Episode 1 Rip Off Britain

We asked you to tell us who has left you feeling ripped off

and you contacted us in your thousands

by post, e-mail, even stopping us on the streets.

And the message could not be clearer.

They're in it for what they can get.

They're not in it to provide a service.

I didn't sleep. It upset me so much I that I didn't sleep.

You told us, with money tighter than ever,

you need to be sure that every pound you spend is worth it.

How do I get my money back? I just think I'm entitled to it.

So 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 what you can do about it.

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

We get results, that's the interesting thing.

Your stories. Your money.

This is Rip Off Britain.

Hello and welcome once again to Rip Off Britain,

the programme that gets to the bottom of why you haven't

ended up with what you thought you would for your money

or indeed your time, which of course is the reason the people

we'll be meeting in today's programme got in touch with us in the first place.

One way or another they all feel rather

let down as indeed we often do when we end up with something that

just did not live up to the hype or even to our own expectations.

And of course we'll also have plenty of advice

so that before you hand over your money,

you've done everything you can to protect it in case something does goes wrong.

Coming up, as insurers soak up the cost of one of

the wettest summers on record, could you end up paying the price?

They're not making the money that they think they should be making

and therefore they're going to continue to search for a reason

to punish householders for wanting to protect their greatest asset.

Cash for gold.

But when companies promise big money, do they always deliver?

I was offered £214 and I was angry.

There was no way I would've sold the watch for that.

And we solve more of your problems on the spot at our pop-up shop.

Some parts of Britain have been hit by disastrous floods

in recent years, and although they may not like it,

you can understand why those people who do live in the worst affected

areas may now have to pay increased insurance premiums as a result.

But what if you live in an area that has never seen

a proper flood in living memory?

And YOUR premiums suddenly start to soar

because, apparently, you have got an increased risk of flooding.

Well, that's exactly what happened to Nancy Hearley.

She just could not understand what was going on

and she asked us to investigate.

And you know it's a good job she did.

Because this time, it seems that her insurance company really

did NOT know what they were talking about.

We're getting used to seeing images of homes under water.

Devastating floods hit parts of Britain in 2007,

2009 and again this summer. But even after the heaviest downpours,

the part of Lincolnshire where Nancy Hearley lives remained unscathed.

In fact, it's 50 years since the area saw a flood

and there's been nothing approaching that in the decade that Nancy

and her husband Phil have lived here.

It's an absolutely stunning part of the country.

We found the house that we absolutely loved,

we have beautiful vistas to look out.

Wildlife to entertain us, we walk in the countryside,

we enjoy our hobbies and we've found a beautiful way of life here.

When the couple moved into their farmhouse, they arranged

their home and contents insurance through Cornhill Direct.

The cover protected them for home and contents, fire and flooding.

Our first insurance policy was for £177.50.

Gradually over the years it crept up

and I believe in 2009 it was slightly over £300

but these were all in keeping with the movement of the market.

Over the next seven years up to 2009,

their premiums have gone up by a fairly modest £129.

And in 2007 the policy was very useful

when Nancy needed to make a claim for some storm damage.

The treatment we received was outstanding. They told us

simply to get it repaired and paid everything very promptly.

We were very pleased with the treatment we had from them.

Or at least they were until two years ago,

when the cost of their insurance suddenly went up from £300 to 490.

Cornhill put it down to the fact that they'd reclassified

the area where Nancy's house sits as a flood risk area.

We have never had any indication that this area had suddenly

become an area of concern for the insurers, with regard to the floods.

'I was astonished to begin with and then I was angry.'

Because it seemed that we were being punished for something that

had not happened and in all likelihood was not about to happen.

Nancy paid the increased premium.

But the next year brought an even bigger shock.

In 2011 we received a premium request for £737.26.

We were absolutely astonished

because this was a massive increase from what it had been

the previous year.

I spoke to them on the phone and their insurers were unwilling

to make any adjustments to this premium for any reason whatsoever.

In two years Nancy's policy had gone up by 141%

because of a risk that Nancy didn't believe would ever happen.

So together with her neighbours,

some of whom were experiencing similar problems

with their insurance companies, she hatched a plan to fight back.

Through their local MP, they arranged a meeting

with a man from the Environment Agency.

He said they too had recently reclassified the area's risk of flood.

But unlike the insurers they'd DOWNGRADED it.

He came and he sat with several of my neighbours.

He talked about the fact that it has not flooded in this area

since 1957 and that the area is now being changed

from a significant risk of flooding to a moderate risk of flooding.

Insurance companies don't have to use the Environment Agency's analysis

when they set their premiums.

But Nancy couldn't understand why Cornhill Direct were saying

the likelihood of flooding was increasing at a time

when the Environment Agency was saying the exact opposite.

The documentation from the Environment Agency proved

to be of little or no use in negotiation with Cornhill Direct.

They simply did not want to know that we had a government agency

that could verify that this area was in no great danger of flooding.

When the insurers wouldn't budge, Nancy asked

if she could reduce the premiums by taking a policy without flood cover.

They declined and finally I asked them if it was possible

to have say £5,000 in excess if they insured me for flooding.

And they declined again.

So we agreed that they were not interested in insuring my property.

Nancy eventually organised her home insurance with a local broker

for just £264.

But she still feels aggrieved that, as she sees it,

Cornhill Direct wouldn't listen to what she was saying.

They were unwilling to look beyond what their computer screens gave them

as a definition of the area

and what their underwriters would permit.

There was no leeway taken into account that this area

was indeed unaffected by flooding.

We contacted Cornhill Direct to find out why they'd been

so adamant that the flood risk had increased,

and when we did, the story took an unexpected turn.

The company agreed that Nancy's postcode wasn't in an area at high risk

of flooding and they told us that when they said it was,

what they actually meant, was that it was suddenly at greater risk

of subsidence because of shrinkable clay soil in the area.

When we broke that news to Nancy, she was flabbergasted.

Subsidence!

I was told twice it was flooding, no-one ever mentioned subsidence,

no-one ever mentioned clay.

Absolutely astonishing! I am, I am truly amazed.

I am, I am furious, actually.

And when Nancy gets angry, she lets the whole village know.

"Our decision to apply the increased premium was purely

"due to the subsidence risk."

It's insurance risk calculated by telephone directory, isn't it?

You've never had any subsidence.

My house hasn't subsided, anybody's house subsided?

ALL: No.

Anybody's house flooded?

ALL: No.

And the neighbours were even more surprised to hear

one explanation that the company offered for their flood risk classification.

In an e-mail to us, they said they'd been

influenced by some of the local street names on Google Maps.

"The River Witham passes her property.

"And the neighbouring roads... the neighbouring roads have such

"names as Forty Foot Bank, Ferry Lane and Fifteen Foot Drain.

"I think it is forgivable for making the assumption that our stance

"was due to flood rather than any other peril."

Cornhill Direct told us they'd adjusted the premiums after

working with an external provider of geographical hazard data, so they

could improve the sophistication and accuracy of their pricing.

And putting aside the inaccuracy of confusing flooding with

subsidence, they're satisfied that from a technical underwriting

perspective, the policy as performed exactly as intended.

They say their premiums reflect what they believe to be the risks

presented to them

and they don't increase them by any more than they have to.

But Nancy is not convinced.

I wrote to Cornhill Direct and expressed my disappointment.

I will try to find out the name of the company who has

researched this area

so in-depth that they'd discovered this subsiding clay is everywhere.

I will share all this information with as many of my neighbours as I possibly can.

It seems Cornhill may not have heard the last of Nancy.

She's not persuaded that the new justification for the price hike

holds any more water than the old one.

They're not making the money that they think they should be making

so they'll continue to search for a reason

to punish householders for wanting to protect their greatest asset.

So yes, I will tackle them on this and yes,

I will continue to fight and yes, I will be as loud as possible.

I'm not going away.

They may think they won, but I'm not going away.

'And it's not just Nancy who's determined to tackle

'the seeming confusion about how insurers decide flood risk.

'At Rip Off Britain, we want answers too.

'So I went to challenge the man from the Association of British Insurers.'

How do you decide who should or should not get cover

for those people who live in areas that you judge to be a flood-risk?

Well, insurers assess flood risk very carefully. Erm, they...

How carefully, what do you do?

They use a variety of methods. Environment Agency mapping,

they use their own mapping, they use the history of flooding in that area.

And they use that to assess the risk.

Are you convinced and happy that that's what all insurers do,

because we do know that there're insurance companies

that do not use the advice of the Environmental Agency, and very often

what they discover is at odds with what the insurance companies say.

Some insurance companies use their own mapping

rather than the Environment Agency mapping

though most of them do use Environment Agency mapping.

If they use their own mapping then the person who's being

insured, if they've seen what the Environmental Agency has said,

which doesn't put them at exactly the same risk,

can presumably only assume that therefore the insurance company is

using their own terms of reference to suit them and not the customer.

Insurers always want to look after the customer,

they want to make sure that they cover customers

who whatever risk category they're in.

I think the issue that you're talking about here is twofold,

one is that the Environment Agency maps

can be quite high-level and quite a lot of insurance companies have more

sophisticated mapping.

But there's also the issue as to how quickly the flood defence data comes

into the Environment Agency mapping and that can be a bit slow.

It's something we've pushed the Environment Agency for,

we push Government for, to get the data through faster.

So that, if a flood defence is put in your area then it comes

very quickly through in the mapping and the insurance company

can use that to say, right, your risk has gone down.

So can you be absolutely certain that

when someone takes out an insurance policy and they are in what

the insurers think is a flood risk area, that that genuinely is

an area that is at risk of flood, and is not just something

that the insurance company have just taken a postcode lottery on?

Insurance companies will work as hard as possible

to get people on their books.

They're not an arbitrarily get rid of them.

They'll have different approaches

and they'll have different ways of assessing risk.

It's one of the reasons it's sensible to shop around.

And if you are in a flood risk area don't just go onto

a comparison website and look at it there, go to a local broker.

Brokers often understand the local risk and they'll know,

and they'll know the insurers who understand the risk better.

In those circumstances that would be my advice.

Mr Starling, thank you.

Now we've all seen the ads for the companies that have sprung up

offering to exchange your gold for cash.

At first glance,

it seems a great way to earn money from any unwanted jewellery that

you might just have lying around the house, but in fact,

as we've reported before, it's not always the golden opportunity that's promised.

Now in the past, we've looked at how the money on offer is all too

often no match whatsoever for the true value of what you're selling.

But since then, you've been letting us know about another way that

some of these companies can catch you out and cost you money as well.

They've become an extraordinarily popular way to quickly raise cash.

And it's no wonder that so many people are tempted by the dozens

of companies around offering great prices for your unwanted jewellery.

Because adverts like these can make you feel you're

sitting on a gold mine.

-And you'll be pleasantly surprised at how much it's worth.

-So why wait?

Make the call or go online and turn your gold into cash today.

That's certainly what Lisa Tait hoped when,

earlier this year, she started looking into selling

an expensive watch which she rarely wore.

My husband bought me the watch on a holiday to Turkey 11 years ago.

It's just been in my jewellery box, not really doing anything.

I thought it would be nice to use the money for the watch

to go on holiday with my daughter.

Lisa found an impressive-looking website for a company called

The British Gold Refinery, who were promising

"excellent rates and first class service".

Their website looked professional and it stated that if I wasn't happy

with their price they would return it within ten days, no quibbles.

To get a price quote, Lisa entered the watch's weight

and carat into the website's online calculator.

And she was delighted

when they said that they'd pay her more than £500 for it.

So happy to take up that offer, she posted off the watch.

But then after they'd received the watch in early March,

the British Gold Refinery rang her up to say that, in fact,

they could only pay her less than half of what they'd initially suggested.

I was offered £214 and I was angry because I felt that

the website was misleading.

There was no way I would have sold the watch for that.

Now one of the reasons the company gave for the reduced offer

was that they said the watch was 13 carat

and not 14 carat as Lisa had said.

They also claimed that the weight was wrong as well.

But Lisa found all of that just hard to believe.

I know this to be the weight in carat because I've had

an expert valuation done for insurance purposes in the past.

And the bad news didn't stop there.

Lisa was told that if she turned down the £214 offer,

that she would have to pay an administration fee for her gold to be returned.

£35 plus postage and packing all of which they say added up to £50.

I was shocked and surprised when they asked me

to pay £50 to have my watch back because their website had

kept saying free quotation, free valuation, free return

if you're not happy with the quotation that we give you.

A £50-fee does seem a long way from the no-quibble returns

that the website had promised.

Lisa told the British Gold Refinery she was not happy with their offer.

And though they did increase it, first to £302,

and then to £350 - that was a lot lower than the quote

they'd first given her in the first place.

By now, whatever they offered her, Lisa no longer wanted

to deal with the company.

I wouldn't sell my watch to the British Gold Refinery

even if they offered me the full value of it.

I would rather flush it down the toilet than give it to them.

Lisa found herself up against a deadline.

Because the company told her that if within 14 days

she didn't accept their final price of £350, or stump up the £50

to have her gold returned, then she would automatically be paid

just the £214 they'd previously offered and the watch would then be destroyed.

I was really worried that they were gonna melt my watch down.

They had told me this in the emails,

that if I didn't pay within the 14 days it would be melted down

and for that reason I felt that I had no choice but to pay the £50.

Lisa was told that the £50-fee she'd paid to get the watch back

was to cover the price of an expert valuation.

So intrigued as to why that would cost so much,

she asked the company to e-mail her a copy.

Their expert evaluation was worded

"One watch with straps, valuation £302."

Which works out at £10 a word.

It's a complete rip-off.

I could get an expert evaluation for half that price.

In fact, she could get one for free in some jewellers.

And Lisa's not the only one who feels that the promises

made by the British Gold Refinery may not in fact have been worth their weight in gold.

We've spoken to other people who feel let down by the company.

And a search on the internet reveals numerous complaints

from very unhappy customers.

The British Gold Refinery told many of the customers

who'd complained about the £50 administration fee

that they'd paid it because they had not ticked the "quote only" box

on the envelope, and had therefore consented to a valuation.

Now Lisa admits that's an error she also made

but had tried to correct.

When I realised my mistake I called them

and spoke to a telephone operator who assured me

that she had put a note on my account to that effect

and that I wouldn't be charged the £50 admin fee but they still charged.

Lisa says she didn't spot the administration fee because it was buried

deep in the terms and conditions on the company's website.

And the Advertising Standards Authority would agree with that.

In January, they ruled that The British Gold Refinery should

clearly display the administration fee on their website.

And in fact the company has gone further than that.

After we got in touch to query Leesa's charge,

they told us that they've scrapped their return fees altogether.

They say they aim to provide the best price

for the gold sent to them, and the best customer service,

but they've listened to customers and as a result

changed their policy.

Anyone unhappy with a quote who wants their gold back

will now get it free of charge,

with no return fees applied.

As for the prices they offer,

they believe them to be a fair estimate

for the gold in the items sent.

They're confident that they offer the best price in the market

and the reason these can be lower than the initial quote

is because those quotes are simply a guide

based on the spot price of gold.

The exact prices can only be confirmed

once they've received the items.

Meanwhile, although Leesa did get her watch back,

she's been left feeling totally frustrated

-by her dealings with the company.

-To me, it's underhand

and misleading and it shouldn't be allowed to happen.

Well, this really is a subject that you contact us about all the time.

Later in the programme you can see what happened

when WE sent some gold to the same company that Leesa did.

Still to come on Rip-Off Britain.

A woman who's had to pay hundreds of pounds of extra costs

after buying something faulty.

So, why should it be her that has to pay them?

I was in a situation where I had no car

and the money was starting to add up

and I started to become very stressed

about how I was going to afford to pay for everything.

Rip-Off Britain has come to the northeast of England.

Overnight, we've created a shop where anyone can pop in

to receive instant advice from our team of consumer experts.

The marvellous thing about being quite early in the day, John

-is the fact I can take you straight to the expert.

-Come on!

-So, come with me.

-Let's go for it.

-I know.

First up to see our travel expert, Simon Calder, is John.

He feels badly let down by his travel insurance company

after his partner had an accident on holiday in Scotland.

We got to Bute,

we're out walking, she fell, broke her wrist

it involved us in taxis,

trips to the mainland for X-rays.

In total, the cost came to about £135.

So, we put the insurance claim in

and we got a letter back saying

that this insurance policy does not cover us

for the United Kingdom,

the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man.

Here we are, here we are.

Section B emergency medical and treatment expenses.

It very specifically says

this section does not apply to trips within the UK,

Channel Islands or Isle of Man if you live there.

What should they have done?

The advice is unless there's a very particular reason

that you would want to get insurance for a UK trip,

-don't bother.

-Are you going to take this issue up on behalf of John?

I most certainly am!

I want to find out first of all

how they can possibly sell insurance at that price

£55 for five days in Scotland.

I don't know if we have legally a leg to stand on

but morally, I'm afraid this is an almighty rip-off.

-Are you a happy man, John?

-Very much so. Brilliant, go for it!

-Thanks very much indeed.

-Our pop up shop

has certainly drawn the crowds

and our experts have been busy with an extraordinary range of problems.

Good heavens above! Sarah, what's the legal position here?

If nobody is offering you any financial recompense,

you may have to consider going through the courts.

Michael has been left with an expensive repair bill

after his car was damaged by a pothole

and wants some advice on what to do next with his claim

after his local authority's insurer refused to pay out.

They wouldn't accept a claim

for damage against a third party's insurer.

I didn't know where to turn next.

The difficulty here is you're not a client

of the local authority's insurer.

And so actually you don't have that same protection that you do,

you know, if it was your own insurance policy.

So, there's sort of a couple of other options open to you.

One of them you probably considered

which is to make a claim on your own car insurance policy.

But of course you've then got your own excess to pay.

That damages your own claims record.

The only other option really open to you now

is think about complaining to the local government ombudsman. At least

it's independent eyes looking over your case.

Well, I have records from the insurance company which show

that the last time the road was surveyed

was in February.

And no survey exists for March

and the accident was in April.

Well that sounds like that could be a key piece of evidence and,

you know, that evidence is all stuff that should be put in your claim

to the local government ombudsman

and best of luck with it. Let's hope you get that insurer to pay out.

I'll certainly do that and thanks very much for your advice.

Next, a case of what should've been a straightforward repair

which has not only dragged on for months

but led to hundreds of pounds of extra costs

and an extraordinary amount of unnecessary hassle.

Harriet Love contacted us because the company concerned

had told her it wasn't down to them to put things right.

But, according to the experts we've spoken to,

this really is a case where there's no smoke without fire.

When Harriet Love's car engine

packed up, she recorded the moment on camera

little realising that smoke was a sign of worse things to come.

Harriet needs a car to ferry her two children around,

but rather than replace her ten-year-old Vauxhall Astra,

she decided to give it a new lease of life.

I got advice from my brother who's a mechanic and he seemed to think

it would be very straightforward to refit a second-hand engine

and at the time it was going to be the easiest option.

I couldn't afford a new car. It was quite difficult

to find a new engine with the car being so old.

So, I decided to go online through a company that you could get

parts from and I felt reassured by this company because

they were the largest in the country and the parts would come guaranteed.

And through that website, Harriet got a quote from a business

called West Coast Car Breakers in Preston.

Their own website boasts that they can

supply anything from a wheel nut to an engine.

And that they do it reaching new heights of efficiency!

So Harriet was thrilled to discover they had the engine she needed.

They came at a reasonable price, at £288

which was going to include delivery

and a 30 day warranty, so I was happy with this purchase.

After several weeks of not having a car

I felt very much relieved that this company was going to supply

the engine very quickly and I'd be able to get myself back on the road.

West Coast Car Breakers

DID deliver the engine to a garage near Harriet, as promised.

But something wasn't right.

The engine was fitted really quickly but then I got a call

from my local garage that had fitted the engine

saying that he was a little bit concerned

that there was still some smoke coming out the back of my car

and he found that the water pump supplied with the engine

was cracked and it needed replacing.

Graham Ransom, the mechanic who did the repair,

is in no doubt about the equipment he'd been supplied with.

This engine wasn't fit for purpose. As soon as I put it in

it was burning oil. It was so bad you couldn't see the car behind.

Obviously it was the piston rings

letting the oil past,

obviously creating the smoke and burning the oil.

So Harriet rang West Coast Car Breakers.

After all, they'd sold her the engine with a 30 day warranty

But they told her that DIDN'T cover the water pump.

They weren't very helpful and I didn't quite understand

all the terminology so I asked my mechanic

to phone up on my behalf

to see if he could resolve the problem.

He did this the following day

and the scrapyard agreed to send out a replacement water pump,

so I was happy with the response.

But not for long.

When the water pump didn't arrive,

Harriet's mechanic rang West Coast Car Breakers again to see why.

This time, they returned to saying they WOULDN'T replace the part

as it wasn't covered by the warranty.

In a desperate attempt to get Harriet mobile again,

Graham suggested trying to salvage the water pump

from Harriet's old engine.

Thinking that it was going to be straightforward, I was surprised

when my mechanic called me again

to say that the engine was still smoking badly and in his opinion

it needed replacing and I'd been sold a bad engine.

What colour is the circle?

Harried was becoming increasingly frustrated.

She'd been without a car now for several weeks

and the problem seemed to be getting worse.

It was becoming very stressful.

I was confused over what was going on

and in the meantime I had no car

it was at a garage, costing me a lot of money...

I've got two small children and life was becoming very difficult at home.

Harriet was fed up and she wanted her money back.

And she was confident that the law was on her side.

Under The Sale of Goods Act 1979,

if you're sold a product with an existing fault

even if it's second-hand and it wasn't made clear to you

when you bought it, you should be entitled to a refund,

repair or replacement.

And the trader should also be responsible

for any consequential loss.

But West Coast Car Breakers DIDN'T see things entirely the same way.

The company said that the engine would have been fully tested

before it had been removed from its original car.

And that they would only refund me for the cost of the engine

and not all the other costs that I'd incurred

from fitting it and taking it out.

Eventually, we agreed that I would have a refund for the engine if I removed it from the car

and they would collect it free of charge.

Though that seemed to be moving in the right direction,

Harriet had to spend more money removing the engine from her car.

I arranged to rebook my car in the garage to have the engine removed

and I contacted the scrap yard to tell them the day when it was going to be ready for collection.

The scrap yard turned up the day before when the engine was still in the car

and they saw the engine working and they agreed that it was very bad,

the smoke from the back of the car, but they left without the engine.

West Coast Car Breakers insisted they HADN'T got the day wrong,

and that as they had now had a wasted journey,

it was up to Harriet to return the engine to them.

However that confusion had occurred, by now it wasn't just the car that was fuming.

This company were being very unreasonable and were not helping me in any way

despite them selling me the bad part.

I was in a situation where I had no car and the money

was starting to add up, and I started becoming very stressed about

how I was going to afford to pay for everything.

Despite spending hundreds of pounds,

Harriet didn't have a working car, and things were tough without it.

I was still without a car with an engine,

which had been very stressful because of the school run

taking three hours a day using public transport.

We got in touch with West Coast Car Breakers,

who say they're saddened by this situation, but don't agree that

they've been unhelpful in resolving it,

and stress they're not a company that acts with no regard for the customer.

They point out that they offered a full refund for the engine

and to collect it free of charge within an hour of being asked.

However, they now say they WILL refund the cost of the engine without its return.

And they accept that they did go to collect it on the wrong day,

for which they offer their "sincere apologies"

and they're giving Harriet £200 in compensation.

But, it still doesn't seem that they're going to cover all her consequential losses.

They point out that's because the terms and conditions of the website

she first used to contact them makes clear these costs won't be paid.

But experts we've spoken to say any terms and conditions are always trumped by the Sale of Goods Act,

and that losses in cases like this should be paid.

Meanwhile, Harriet felt she had no choice but to find another engine somewhere else.

And of course that's cost even more money.

So while she's relieved to have a working car again,

she's angry that the whole business has left her so out of pocket.

Financially and emotionally, I feel completely drained from everything

that I've had to do in order to get this car back on the road.

And I'm in a situation where

I don't feel I can move forward with this scrap yard

and I can't see an end in order to resolve this situation that I'm in.

After our last series of Rip-Off Britain, many thousands of you

sent in for our Rip-Off Britain guide to getting a good deal.

So, this year, we've written a new expanded guide with practical advice

on topics that are covered in this series,

like PPI, cold calls and supermarket deals, as well as updated tips

and information on avoiding rip-offs and how to get a better deal.

You can find a link to the new, free guide on our website. It's at...

Or to receive a copy in the post,

send a stamped, self-addressed A5 envelope to the address

that we'll give you at the end of the programme.

Swapping your unwanted gold for cash has become increasingly popular in recent years.

And earlier in the programme we heard from Lisa

who was disappointed by her experience with the service that she'd had

from the online cash for gold company The British Gold Refinery.

They gave her a quote of more than £500 for a gold watch,

only to then offer less than half that amount once she'd sent it off to them.

To me, it's underhand and misleading and shouldn't be allowed to happen.

So, was Lisa's experience a one-off?

Well, we wondered what would happen if we tried to sell some.

So, we sent some gold to The British Gold Refinery.

Would we, as they claim, get the best price on the market?

We selected three pieces of gold - a money clip, a bracelet and a gold chain,

and went to a professional jeweller

to have them weighed and the carat certified.

This piece is 14-carat gold. I've weighed it at 25.27 grams.

We also had all three items valued.

14-carat chain, I would give £440 for.

The 9-carat gold money clip, I would give £138 pounds for.

And the bracelet with cubic zirconias and 18-carat gold,

I would give £270 for.

The jeweller offered a total of £848 for our gold.

So, could we get a better offer from The British Gold Refinery?

Well, in this video on the homepage of its website,

the company promises top prices.

Do you want to get the most cash for your unwanted gold?

If your answer is "Yes", you couldn't have found a better place.

And true to that promise, they instantly seemed to beat

the jeweller's valuation by quoting us more than £900 for the gold.

So far so good, and we posted the gold off to them straightaway.

Our online service guarantees top gold rates.

But all hopes of a "guaranteed top rate" disappeared when,

after they'd received our gold,

the company reduced its offer.

By almost two thirds.

They now said all that they'd pay was £335.94.

One of our team rang them straightaway.

You know, I was expecting over £900, really, for what I've sent in.

The British Gold Refinery then upped their offer to £360.

An improvement, but still over £500 LESS than their original quote.

As a UK leading refinery, we pride ourselves on offering market-leading payment rates.

So we called them again to see not just why the quote was now so much lower,

but how they'd worked it out.

For example, how they valued our gold bracelet.

What did the bracelet weigh?

Four grams? Right, OK.

The company claimed that our bracelet consisted of just four grams of gold.

That's half as much as certified by our jeweller,

whose valuation was based on it containing eight grams.

He also certified the gold as 18-carat,

so what did The British Gold Refinery say it was?

The bracelet at 16, yeah, yeah.

Two carats less than our jeweller's certification.

So, what about our gold chain and the money clip?

Nine-carat, right.

The company said that they were both nine-carat,

and though that is the same as the jeweller had said for the clip,

he told us that the chain was 14-carat.

We decided to decline The British Gold Refinery's offer

and ask for our gold back.

It isn't what I was hoping for at all,

so I'd just prefer to have them sent back if that's OK?

They promised to call us back, but the phone didn't ring.

We also e-mailed to make sure that the company knew we were unhappy.

We were then told to contact their returns department.

Over the next three days, we called The British Gold Refinery

a further three times to ask for our gold back.

And it was returned, five days after we first asked.

But our experience with what they offered to pay was very similar

to what had happened to Lisa.

So why had they initially quoted so much more than they were willing to pay?

When we asked them just that, The British Gold Refinery told us

that they were "unable to comment" without proof that our valuations

were for the same items that we'd sent them.

They also said their valuations...

..not a retail, resale or insurance price, which they say...

..between their valuations and the ones from our jeweller.

Although, in fact, his valuations were done in exactly the same way.

The company also says how much they offer takes into account their cost and profit margins...

And they've reiterated that the original quote is based on

a guide spot price of gold, with their exact offer only confirmed

once they've received the items.

But none of that holds much weight with the jeweller who did our initial valuation.

I'm not saying that we're always going to be the best person in town,

but I think £500 differential is a huge amount to be thinking about.

You've got to just get the best price you can.

I find it very disturbing that they can offer such a little amount.

I would've thought they may have offered maybe £100 less or something

for their extra work in sending it backwards and forwards.

But at 335,

it just seems to be that they haven't read the gold properly.

There are plenty of other gold companies that you've told us

don't pay anything like the price initially quoted.

The best advice is to do what we did -

get your gold accurately weighed and valued before you send it off.

And shop around so that you can be sure you are getting a fair price.

You can find more information on how to sell gold safely and effectively

on our website...

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?

We should read it but it's not in plain English. It's not...

It should be simple, you know, ABC. You know, very basic stuff.

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

and that "great deal" has ended up costing you money?

You get home, you get your bill and it's like £70,

when it's meant to be £35.

And it's just basically... You get ripped off, don't you?

You might have a cautionary tale of your own and want to share the mistakes you made with us

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

We paid them good money to act in our best interest, they didn't.

You can write to us at...

Or you can send us an email to...

'Remember that the Rip-Off team is always ready and waiting to investigate your stories.'

So as we've heard today,

sometimes we need to manage our own expectations before getting

too excited about an offer or a promise that may not be

quite as good as the website or the ads would have us believe.

But even so, when you are forking out good money,

you really should expect to get what you paid for.

And if you don't, then you need to make sure that you know your rights

so that you know the most effective way of getting your money back.

And do think about the way you pay for things.

Remember that paying by credit card will usually give you protection if something does go wrong.

That's all we've got time for today,

but we hope you can join us next time when we'll be looking into more of your stories.

-Until then, from all of us, bye-bye.

-Bye!

-Bye!

Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd