in this case, for a small fee

on the proviso that they can sell energy generated by the panels back to the grid.

Essentially, they rent the roof space from the homeowner

who in return benefits from some free or cheap electricity during daylight hours.

My wife and I, we're both retired now,

and we spend most of our time in the house

so we do use a lot of electricity

and we thought this would be a way of not only combining our recycling

and trying to do our little bit environment with saving some energy.

Looking forward to receiving some free electricity,

Arthur called the Energy Saving Group who sent someone round to assess his property.

The surveyor measured my house,

looked at the construction of the roof,

said yes it was eminently suitable,

and took my cheque for £500 and left.

Looking carefully at the paperwork, it's clear that Energy Saving Group

wouldn't actually be the company installing the panels.

In fact, all they would do is get in touch with another company,

-My Energy Station,

-which also trades as Norton Energy.

That company would do its own survey

and fit the panels if the house was suitable,

a service they'd provide direct to the customer for free.

Suddenly Arthur's £500 fee didn't seem such good value.

I'm quite annoyed that my £500 really didn't go towards the installation whatsoever.

The work that the survey did was no more than I could've done and sent them the details.

But while after questions the relationship between the companies,

his main beef is that he hasn't got what he was promised.

The paperwork set out a suggested timeframe of around two months,

but after four months he's heard nothing.

Yeah, I was beginning to panic and so I phoned them up

and they said, "Yes, we'll get onto it straightaway,"

and again nothing happened.

I phoned them then a further three times

and again was reassured every time that something would happen.

And you get 28 panels on there, which gives 3.8 kilowatts...

Eventually, My Energy Station, the actual installers,

did send someone round to do a more technical survey.

After that second visit I was more assured

and I thought that things would start to happen, but they didn't.

Installed between two and six weeks.

Arthur parted with his cash back in January,

but 11 months later he's still waiting for their panels to be installed.

I was getting frustrated to say the least

because nothing had happened, I'd phoned, and phoned, and phoned.

Trading standards say there are others like Arthur

who feel they have been kept in the dark by the Energy Saving Group.

They have dealt with lots of complaints from people who are still

waiting for their panels to be fitted, or indeed for a refund.

This company appears to be acting in the role of a type of broker.

They're arranging for the survey to be done for you

and then they're arranging for a separate company

to come and put the panels in,

but they cannot offset their responsibility to the installers.

They were given the money

and they are on the other side of the contract from the householder,

so therefore the householder is entitled to either the service to be carried out promptly

or to get their refund of the full amount of £500.

Oh, hello, this is Arthur Clark.

Arthur is now so fed up with how he's been treated by the Energy Saving Group

he's just not prepared to wait any longer and he wants money back.

I've sent you a number of e-mails, a number of phone calls

and nothing's happened.

We asked the Energy Saving Group to explain what has gone on,

so far they haven't responded...

but we also contacted the installers, My Energy Station,

who claim they had no idea that the Energy Saving Group was charging people to be referred to them.

They say they've never received any money for this,

have now terminated the relationship and are considering legal action.

They say they totally disapprove of charging for free solar

and would never do it themselves.

They also told us that their own survey suggested

that Arthur's house was not right for their solar panels,

but it's a shame that neither company passed that message on to Arthur.

Now thoroughly sick of wondering if he'll ever get his solar panels,

Arthur has now had them installed by another company entirely,

but he still waiting for his £500 refund from the Energy Saving Group

and even if he does get that money back for a rainy day

he's furious about all the sunny days that he's missed.

We've just wasted a whole summer full of sunlight,

where we could've saved pounds, and pounds, and pounds on our electricity

just from waiting for those panels to be fitted.

Having buildings insurance is considered to be an essential if you're a homeowner.

It means that it'll give you peace of mind if the worst happens

and, for instance the houses flooded or the roof blows off,

but complaints to the Ombudsman about this kind of insurance

have nearly doubled in the last five years

and after stories like this next one I think you'll be able to see why.

This Victorian property in London has been standing on this plot of land for 136 years.

Lola, Jasmine, Claudia and Marcus

have lived in a flat here since 2005.

I discovered the place because we were looking at houses

and we wanted quite big bedrooms

and then we opted for an old Victorian flat with high ceilings

and the bedrooms are quite big.

But just a few months after they moved in,

they noticed a puddle of water forming outside the front door.

We called some plumbers round to inspect the problem

and they said they thought it was a bit more than just a puddle

and it could be caused by broken pipes.

The council came and took a CCTV, going into the pipes,

and when we saw the video back there was clearly a brick from the stairs,

you could see where the stairs had come down

and had fallen onto the pipe and broken the pipe.

The report from the survey concluded that the damage to the drain

was caused by subsidence to the property,

but as the couple, along with owners of the building's other flats,

had insurance cover for subsidence underwritten by Lloyd's of London,

they thought they'd be OK.

Of course we called our insurance company

and our lovely loss adjuster showed up

and he said we would have to pay for it

and he could see that it was because of our negligence that the pipe was broken

and had nothing to do with accidental or subsidence.

The residents were surprised at that,

but paid £3,500 to have the drain repaired

hoping that that would be the end of it.

Unfortunately, the following year, 2006,

Marcus and Claudia noticed that huge cracks were beginning to appear in the back bedroom of their flat.

Again they called their insurance company

who sent out the same loss adjuster who had dismissed the claim for the broken drain.

He looked around and said that he didn't see any subsidence

and it was fairly obvious to us it was subsidence,

but he said we would have to prove it.

Frustrated that it was them that had to pay,

but keen to get the problem resolved,

Marcus and Claudia paid over £2,000 for tests.

These concluded that the damage WAS caused by subsidence

so the residents put in another claim to their insurers,

who offered £57,000 to repair the damage,

but only to the back of the house,

so any problems at the front wouldn't be fixed.

We thought it would be a bit crazy to accept this offer.

We had a consultant, what they call a loss assessor,

and we also had an engineer

who both said that we should not take the offer

because it would not cover the entire problem.

So, in the four years since then

the residents and the insurance company have been at loggerheads.

Lloyd's of London, who have been handling the case,

accept that the damage to the back of the house is subsidence,

but they refused to carry out, or pay for tests, on the remainder of the property,

which is also showing signs of cracking.

Hello, Lola. The door...

..hardly shuts

and we've got cracks all around that, as usual, the same.

Worn down by such a lengthy stand-off,

the residents took their case to the Financial Ombudsman Service

who agreed with them.

They said the insurers could not put a final figure on repairing the house without further testing,

but as the ruling was informal

it couldn't force the company into action

and the insurers would just were not moving from their position.

Unlike the house, where during all this,

the cracks and damage have been worsening,

some of it with frightening consequences.

So, this is the girl's bedroom

and it was Saturday on 19 June last year,

about nine o'clock in the morning I heard this really, really big rumble

and I came into the room and the ceiling had just fallen down.

Everything was covered in debris and whatever

and Lola, at the time, had slept at the top,

but she had just gotten out of bed, maybe 15 minutes before.

If she had been hit by it she would have been hurt.

A Lloyds of London insurer told Rip-Off Britain that,

"This is a complex claim that requires full cooperation from the residents to resolve."

So, let's see if we can help move things on.

We've asked an independent expert to have a look at the house.

Tony Tsoucass has 30 years experience as a structural engineer

and we've arranged for full testing, free of charge, on the disputed area

to find out once and for all if there is any subsidence.

Even before the team can complete the tests,

the cracks on the staircase make Tony very suspicious.

Just without the bore hole information,

one would think that this is proof of subsidence

and certainly this is settled.

It's Tony's investigations at the disputed front of the house

that are particularly important Claudia and Marcus's claim.

The insurance company have said

that subsidence isn't occurring to this part of the house

and what we think is that it is,

just from the profile of the cracking inside

and the proximity of the trees.

It's not long before Tony is confident enough

to give Marcus some good news.

From the initial investigation so far, we think it's definitely subsidence

and all though testing still has to be carried out,

from that visual inspection it points to subsidence already.

And when the tests are complete the full report says the same thing,

the front of the house is suffering from subsidence.

Armed with Tony's findings,

Marcus and the other residents have gone back to the Ombudsman

to get a formal ruling, which the insurers then would HAVE to act on.

Yes, I do believe this brings us nearer to a conclusion.

With physical evidence like this

I don't see how they can carry on telling us that they will not cover the claim that we've made.

And just as we were finishing putting this programme together

we had an update from the insurer that underwrites the policy.

Their loss adjusters and engineers have now had further meetings with the residents

to assess the nature and extent of the work required,

which is they say they hope to agree in the very near future.

So, fingers crossed all this will soon finally be at an end.

Here at Rip-Off Britain we're always ready to investigate more of your stories.

Confused over your bills?

Trying to wade your way through never ending small print

that leaves you totally confused?

I might have been stupid for not reading it or I've read it and not took it in.

I could kick myself, I really could.

Unsure what to do when you discover you've lost out

and that's great deal has ended up costing you money?

I thought, "This cannot be true, it's totally unacceptable,"

I was so angry.

You might have a cautionary tale of your own

and want to share the mistakes that you've made with us

so that other people don't do the same thing.

No-one knows about this, so this is very, very strange to me

and I really would like to get this much clearer.

Don't forget you can always write to us:

Or you can always get in touch by sending us an e-mail:

Don't forget, the Rip-Off team is ready and waiting

to investigate your stories.

You know, from the stories that you shared with us today

it is absolutely clear that when it comes to buying a home

and all the things that go with that

it's just all too easy to end up feeling that you've not quite got what you thought you paid for.

It really does pay to do your research

and get as much information as you can

about what exactly you're signing up to. The trouble with many of these costs

is that they don't stop once you've been handed the keys.

Something I'm sure that we've all experienced at some point.

That's where we have to leave it for today,

thanks for joining us, we've really enjoyed your company

and we'll see you very soon when we'll be hearing more of your stories

and hopefully helping you to avoid being ripped off.

-So, in the meantime, take care.

-Goodbye.

-Bye-bye.

Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd

E-mail [email protected]