Episode 10 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, email, even stopping us on the street,

and the message could not be clearer.

It feels to me that I'm fighting a battle that I can't win.

Costs you a fortune and when you actually get through,

you get fobbed off.

You told us that, with money tighter than ever,

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

We ploughed thousands into it and we had nowhere to turn.

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.

Your stories, your money.

This is Rip Off Britain.

Hello and welcome to Rip Off Britain,

the series that tries to ensure that whenever you spend your money,

whether it's pounds or pennies,

you really are getting exactly what you paid for,

but that's not always the case.

Sadly not, and today we'll be hearing

about situations where things have gone wrong

and the repercussions of that have rumbled on for months,

and even years.

So that, instead of being resolved quickly,

the initial problem has created all sorts of extra difficulties

and, of course, stress.

Not to mention extra costs.

There are huge sums of money at stake in these stories,

and what makes that worse is the fact most of them

appear to have begun with some sort of mistake or oversight.

But, as we're going to see, that does not always mean that

putting things right is straightforward.

Coming up on today's show, why this woman says

an error by one of Britain's best-known banks

cost her over £7,000.

I'm just disillusioned in the way that they treat people,

and the way that they accuse you and don't listen.

The solicitor's mistake that's left this family fighting

a £150,000 debt they should never have had to pay.

The more this case goes on, we realise that we are on our own

and nobody else is actually helping us.

And more invaluable advice from the experts at our pop-up shop.

Go straight back to the energy company

and say that you want this overpayment back,

cos it's your money.

Ask for everything up front, in writing,

before you part with any money.

Now, when you're deciding whether or not to buy a house,

the thing that very often clinches it for you is the survey.

Finding out that there's expensive work that needs doing can be

what puts you right off.

But, equally, being reassured that there's nothing major

that's wrong with the building can be what spurs you on

to go ahead with the purchase.

So, what happens if later it turns out that there was something

wrong and that the survey missed it?

Well, in our next case, exactly that situation has

resulted in a whopping repair bill for tens of thousands of pounds.

So, who should be the one to pay it?

Sarah Day is turning her passion for dressmaking into a career

and it's a job that requires real attention to detail.

I'm just trying to start it up as a business now.

I've done a couple of wedding fairs and it's going really well.

Back in 2009, Sarah began looking for a property that she could

not only live in but from where eventually

she could also run her budding dressmaking business.

And with the help of mum Catherine,

she soon found what she thought was the perfect first home in Essex -

a reasonably priced Victorian terrace in need of some work.

At the time we were looking, it was shortly after the financial crash.

The whole housing market was just in sort of frozen

and there was nothing moving.

And this place had...

sadly been repossessed, and it just had a lot of potential.

Sarah offered £85,000 for the house, which was immediately accepted.

She arranged a mortgage,

and set about getting a survey and valuation.

When we were sorting out the mortgage,

obviously we had to get a survey done.

The mortgage company recommended e.surv.

e.surv are, in their own words,

"The country's largest provider of residential valuation services

"and do more valuations for lenders than any other surveyor in the UK."

Because the property was quite run down,

the fact that such an experienced company was going to be

carrying out the survey reassured Sarah and her mum.

We knew there were problems with the house.

Because it's a repossession,

you never get very good information about it.

So, the only...

The only information you get, really,

is what you get from the survey.

Indeed, when the report came back, it highlighted that there

were areas of work that would require attention.

And we went through the survey very carefully

and they had picked up a number of things.

Woodworm and damp...

Damp in the cellar and the gutters...

The house was in a bit of a mess and...

We'd put some money aside to do it, hadn't we?

-And factored that in.

-We looked at what needed doing

and tallied up how much it was going to cost,

and it was all perfectly doable.

So, although considerable work was required,

there was nothing to alarm Sarah or her mum,

and they felt prepared to take it all on,

so the sale went ahead.

It was quite exciting.

I was kind of thinking where I was going to put things.

I had my eye on the cellar as my work room and...

it was really good fun.

After moving in, Sarah and her mum set about tackling the work

that e.surv had highlighted as urgent.

We worked through everything. We sorted out the heating system,

we sorted out the bathrooms, we sorted out the gutters -

all of that.

Once all the main remedial work was completed,

Sarah and her mum decided that they'd look at adding a fourth

bedroom by building an extension in the roof space above the kitchen.

It would allow Sarah to move in a lodger

and make some money from the rental income.

Until now, there hadn't been any reason for them

to think that there was a problem with the roof because the

survey certainly hadn't said that it needed urgent attention.

Indeed, it had said there was no evidence of significant distortion.

The e.surv survey said of the roof that it was in an average condition,

so on that basis,

we took it to mean there was nothing majorly wrong with it.

So, thinking it was going to be a straightforward job,

Sarah asked a builder for a quote,

but his reaction was not what they were expecting.

He stuck his head up in the roof and just said, "This is a major job.

"You need a structural engineer."

And he looked quite horrified, actually,

that people were living in the house with it in that state.

He really thought, if he went up there,

there was a chance the whole lot could come down.

And it seemed that the builder's fears were well-founded.

The roof was sagging so badly that two dormer windows

built into the roof had little support,

and were on the brink of collapsing into the top floor of the house.

Wooden beams that were vital in supporting the roof

were barely attached to each other

and, in some cases, not attached at all.

And most concerning, the property's water tank,

weighing well over half a ton,

was balanced on just a few narrow beams, looking very unstable.

The water tank was a big part of the problem.

I mean, it was a massive thing.

And if it had give way, which it could've done,

there was a bed directly underneath it,

which one of the lodgers was using,

and then underneath that - the floor below - was my room.

And it's quite likely it would've taken out both of those.

Sarah and her mum got in a structural engineer,

who confirmed the builder's opinion.

In fact, he was so concerned, he refused to enter the loft,

as he feared it would collapse under his weight.

He was fairly horrified, actually, the look on his face.

It was just horrendous, the state the roof was in.

There doesn't seem to have been a lot holding it up...

besides woodworm holding hands, as far as I can see, in places.

It was just horrific.

Sarah and Catherine couldn't understand how such significant

problems were missed by the surveyor when he'd looked at the roof space.

You've put your trust in the surveyors to tell you

if there are any major problems, and they really let us down.

They completely missed it.

It's quite an old building, it's sort of 1880s,

and old buildings can be wonky, but I didn't think anything of it

because the survey said it was all right.

If the builder could spot that it was in that state just by looking

through the loft hatch, then how did they not notice?

How did the surveyor not notice?

The shock of finding the roof was in such a state was nothing

compared to the cost it would take to put it right.

The whole roof structure has had to be replaced,

costing around £25,000.

Add to that professional fees, removal, storage and redecoration,

and the total cost for fixing this was over £32,000.

If we'd had the right advice in the survey right at the outset,

I don't think we would've bought the house.

We might have tried to reduce our offer by about as much as

we believed the works were going to cost.

I'm not sure that we would have got a mortgage.

In recognition that Catherine felt she hadn't had the best

service from e.surv,

the company offered a good will payment in full

and final settlement, and without admission of any liability.

But Catherine and Sarah still think that this is much less than

they had to spend to fix the roof and make the house safe again.

Once we'd let them know that we had a major problem,

they came back with an offer but we just couldn't understand where

they'd got this figure from.

And there's absolutely no relationship to the amount

that we've had to spend to put right the problems

that they failed to identify.

Sarah and Catherine feel they have no choice

but to take legal action against the company,

and it's left them questioning why house-buyers can be left

so exposed to risks and such potential financial loss.

It's a real David and Goliath situation.

We're just ordinary people with finite resources,

very limited resources,

and they're a huge company with massive resources.

We appointed them to give us professional advice and they failed.

When we contact e.surv, they said that,

as the matter is the subject of legal proceedings,

they're unable to comment on specific aspects of the case.

But they told us that, as the UK's largest surveying practice,

they pride themselves on offering the very highest

standard of service,

and that their workforce of more than 380 fully qualified

and experienced surveyors is subject to ongoing checks

as part of their quality control.

Where concerns are raised, they say they do all they can

to resolve things to the customer's satisfaction,

and they are satisfied that their procedures were

followed in this case.

Meanwhile, for Sarah, what was supposed to be an exciting first

step on the property ladder has instead become a huge

burden on both her and her mum.

It's just cleaned out the savings of the whole family, really.

I expect that...it will have effects on me and Mum for years, really.

The amount of money that we had to spend out on fixing something that we

should've been forewarned about.

And if you have any concerns following a survey that

you've had done on your property

and you can't resolve it with the company who carried it out,

then you should contact the Ombudsman Service for property.

They will investigate your complaint free of charge

and decide what action, if any, can be taken to resolve matters.

We've been on the road again.

This year, opening up our pop-up shop in Liverpool,

with a whole team of experts on-hand to offer face-to-face advice

to as many of you as we could.

Go straight back to the energy company

and say that you want this overpayment back,

because it's your money.

And we had more people calling in for information

and advice than ever before.

Set out what your evidence is, mention the industry benchmark...

Ask for everything in writing, up front,

before you part with any money.

Our pop-up shop gives us the opportunity of hearing first-hand

about situations where you feel you've been ripped off.

And, here in Liverpool, you've been telling us just that.

One man who came to see us was Terrence.

He was hoping that communications expert David McClelland could

help him with a problem that he's had trying to end the phone

and broadband contract on a house that he no longer lives in.

I informed them that I'd be moving on the 28th of August.

The last bill I got, I got the bill on the September,

which covered the August.

Paid that. It was done by Direct Debit.

Once I paid that, I said,

"You can cancel that bill because there is no contract."

So, verbally, on the telephone with them,

you said, "I'd like to terminate my contract, please."

I'm not renewing the contract cos I'll be moving very shortly.

But the company didn't cancel the contract

and carried on sending bills to Terrence's old address,

which quickly stacked up.

It's gone on now into several hundreds of pounds...

..and they've now put bailiffs onto me.

I've now received a letter with a reduction in the thing.

-How much?

-£242 off.

It sounds as though, by the fact they've written to you

and made you an offer of a reduced bill to your new address,

that they've acknowledged you've moved house,

and they've acknowledged that maybe everything hasn't gone

quite as it should've done.

So, they're making you a gesture of good will to a certain extent.

I wouldn't accept that.

What I would be doing is I would lodge a formal complaint.

All telecoms communication providers do have to have an official

complaints procedure.

If they don't respond to that to your satisfaction,

then there are other places that you can go to.

Now, there are two alternate dispute resolution services

for the telecoms communications industry.

One is called CSAS,

The other's called Ombudsman Services.

The guys at Ombudsman Services and CSAS make it very,

very easy to complain.

So, there's no - in theory -

complicated form-filling to go through.

They just want to make sure that you're happy with the service

you receive from them.

The official procedures there will mean that it does get looked at

properly, and, if you're not happy,

then there are regulated bodies who will make sure that that

-complaint is dealt with satisfactorily.

-Fine.

This year, we weren't just inside our shop.

We were outside on the streets as well,

with workshops packed with practical advice to stop you being caught out.

Morning, all. I'm going to talk to you guys all today a little

bit about broadband and how you can save money by switching.

When you see an item in a shop, they are not offering to sell it to you,

they are actually inviting you to make an offer to buy.

Our experts went right into the heart of the city

to give you top consumer tips.

Whenever you use your credit card to buy something

that costs more than £100 and less than £30,000,

if something goes wrong, you can then go to the credit card company

and they are legally obliged to help.

Do you know? I do not think that anybody in Liverpool has

an inhibition in their body. They're wonderful.

And you go out, you give them an opportunity to meet the experts,

but to participate and join in.

It has been a real road show in that respect.

Well, I think the shops haven't sold a thing

and they've all been coming to us today,

so whether they'll like Rip Off Britain again next year is another thing.

But that's the other lovely thing that the crowd say.

They go, "We watch Rip Off Britain, we learn by it."

I hope that they've learned in the streets today.

Still to come here on Rip Off Britain,

a year since we first met her,

what's happened to the woman who was left with a house impossible to sell?

I definitely feel we're paying the price for somebody else's mistake.

I'm very angry.

Very angry and very hurt.

Now, normally, when a company makes a mistake,

you'd hope it would be relatively simple to put it right

and certainly it shouldn't be you that ends up losing out.

But we've been contacted by a family who,

through absolutely no fault of their own,

have ended up in the most dire straits imaginable.

And, after six long years of fighting,

now face losing everything,

all because of disastrous blunders by not a bunch of amateurs,

but highly skilled professionals

who really should've known what they were doing.

Annie and Michael Fan had a tougher start to life than most.

As child refugees, they fled from Vietnam during the war

and came to the UK to make a fresh start.

But after the difficulties they faced,

the couple have strived to give their own children better

opportunities than they had.

We've encouraged our children to work hard, save money.

To commit into professional...be honest.

Be more flexible, open-minded, in order to succeed in life.

In 2007, they were looking to buy an investment property,

something that would hopefully give them

and their children a secure future.

We want to give them a good head-start throughout their life -

that was our intention.

They found what seemed the perfect property on sale for £180,000

in an area that they knew and liked.

It was the ground-floor shop and basement of a four-storey

end-of-terrace building where they hoped to start their own business.

But in October, 2007, just as they were exchanging contracts,

Michael and Annie were told by their solicitors that the property

had two hefty outstanding debts incurred by the previous owner.

We were shocked because, like, any transaction...

we expect everything go smoothly.

But the paperwork sent by the seller's lawyers,

a company called FC Solicitors,

reassured the couple that they had nothing to worry about.

The debt wouldn't be passed onto them. Instead, it would be paid

off with the money from the sale of the property.

When this one came to light, we had fights in the English legal system.

Everything would go away.

But that isn't how things turned out.

To raise as much money as possible to pay off their debts,

the sellers had split the building into two

and were selling both parts separately,

which, provided all the paperwork was in order and sorted in one go,

should have been straightforward.

We thought it's normal procedure, the charge would have been clear.

We would have registered our property via Land Registry

and we did not worry too much about it.

The sale of both halves of the building went ahead

and completed as planned, or so it seemed.

But, in fact, the whole process had been spectacularly botched

by the seller's solicitors.

The first clue to all that

was when they were told that only one of the two debts

on the property has been paid off with the money from the sale.

As for the other, well, in a catastrophic miscalculation,

FC Solicitors had only managed to pay off part of it.

Almost £67,000 of it remained unpaid.

And because this debt was secured on the property

that Michael and Annie now owned,

it was money they would now be chased for.

It's extremely hard to visualise how we maintain our family,

our career, our business...

It's absolutely a nightmare.

We literally go through hell.

And we had to be strong for each other

to master this problem all together.

There are also other errors made by the solicitors,

but the most disastrous consequence was that the family were

being asked to pay a debt that they never took out,

and now it threatens everything that they've worked for.

When this happened, we thought that we are both innocent.

The law somehow will protect it in some way or other.

Michael and Annie took their complaint to the

Solicitors Regulation Authority,

who, after investigating what had happened,

struck off the solicitor responsible for the mistakes.

They also ruled that the outstanding debt should be

paid off by FC Solicitors,

but the company didn't do it and they ceased trading.

But that hasn't helped Michael and Annie.

They're still being chased for the outstanding debt,

which, with interest added, has now risen to just over £150,000.

The company tried to make a claim

on the solicitor's professional insurance,

but the company's insurers said they wouldn't pay out.

They've also tried getting compensation from the regulator

but, so far, that has got them nowhere.

Michael and Annie are now in danger of losing everything.

Basically, we have to pay for it.

And, obviously, we have to raise the money somehow to pay for it.

And if you don't have that money,

you could become bankrupt.

And if you're working all your life to build up this far,

and you've got four children

and you want to set a good example to your next generation,

how do you feel about it?

You are innocent party...

and you are let down by the legal system.

The couple have now been battling to resolve this for six years,

but the situation has only gotten worse.

They've had to fight a repossession order placed on the property

in an attempt to force them into paying the debt that should

never have been theirs.

And, with their funds long gone,

they have no choice but to represent themselves in court.

The more this case goes on,

we realise we are really on our own and nobody is actually helping us.

And we keep having to pay all these bills.

It's really, really frustrating.

Michael and Annie feel they've been let down at every stage,

first by the solicitors who got them into this mess,

but also by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, who, as yet,

haven't got them out of it.

We wrote to two former partners of FC Solicitors,

the company who had got the family into this situation

in the first place. They haven't replied.

We also contacted the Solicitors Regulation Authority

and asked them why, as yet,

they haven't given the Fans any compensation.

They told us that a full review was under way and, in fact,

just as we were finishing this programme,

Michael got in touch with some fantastic news.

After fighting this debt for six long years,

the Solicitors Regulation Authority has now agreed in principle

to compensate him,

which has come as a huge relief to Michael and his family,

who can now finally stop worrying and start planning for their future.

As we've been hearing, what may seem a small mistake to a solicitor

can have far-reaching implications for you.

So, what's the best way to go about finding a good solicitor

in the first place?

At our pop-up shop,

solicitor Gary Rycroft was on hand with some key advice.

Try and choose a solicitor who has some kind of quality mark.

The Law Society has a quality scheme called Lexcel,

so law firms that have the Lexcel badge have passed certain standard.

Solicitors are regulated and insured,

so it's not rude or cheeky to ask

for a policy of their professional indemnity insurance.

It's always a good idea to find out how much your solicitor is going

to charge before you employ their services.

Before you engage the services of a solicitor,

always ask for a quote.

Always remember that the cheapest quote may not necessarily

result in the best service.

Once you've decided to engage the services of a solicitor,

ask for written confirmation of the cost and all terms and conditions.

Despite doing all of this, things may still go wrong.

Solicitors are only human, after all,

so it's important you know where to go if they do.

When you engage the services of a solicitor,

they should always tell you about their internal complaints procedure

in their initial terms and conditions.

So, never be afraid to make a complaint

according to that procedure.

And if you're still not satisfied after following the company's

response to your complaint,

you can take things to the next level.

Ultimately, you can make a written formal complaint

to the Legal Ombudsman.

But they're charged with dealing with consumer complains about

all sides of the legal profession...

anyone who has offered legal services to a consumer.

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

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

it may be their terms and conditions just weren't clear enough

or there's been a genuine mistake they've been slow to put right.

Whatever the explanation, when things go wrong,

you need to know what to do and where to turn.

So, we've put together a guide of tips and advice.

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

Or, for a hard copy, send a stamped A5 envelope

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

Something a lot you point out to us is that,

when you feel you've had a raw deal,

it's not always just about the money.

It's the sense of injustice

and unfairness that can leave a nasty taste in the mouth.

That's very much the case with this next story

and indeed why we felt we just had to investigate further.

Five years on from the peak of the financial crisis,

our relationship with our banks has changed for ever.

Official reports and enquiries suggest the banking system

remains unfixed and it's clear that the trust

they could once take for granted is no longer guaranteed.

Do I trust my bank?

Erm...

not wholeheartedly. No, I don't think I do.

They're a necessary evil, I think.

Don't really give the service the banks ought to, or used to.

Viv Woods has lost confidence in her bank Santander, and she blames them

for the fact she's out of pocket by thousands of pounds.

Her problems began after she changed

her mortgage product in October, 2010.

My mortgage that I have with Santander was coming

to its end of its two-year term.

Santander contacted me by letter to say that

if I took out a new product with them,

my mortgage monthly payments would halve.

Santander were suggesting that Viv pick a new fixed or discounted-rate

product to be sure she was getting the mortgage best suited

to her needs - a deal that seemed too good to pass up.

But, with her home up for sale,

she wanted to be confident she could take her new mortgage with her,

with no penalties attached,

and her bank seemed happy to reassure her on that.

They said, "That's not a problem.

"All that happens is your mortgage moves with you. It's portable.

"You'll take it from this house

"and you'll move it to wherever you move to."

Six months later, having found a buyer for her house

and a new dream home with plenty of outside space for her horses,

she contacted Santander to tell them

she was ready to move her portable mortgage to the new property.

But there was a problem.

Santander told her she couldn't take the mortgage with her after all,

which would leave Viv unable to buy the home she'd set her heart on.

I was totally shocked when they said,

"You can't transfer your mortgage.

"There's no prospect that this mortgage will be transferred."

So, I kept ringing them.

I went through a complaints procedure and then, finally,

one lady said to me,

"I suggest you obtain a credit report and you'll find you've not

"paid your mortgage for November."

Viv was baffled. She knew she'd paid the amount she needed to,

but when the credit report arrived, it showed that,

when a few months earlier she'd changed over to the new mortgage

that Santander had offered her,

she'd made two payments in one month and,

unfortunately, the bank's systems hadn't registered that one of these

was intended to cover the next month.

As a result, what seems as though it should've been an easily sorted

case of "computer says no" was jeopardising

the whole of her house purchase.

They couldn't set up a Direct Debit in time for the new mortgage,

so I'd sent a cheque and that cleared on the 28th of October,

which was for the November payment. I kept explaining that.

I even got my bank statements and said,

"I note the dates that it's cleared."

They wouldn't accept it.

It meant that we couldn't complete on this property

and I was frightened that we were going to lose it.

HORSE NEIGHS

It was really stressful.

I was tearful and constantly contacted Santander

to try to tell them to rectify their error...

and they wouldn't do it.

All this was a real shock to Viv.

She couldn't understand why she was suddenly being told

she couldn't transport her mortgage,

especially so soon after the bank had encouraged her to take it out.

If I'm such a bad customer with such a bad credit history

that I'm not worthy of having a mortgage with

or porting a mortgage, why sell me a new product?

The bit I don't understand is, they contacted me

and asked me to keep my mortgage with them.

And if I was such a risk,

they wouldn't have offered a new product on the old property.

Apart from one missed payment in 2010 when her mother had died,

which the bank was fully aware of,

Viv had always kept on top of her payments.

But, then, just as it looked like she was going to lose her dream home,

Santander got in touch with some good news.

I received a phone call from the Executive Complaints Director,

which sounds pretty official to me, to say, "We've got it wrong."

He explained that because the computer system at Santander

hadn't recognised a payment on the 1st of November,

they had made a mistake, and he apologised profusely.

I was so excited, I cried and I cracked open a bottle of champagne,

because it just meant that everything was sorted

and it was all over.

Santander wrote to Viv,

saying they would amend her credit file to take off the missed

payment and advised her to reapply to successfully port her mortgage.

Viv was reassured the purchase of her new home could go ahead.

But she was in for another shock. When, as suggested,

her financial advisor contacted Santander to reapply,

they informed him they still weren't prepared to lend on the new property

and Viv still didn't meet the criteria

for the mortgage to be transferred.

With a two-week deadline looming before the completion

on selling HER home, Viv felt she had little choice

but to go ahead with the sale and move into rented accommodation.

The people had to complete on my property in May,

they had a deadline. I didn't want to let them down.

I wanted to move from my house, cos I didn't have enough land,

but I had no property to move to.

I had to rent an acre field with two stables for six horses and my goat,

and we had to rent an alternative house.

We had to move into rented accommodation.

With the sale of her home completed,

and desperate not to lose the one she wanted to buy,

on the advice of her financial advisor,

Viv approached another mortgage lender.

They wasn't bothered about any problems.

They knew the urgency...

They instructed a surveyor the day after and, by one o'clock,

the mortgage offers had been faxed through to both

my financial advisor and my solicitors.

Viv finally moved into her home in July, 2011,

but there was one final and very costly twist still to come.

My solicitor contacted me as completion was going through

on the 7th of July on my dream home, to say,

"I'm really sorry, Viv,

"but because you haven't ported your mortgage with Santander,

"and because you've gone to a new supplier for your mortgage,

"they're charging you £5,700 in an early redemption fee."

That, to me, was just wholly unacceptable.

Determined that she shouldn't have to pay for a situation

she's adamant was because of an error by the bank,

Viv is now pursuing Santander through the courts to claim the money back.

When a bank like this make a decision that

"we're not transferring your mortgage,"

they don't know what you're going through.

I'm just disillusioned in the way that they treat people

and the way that they accuse you and don't listen.

When we contacted Santander, they told us they've reviewed the details

of Viv's case but maintain that she did not meet the eligibility

criteria for porting her mortgage because of her payments and arrears.

And they say

as she chose to move her mortgage before the end of the term,

in line with their terms and conditions,

an early repayment charge was applicable.

Even so, just as we were finishing this programme, there was good news.

As a good will gesture, and without accepting any liability,

or that they were wrong,

the bank has now offered to give Viv the money back,

but she's still unhappy about everything that has happened.

Nobody understands the effect that it has on somebody's life.

They must say sorry to me -

I'm absolutely adamant about that -

and then I'd like my money back, please.

I'd like my £5,700 back.

Nobody understands the effect it has on somebody's life

and the effect it has upon you.

Now, one of the most memorable stories in our series last year

was to do with the devastating implications of a mistake

that had left one woman unable to sell their family home.

And it was all because an extraordinary but really crucial

detail had been missed.

Well, there have been some big developments in that situation

since then, although, sadly,

it doesn't mean that things are actually resolved.

It was 2007 when Chris from Sussex first put her house on the market.

But for the next five years, she found it impossible to sell.

She had plenty of viewings and even offers,

but all fell through for the same astonishing reason.

Chris first got in touch with Rip Off Britain last year,

after yet another potential buyer had pulled out.

I was gutted.

I just can't find the words to express how I feel.

I felt as if I had been dealt a great big, hefty blow.

Each time the sale had collapsed, it was because of an extraordinary

complication with the title deeds of Chris' property,

one likely to put off any buyer,

but it had only become clear when Chris put the house up for sale.

She discovered then that the deeds contained a clause forbidding

them to sell the house without their next door neighbour's permission.

What's more, any structural changes to the home would need to be

run past the neighbour as well.

So, technically, even if they wanted to knock a wall down

inside the house, they would have to pop next door

to check if that was all right.

This is why the people pulled out of buying the property,

because they weren't prepared to take the house on

with those restrictions on, which is fair enough.

We wouldn't have taken it on if we'd have been told about it.

And that is the root of the problem.

When she'd bought the house back in 2000,

Chris said she wasn't told about the restrictions.

It later emerged that Chris' house had been built on land

which originally belonged to next door.

Now, when the land was eventually divided up,

the deeds weren't adjusted accordingly.

But Chris couldn't understand how the property was sold to her

with the restrictions in place,

so she asked the solicitors that handled the original sale,

a Maidstone-based company called Gullands, for an explanation.

And they accepted that they could have done more to put right

the deeds at the time she bought it.

They've admitted, technically, the wording was wrong.

They admitted they're wrong.

He's admitted they could have been corrected.

Gullands were confident that the problem could easily be resolved.

But, in fact, getting the restrictions on her home lifted

has proved more difficult than anyone anticipated.

And for the next five years,

Chris' house proved virtually unsellable.

Over that period, she faced every potential buyer,

knowing that as soon as they found out about the restrictions

on the property, they, too, would be put off.

She feels her solicitors Gullands have totally let her down.

They're the legal profession.

It's their job to know what all this is about,

what conveyancing is about,

what those words on those papers mean.

We paid them good money to read that and to act in our best interests.

Gullands did offer to pay a total of £435 compensation,

some of which was to cover the inconvenience caused

and handle any future sale of her property for no fee.

But Chris doesn't consider that covers what she has lost.

She feels that, with the extra legal costs she's paid out,

as well as the financial implications

of staying in the old house longer than she'd hoped,

the knock-on effects of all of this have been catastrophic.

I definitely feel we're paying the price for somebody else's mistake.

In November last year,

Chris did finally manage to sell her house and move to this bungalow.

To do so, she employed another firm of solicitors, who,

funded by the legal protection on her home insurance,

eventually paid the neighbours £10,000 in order

for the restrictions to be lifted.

And she ended up accepting an offer £110,000 lower than the offer

she'd had before the problem came to light.

All of which means she's been left with a large mortgage on her

new home and, instead of enjoying their retirement,

her husband has to continue to work.

Having a mortgage just horrifies me and upsets me,

because we shouldn't be having it.

My husband should be retired and enjoying this.

He's left the house this morning at six o'clock...

this morning to get a train to work.

He won't be home until six o'clock tonight.

He's 64.

He's worked nearly 50 years and he's now still talking that

he's got to work over retirement age because of this mortgage.

Although Chris is now settled in her new home,

she can't believe that the restrictions were ever

there in the first place.

When we purchased the property, they never pointed out to us

the effects of the covenants on the property,

so I blame them for putting us in the situation we're in.

We asked solicitors Gullands about Chris' case.

They've told us they're always disappointed

when a client is less than satisfied

but maintain that, in their opinion,

the covenants were not of themselves onerous

and say they were brought to Chris' attention when she bought the house,

something she emphatically disputes.

They say this case involved a simple error at the Land Registry

and they do not accept that this issue should have caused

any real problems when Chris wanted to sell her house.

And although they accept they could have taken the opportunity

to correct things at the time,

they're satisfied that they've dealt with the case fairly,

that they've taken every opportunity to engage with Chris,

and that their original offer of compensation was appropriate.

They also point out that, although they're not privy

to any further legal advice Chris may have received,

no legal proceedings have been served.

But while her former solicitors remain confident that

all this should not have created an ongoing issue,

Chris is adamant that it has and is clear that,

however the problem could best have been resolved, for her,

it's caused an extraordinary amount of stress.

I'm very angry.

Very angry and very hurt.

Here at Rip Off Britain,

we're always ready to investigate more of your stories.

Confused over your bills?

My first ever bill, I'd only been in the house for four months,

and it was for £2,000, erm...£2,700.

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

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

We don't have that amount of money, so...

..I can't see an end to this situation at all.

You might have a cautionary tale of your own

and want to share the mistakes that you made with us,

so that others don't do the same.

And had no idea that this company with this wonderful website

was going to be so poor.

You can write to us at...

Or send us an email to...

The Rip Off team is ready and waiting to investigate your stories.

Well, we all make mistakes but it's how we put them right

that can make all the difference.

And if there has been some kind of error and it isn't easily fixed -

well, as we've been hearing, it can make the situation so much worse.

It really can and, quite honestly, I'm always astonished to hear

how, in some of the most extreme situations you tell us about,

you can feel as if you're pretty much on your own,

trying to fight your corner with far less help or protection than

you might have expected.

But, of course, that's where we come in.

So, do keep telling us about situations

where someone else's blunder has left you out of pocket

and, hopefully, we can either point you in the right direction of where to turn to,

or stop the same thing happening to someone else.

Well, we're going to see you again very soon to investigate

even more of your stories but, until then,

-from the Rip Off team, bye-bye.

-Bye.

-Bye.

Subtitles By Red Bee Media Ltd