Episode 17 Rip Off Britain

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

and you contacted us in your thousands by post, email,

even stopping us on the streets,

and the message could not be clearer.

Things weren't right, it was costing me time and money,

and it was like, "Does anybody listen?"

Unfortunately, I think these companies are more motivated

by their share price than they are by actually looking after their customers.

You've told us, that 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? Cos 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 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, where today we're asking

a question that doesn't always produce the answer that it should.

And that is just how much do the companies to whom

we hand over our money really have our best interests at heart?

Because sometimes it seems they just want to get the job done

and move on to the next.

Or they may be in such a hurry for the next payment

they make you feel their priority isn't you or giving you

the best deal or service, but simply getting hold of your money.

And that's certainly how it feels to some of the people whose stories we'll hear today.

They say they're not being listened to -

particularly, when things have gone wrong, or there's been a mistake.

So the question is, are they right? Well, we'll soon find out.

Coming up, how a cupboard's hidden secrets have cost this couple £20,000.

I walked into the cupboard

and as I walked over to the chipboard flooring,

my foot fell straight through the chipboard.

And a family that spent almost £900 on a unique memorial...

I had my heart ripped out when Danielle died.

It's so important for me to get to the bottom of- of all of this.

If you're lucky enough to have a guarantee

for work that's been done on your home,

you'd think it would be obvious what it entitles you to.

But that's not always the case.

Sometimes, the guarantee you've pinned your hopes on

is no longer worth the paper it's written on.

# I could have danced all night

# I could have danced all night. #

When amateur singer Adrienne Guthrie was looking for a new place

to live last year, Wetherby in Yorkshire seemed the obvious choice.

The previous winter

I had been quite isolated following an accident in York.

And so I looked for a property near friends

and because most of the activities I'm involved in, ladies' choir

and one or two other activities, are in Wetherby.

Adrienne had no trouble finding her ideal home.

She was sent a stack of paperwork to go with the purchase,

and amongst it was some very good news...or so she thought.

I saw that there was a guarantee for the double glazing

for a ten year period.

Double glazing had been installed less than two years earlier.

So with eight years left on the guarantee for all her windows

and doors, Adrienne was delighted.

Especially as it soon became clear that her double glazing

wasn't keeping the house as warm as she'd expected.

I hadn't been in the house very long when I realised the kitchen was cold

and as the cold weather came it was like being in an icebox in there.

Adrienne traced the problem to the kitchen door

which didn't seem to have been fitted properly.

But she was reassured by the fact she had that ten year guarantee.

I wasn't unduly worried, I thought that the double glazing

would be covered under the guarantee

and it would just be repaired from that.

So Adrienne contacted the company who'd issued the guarantee,

Orion Windows Limited,

and got a nasty surprise.

They told her the guarantee was no good to her

because it was only valid for the customer who'd installed the glazing.

In other words, the house's previous owner.

I just couldn't believe it.

And I spoke to loads of people,

both people that I meet on a day to day basis

and people in the building trade,

and nobody could understand why the guarantee wasn't transferrable

from one owner to the next and why it didn't stay with the house.

And to make matters worse,

just a few weeks after hearing her guarantee wasn't valid,

there was another problem with Adrienne's double glazing.

I suddenly heard three loud cracks.

And when I went into the back bedroom,

the window had cracked from top to bottom.

It was very cold outside and I'm assuming it was because of the cold.

So with two double glazing problems in just two months,

you can see why Adrienne was annoyed at the prospect of shelling out

for repairs that - because she had that guarantee -

she believed should be done for free.

I don't understand why the guarantee doesn't transfer from owner to owner.

It's just ridiculous the way it's just null and void.

If the previous owner still lived here

they would be able to claim on it.

In fact, double glazing suppliers aren't under any obligation

to supply transferable guarantees -

unless that is, they're members of the industry trade body, the Glass and Glazing Federation.

In that case, they ARE supposed to honour guarantees

if the house changes hands.

And funnily enough, Orion Windows IS a member.

So we asked them why they've refused to follow

the Glass and Glazing Federation's guidelines,

which would mean they'd transfer the guarantee to Adrienne AND carry out the necessary repairs.

And when we did, there was an about-turn!

They told us although no problems had previously been identified

with the glazing, they'll be making an appointment

with Adrienne to assess what works need doing.

And crucially, they WILL now be transferring the unexpired portion

of their guarantee to her.

We also spoke to the Glass and Glazing Federation,

who reiterated that it's a mandatory requirement for ALL their members

to provide transferrable guarantees.

But it seems Orion Windows Limited may not be the only company

that hasn't always stuck to the guidelines.

We contacted the 20 Glass and Glazing Federation members

closest to where Adrienne lives to see if they offered transferrable guarantees.

And four of them said they didn't.

We've passed that information on to the Federation,

who've said they'll be reminding all their members of their obligations on this.

Meanwhile, Adrienne's delighted her situation is now resolved.

It will make things a lot easier for me,

but I think people should remember that they need to pay attention

to all the terms and conditions

and make sure that they understand the legal aspects of these things.

If you want to check if your windows

are covered by a transferrable guarantee

or whether you might end up in the same situation as Adrienne,

then there are details on what to do on our website:

Well, I'm sure that, over the last year, most of us would have liked

to have seen a lot less rain, but if you've got a leaky roof

then you'll have found it particularly frustrating.

Peter Dobson certainly has,

and when you hear what it is that's caused his roof to leak,

you'll understand just why he's so annoyed.

When Peter Dobson retired at the end of last year,

he decided to make some additions to the family home in Northumberland.

And top of the list was a traditional wood-burning stove.

It's great when it's on - it's warm, it creates a friendly look,

Plus, of course, it keeps the bills down.

It reminds me of my childhood

when my grandmother had one of these open stove things

and she used to boil water on it and stuff like that,

and I often look at it and it kind of pulls you back to that time.

Peter was thrilled to find what he was looking for

with a company called Border Stoves.

They told him that it would cost £795 for the stove,

which their sister company Border Services

could fit for a further £1,650.

I have to confess, when I got that quote I took a step back

and thought maybe this isn't, you know, a good thing to do

but we'd kind of built up to it

and thought "OK, it's a one-off. We'll kind of do it."

So Border Services came to install the stove,

and making, it seemed, the necessary adjustments to the roof,

which involved cutting a hole in it for the flue.

And at first, Peter was delighted with what he'd bought.

The stove's functioned very well.

It's done exactly as supposed to, it looks good, it's very easy to light.

But then, when there was the next heavy rain,

Peter got a rather soggy surprise.

Water was streaming through the ceiling into his house.

The water coming in became a major issue

because the plasterboard on the ceiling got really wet.

It was leaking so far away from the chimney itself,

the fire wasn't drying it out.

Peter immediately got back in touch with the company,

and, after several unreturned calls,

they finally came back to have a look.

As Peter suspected, the problem turned out to be related

to the hole in the roof that they'd made for the flue.

He said he could temporarily sort it out

and hopefully, bring the major leaks to a halt and he started to do that.

After he'd finished the job he then said, "Really, it's temporary."

He informed me that the stuff used should've been on a slate roof

and ours is tiled, so it's really the wrong bit of equipment.

It seems that when Border Services had cut the hole in the roof,

they hadn't sealed it properly leaving big gaps

that were letting in the rain water.

And the repair did indeed prove to be just a temporary fix.

Because the next time it rained, water came through AGAIN.

It rained heavily through the night, and when I got up in the morning

the side of the stove was stained where the water had run down.

There was water on the laminate floor

and it was a right big mop-up session first thing in the morning.

Border Services came back again...and then AGAIN...

to try and sort things out.

But each time they came they failed to put the problem right.

So with water STILL pouring through the ceiling,

and no permanent solution from the company responsible,

Peter called in a roofing expert to see what he thought.

He just said...

It's just one of the worst jobs he'd ever seen.

I then got up on the wall to have a look

and he pointed out really why it was leaking.

There was a gap between the tiles that you could fit your hand into.

You can see from Peter's photos just how big that gap was.

And though it has now been rectified,

when we sent local surveyor Steve Vogel to examine Peter's roof,

it was clear that the hole wasn't the only problem.

I can also see what appears to be silicone sealants underneath

the tile, and that has possibly been applied to keep a loose tile

in place and that's just completely inappropriate.

It shouldn't be necessary when the tiles are correctly fitted

and there certainly shouldn't be gaps between the tiles.

When Steve then had a look inside the house there was more bad news.

He noticed that the stove was too close to the skirting board,

which made Peter nervous.

Is that dangerous, then?

Potentially, yes, because these stoves do get very hot

and with it being that close, there is the risk of that

actually burning at some stage.

-Which is why combustible materials all have a minimum

-distance

that they should be kept away from the stove itself.

So it's just getting more expensive all the time, isn't it?

-Unfortunately, yes.

-OK.

On top of the £2,500 that he's already paid for the stove,

Peter is now looking at having to stump up an additional £600

for repairing the roof and shifting the stove.

So he's written to the company asking them to pay.

But they refused to accept that it could be their fault.

I felt I'd proved it categorically having sent them photographs.

They were self-evident, you could see clearly

that there were holes in the roof.

You could see daylight from the whole of the living room as you looked up towards the roof.

Peter says the company even suggested the leak

could have been there already,

and was therefore nothing to do with them.

And when his next letter to them brought no joy,

that's when he wrote to us.

The two companies who sold and installed the stove

are run by the same man.

When we contacted him,

he disputed some of the details that Peter had told us.

He said he hadn't replied to the initial calls

because he was on holiday, and disagrees that he used

the wrong materials, or installed the stove too close to the skirting.

He says poor weather hampered the work he did,

both when the stove was installed,

and on the first occasion that he attempted to put things right.

And he stresses he HAS offered to resolve the situation,

and recommended a firm of builders to do the job.

But Peter has now lost so much confidence in the company

that he'd rather get the job sorted using builders of his own choice.

All he wants from Border Stoves is his money back.

Meanwhile, there's been an awful lot of rain this year,

and an awful lot of it has come through Peter's roof.

So he just wants things sorted.

If Border Stoves came back

and refunded what I'd actually spent on having them install it,

I would then take the view that the matter's closed.

It would be the end of four...

well, nearly five months now of complete aggravation.

Now there's always plenty to worry about if you're buying a new home,

which is why you hope that the survey

will flag up any serious problems before it's too late.

In Scotland, survey information is provided

to ALL prospective buyers from the off.

But unfortunately - that DOESN'T necessarily mean

you're safe from nasty surprises later on,

as this next couple found out.

The Island of Lewis, largest of the Western Isles of Scotland

and home to Norrie and Marina MacDonald,

who last year moved from a small flat to this much bigger house.

It just ticked all the boxes for us.

The location was perfect, the size was perfect,

-and also it was affordable to us which was very important.

-Yeah.

When Norrie and Marina first came to view the property,

like all Scottish homebuyers,

they were given what's called a homebuyer's report,

prepared for them by the seller.

Introduced in 2008, it's a bit like the Home Information Packs

that were briefly available in the rest of the UK.

And one of the key parts of it is a survey of the house's condition,

highlighting repairs that may be required.

The house was empty for over a year.

Now, we came out and we viewed the house with my parents

and my mother, especially my mother.

She noticed...a particularly strong smell of dampness

coming from just the ground floor area of the house.

I thought, "Right, the home report will tell us if there's anything wrong.

"If there's something wrong, we pull out."

What they didn't yet realise

was that the survey in their homebuyer's report

was what's known as a single survey,

which means it isn't a full structural survey

and won't necessarily pick up every problem with the house.

But with no idea of that at the time,

when Norrie and Marina got the report,

everything they read made them feel completely reassured.

The home report stated that everything was a Category One,

which meant that there was no immediate attention required for anything.

We paid particular attention to the dampness section,

which talks about dry rot, wet rot,

and there was nothing other than annual routine maintenance.

As all seemed well,

Norrie and Marina went ahead and bought the house.

But just a few days after moving in,

they realised something wasn't right in a cupboard downstairs.

I walked into the cupboard

and I noticed particularly bad discolouring to plasterboard.

So on walking over to the back wall,

I touched the plasterboard and it kind of felt damp.

I then noticed about a two-foot square of dampness

on the chipboard flooring.

As I walked over to the chipboard flooring,

my foot fell straight through the chipboard.

Norrie shouted, "I think you'd better come and see this,

"I've found a problem."

But at that time we didn't think it was anything serious.

But they were wrong.

When the MacDonalds called in a surveyor to take a look,

he found that because the back of the house

is built almost into the hillside,

water was seeping through the earth

and hitting the back wall, making the flooring space completely damp.

And since the house is of timber frame construction,

the wall plate and all the uprights were rotten beyond repair.

When we found out how serious the problem was,

-I think we both absolutely felt gutted...

-Gutted.

-..Absolutely gutted.

-Yeah.

We didn't know what to do, we just... This was...

We had put all our money into this property.

It was just, it was devastating.

The damp was such a major problem,

the MacDonalds couldn't see how the homebuyer's report

had failed to spot it.

We thought that was something that quite clearly should have been picked up on.

We just relied on that report so much.

We trusted it, we believed in it.

We bought the house on the strength of that home report.

So Norrie and Marina wrote to the surveyors who'd looked at the house.

And while waiting for a response, they called in another company

to work out how much it would cost to put things right.

We had a local surveyor come round to evaluate the cost

and he put the figure at about £20,000.

Now, at first we didn't know... How can we possibly afford this?

-We didn't even believe him...

-No, no.

-We thought this is... No!

Look at how rotten it was there.

But so bad was the water damage, the couple felt they had no choice

but to start the repairs.

They added the £20,000 onto their mortgage,

and got the builders in.

It wasn't an easy job.

The work that went on was fairly, fairly extensive.

Due to the access of the house, there's no access up either side.

So we had to hire in the local crane company

to crane two diggers over the top of the house.

We also had to have all the materials -

all the chip, all the drainage materials -

all craned over the house, which was...

It was just, it was hard work.

In the midst of all that, the original surveyors came back with their response.

They explained they WEREN'T liable for missing the damp,

because when doing this type of survey,

they're not allowed to move things.

When they'd checked the cupboard

where Norrie later fell through the floor,

they'd found a hoover and a box inside.

So, as a result, with these in the way, it wasn't checked.

I think it's just ridiculous

that because there's a box and a hoover,

that a cupboard cannot be checked.

It's just, it's ridiculous.

Especially I'd say, especially a cupboard

-which would show the most vulnerable part of the house...

-Exactly.

..Which is, I would say, three metres under the ground.

But that IS a limitation of this type of survey,

which is why when the couple complained

to the Ombudsman Services for Property -

whose job it is to try to resolve this sort of dispute -

they didn't get the result they wanted to hear.

The ombudsman's report ruled in favour of the surveyor,

basically because they said that they followed the guidelines.

We spoke to the surveyor who'd done the MacDonalds' report...

..And though sympathetic that the family has...

They've reiterated that a single survey report like this

will only include defects which are..

They say their report DID make that clear,

and that the problems later identified were...

We also contacted the Ombudsman Services for Property.

Though sorry the McDonalds had had such a bad experience moving home,

they confirmed that the survey HAD met

the terms of the necessary code of conduct, which...

They say when you're getting a survey, it's important to...

..If the report indicates that access to an area

has not been possible.

If you proceed to buy a house on this basis, you're...

Their advice is to buy a survey type which will provide you with...

..But also ensure that you...

But the MacDonalds are angry that the document they put their faith in

DIDN'T highlight such a major problem.

All we wanted was the house that was reported in the home report.

nothing more, nothing less.

-And we trusted that.

-We trusted it, yeah.

Most companies you tell us about haven't set out to rip you off.

So when you feel that that's what's happened,

it may be that their terms and conditions

just weren't clear enough.

Or when there's been a genuine mistake

that they've been slow to put things right.

Whatever the circumstances, you need to know what to do and where to turn.

So we've put together a free booklet of practical tips and advice.

You can download it from our website...

Or to receive a copy in the post,

send an A5 stamped and self-addressed envelope

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

Still to come...

Massive repair costs, you've no choice about paying.

I'm just flabbergasted,

I wonder what planet people are living on

to think that someone

living somewhere as poor and deprived as this is

would have any kind of money like that.

Now overnight, we turned this empty store

into a free consumer advice clinic.

Our team of experts were on hand to answer your questions

and advise how best to take your complaints further.

So you need to get hold of those credit files

and check that everything on there are agreements that you recognise.

Kerry, good advice, I think,

and the way forward seems to be through the council.

To pay that for a five-day trip to Scotland

when frankly, you don't need insurance, is a rip off!

Kelly is hoping that Trading Standards expert Sylvia Rook

can help get her faulty car back on the road.

Six months after having the car, the turbo went.

I contacted the warranty company

who decided that I wasn't covered another warranty,

so I contacted the garage where I got the car from who said it wasn't their problem.

So at the moment, I've had to declare the car off the road.

I'm still paying the finance company monthly for the car.

I can't drive it, it's not roadworthy.

I can't sell the car, I just can't do nothing with it.

Sylvia, is this a common story that we've heard from Kelly,

about the pitfalls of buying a second-hand car in this case

and finding that everyone's passing the buck when something goes wrong?

It's always a problem with anything that's second hand,

cos people think that cos it's second hand

you don't have the same rights.

But the Sale of Goods Act applies

no matter whether goods are new or second hand,

and you need to write to the garage saying that the goods

were not of satisfactory quality at the time you bought them from them,

and you copy that letter to the credit company

and say that under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act

they also have liability.

If neither party wants to accept liability,

then you are going to have to go through the courts

and you'll have to sue them to get your money back.

All weekend, the Rip Off Britain team were offering people

some much needed and welcome advice.

I got some brilliant advice and I've now got an avenue to chase up.

I was pleased with the advice I was given

and I'm going to follow what Sylvia's recommended I should do

and watch this space.

Janice and Pat have come to share their gripe

about the legal profession

with solicitor Gary Rycroft.

Where do I start, Angela?

Rock on, honey, you're the solicitor. Come on.

They're convinced they paid well over the odds in solicitors' fees

during their recent divorces.

Was there quite a bit of money at stake with these divorces?

Mine went on for four years.

£61,000 bill.

£61,000?

£61,500.

In terms of solicitors' fees,

the problem with divorces

is that they can go on and on and on.

For lots of legal services you can agree a fixed fee at the outset.

With something like a divorce,

it lasts as long as you two carry on arguing about the assets.

At the outset, you ought to have been told what you were in for,

in terms of the hourly rate that you were going to be paying.

You should also have been told that from time to time

you could ask them what was on the tab,

and you ought to have had interim bills

and an interim statement of what you owed.

Too late to go back and say,

"We are unhappy, is there anything we can do about the bills?"

If you aren't satisfied with the service you've received from your solicitor,

you should always go through the internal complaints procedure first,

but if that doesn't work out you can go to the ombudsman.

Well, we needed you! Where the hell were you?

Thanks for listening to me and better luck next time.

Hey, Gary, they'll be no next time, let me tell you!

Now when a company makes a mistake and lets you down,

I think most of us are prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt

and maybe give them a second chance to sort it all out.

Well, that's what Barbara Watson did.

She spent hundreds of pounds

on something that had a particular significance for her and her family.

But now, more than a year on,

all she's had for her money is nothing but delays and excuses.

Is that Grandad's house?

Yeah, there's one cow.

Barbara and Pete Watson live in Cheshire

with their sons Jamie and Bobby.

Their daughter Danielle sadly died five years ago.

Danielle was due to be 13 years old...

and died the day before her birthday.

I'd gone in the bedroom to wake her up

and found her dead in bed.

Danielle's post-mortem showed

that she died from dead-in-bed syndrome...

with Type 1 diabetes as a contributor.

Danielle was absolutely gorgeous, stunning, lovely heart...

Oh, so tall compared to me.

She was everything, everything to me and my husband.

She's left a big hole.

The family wanted to find a special way to mark Danielle's memory.

Danielle absolutely loved bouncy castles.

Anywhere we went, if there was a castle, she was straight on it.

We decided a bouncy castle would be a brilliant idea

for the children to enjoy themselves, and it would always be there,

it would be in our garden,

it would have Danielle's name across the top.

The other two childrens' names down the columns.

Barbara went online and found a company called

James's Bouncy Castles UK, advertised on eBay.

The website looked good,

the feedback on eBay was brilliant.

They totally understood why I was doing it.

They said that they would make a really good job of the artwork,

considering my circumstances.

The company told her that as it was a bespoke item,

she'd have to buy it direct from them rather than through eBay

and the total cost would be £885 including delivery.

When I actually placed the order with James's Bouncy Castles,

they asked me for at least 50% deposit, if not, full payment.

I decided to give them £500,

so that then I had something else to pay when it was ready.

I pay everybody by bank transfer and so it just seemed easy for me to do.

Barbara was promised the castle would be ready within 12 weeks.

So when that time was up, she emailed to see if it was finished.

They emailed me, saying that it was actually ready

by the end of the week.

If I could transfer the balance

of £385 into their bank account, then it would be on its way.

And that's what I did.

But one month later, the bouncy castle still hadn't turned up.

So Barbara contacted the company again.

Once more, they promised she would receive it that week.

But once more, failed to deliver.

I got an email from James's Bouncy Castles,

telling me that they'd had some problems inside and outside of work

and that was what was causing the delay.

There was no reason for me to not believe what they were telling me.

Again, they told me I would have my castle in about a week's time.

But that didn't happen.

And it was four months

before Barbara was able to chase them up again.

Unfortunately, my dad died,

so I was busy sorting out my dad's funeral and things like that.

I then contacted them again

and this time, I wanted to know the truth.

I wanted to know if the business was suffering financially

and if so, I just wanted them to be honest with me.

The company assured Barbara it would only be another week or so

until she received the castle.

So when that proved to be yet another empty promise,

Barbara gave them a call.

I was actually told that the castle was ready

and that they were arranging to have it sent to me the following week.

Barbara took time off work on the day she was told

the castle would finally be delivered.

It never came and then I received an email later in the day,

telling me that the person that was making the castle

had actually been rushed into hospital.

At that point, I was really beginning to doubt

everything that they told me.

I felt a fool. I didn't think that anyone

could've done this to anybody.

Desperately hoping her suspicions were wrong,

Barbara tried one last tact.

I discussed things with my husband. I said, "If this castle is ready,

"what's to stop us going to pick it up ourselves?" He agreed.

I emailed them again and I said, you know, distance wasn't an object,

I could get a truck and I could come down and pick it up.

And after I informed them that I wanted to pick it up,

I heard nothing more.

Well, it's now over a year since she placed her order.

Yet despite having paid in full and repeatedly being told

that it's about to be delivered,

she still has nothing to show for her money.

So we contacted James's Bouncy Castles UK to find out why.

They told us that the company has had to cease trading

because of financial difficulties.

They claim they were scammed out of money by a customer in Uganda

and they're still struggling with the effects of that.

They insist that there was no intention to rip customers off,

but accept that they should have been more truthful with Barbara,

rather than, as they did, telling her everything was OK.

They apologise for the upset caused, but insist the castle is finished

and have sent this photo to prove it.

But Barbara remains unimpressed.

And putting aside whether the final result

is really worth the £885 she paid,

why did it take so long and why did it take us getting involved

for the company to provide a straight-forward answer?

It's the way that she's been treated that frustrates Barbara the most

and now she'd much rather that the company simply donate the money

to a diabetes charity.

The castle was a memorial for my daughter, Danielle.

It was for the children to play on

and remember her and have fun.

I had my heart ripped out when Danielle died...

..and it's so important for me to get to the bottom of all of this.

After everything that Barbara and her family have been through,

I'm sure you'll agree, this was the last thing they needed.

There are of course ways to protect yourself from losing money

when you're making a purchase

and here's some advice on exactly how to do just that.

The best way to pay for anything online or not is by credit card.

If it's more than £100 up to £30,000,

though that won't affect most of us, you are protected

not only by your rights against the retailer,

but if you can't enforce those rights,

then the credit card provider has an equal liability to you.

Even under £100, you get very similar protection

from what is called chargeback.

It's not got the force of law,

but you will normally get your money back even under £100

and that also applies to debit card payments.

So if you want to be protected, pay by plastic.

If you buy something online, or indeed by mail order

or over the telephone, you are protected

by what are called the Distance Selling Regulations.

They say that even after you have made the order

and up to seven days after you have received the goods,

you can just change your mind.

You can send them back and you have to be refunded.

If the goods simply don't arrive within a reasonable period,

then the seller has to refund you.

It's no good them trying to blame the post office

or the delivery company.

It's the seller's responsibility to refund you

the whole cost of those goods.

Now, when you're getting someone to come and do work on your home,

we all know the best advice. It's to get a few quotes

so you can decide which one is the best value for money.

But what if it's someone else, for example the council,

who's decided that the work needs to be done

but it's you who's got to foot the bill?

Will they also have gone for the best value quote?

A home that you own. That was the promise

of the Conservative government back in 1980,

when Margaret Thatcher introduced the Right to Buy scheme.

It is my great pleasure to hand that over to you

as a little token of the occasion.

It meant council tenants who'd always rented

were finally given the chance to own their flat or house.

Since the scheme was introduced,

almost two million homes have been sold.

Karen Greenhalgh's flat in Sheffield is one of them.

She bought it three years ago

and set about making it a home she could be proud of.

It was a dream come true

when I was able to buy my house.

I know it's only a council maisonette,

but for me it was everything.

You know, it's the place I've called home

and tried to make homely.

As is normal in this kind of situation,

although Karen has bought her flat, Sheffield City Council

can still dictate if any work is needed

on the exterior of the building.

And in 2010, plans were approved for the local council to add cladding

to the outside of her block.

Not simply to improve the aesthetics,

but to make it more energy efficient

and extend the sustainability of the buildings for the next 25 years.

I partly understand why the council has done this.

Our people on our estate

do need something that's warmer

and more insulated.

But improvements like that just simply don't come cheap.

And now that she owned her flat, Karen would have to pay her share.

But she was horrified to hear how much that would be.

Because when the council wrote to her after getting a quote,

they said that her portion of the bill would be £10,000.

I had been expecting a bill,

but actually seeing that amount in writing

suddenly made it all seem more real.

I'd been trying to push it to the back of my mind

and I was thinking "Oh no!" You know?

"Surely, this won't be true, surely, it won't be true"

And although Karen's lease does make clear she should pay

a reasonable part of the costs of improvements,

she'd never, ever expected it would be this high.

I'm just flabbergasted.

I wonder what planet people are living on

to think that someone living somewhere

as poor and deprived as this

would have any kind of money like that.

The Council does offer a range of loans to pay for the cladding,

but they all have interest rates of nearly 6% APR.

And one of the things that frustrates Karen

is that however she pays, she's had no choice about what work is done,

when it will happen or even who does it.

It's the way we've been trammelled and told, "You will have it.

"Oh, you've signed a lease. There's nothing you can do."

It's almost standard for homeowners

who've bought under the Right to Buy scheme

to be billed for major works or improvements carried out.

But do councils always get the most cost-effective quote for the job?

In this case, there are local firms who claim

they could do the cladding on Karen's block much more cheaply.

But when we spoke to Sheffield Homes, the organisation

that manages council housing on behalf of the council,

they said, "These works, as well as being essential,

"provide value for money."

They recognise that the cost of necessary works can be high,

but say that the bills leaseholders face are low

when compared nationally with other councils conducting similar works.

Sheffield Homes told us the original quote -

the result of a competitive, Europe-wide tender -

was a good deal higher than the current estimate,

and the savings from bringing it down have been passed on

to leaseholders, whom they stress have been closely consulted

and involved at every stage of the process.

They point out that where the work has been completed,

residents are already seeing lower fuel and service charges

and are likely to benefit from increased property values.

But they've developed a range of options

for those vulnerable leaseholders who are likely to have difficulty

in paying their share of the costs.

But this is a situation echoed on estates

right across the country, where right to buy leaseholders

faced with big bills for major works want reassurance

the costs are fair and the council has got them the best deal.

It's ruined and spoiled so much.

it's just a financial disaster.

I'm looking at losing my home because I can't afford

a £10,000 bill on top of my mortgage.

I just... I can't.

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?

You should read it, but it's not in plain English.

It should be simple, you know? ABC, 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 and you get your bill and it's like £70

when it's meant to be £35,

and 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.

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

to investigate your stories.

Well, that's where we have to leave it for today.

But don't forget, we're always here to try and move things on

if you feel that you're not getting anywhere with a complaint.

So do keep your stories coming in,

and we'll do our very best to look into as many of them as we can.

Cos when you've got a problem, it's not always easy knowing

what to do next or where to turn for help,

so you'll also find plenty of information on our website.

The address, as I'm sure you'll know by now, is...

And we'll see you again next time,

when we'll have even more advice on how to prevent even more of you

from feeling ripped off.

Until then, many thanks for every one of the emails

and the letters that you send us. And from all of the team, goodbye.

-Bye-bye.

-Bye.

Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd