Episode 9 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.

There's too much focus on profit and less on customer care.

It's so hard to complain. Companies make it so difficult to complain.

You told us that with money tighter than ever,

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

All my money is very hard-earned.

So when I go to spend it, I expect value for money.

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.

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

Hello. Welcome to Rip-Off Britain,

the series where we get to the bottom of the problems you've asked us to investigate.

Whether you're out of pocket by pounds or pennies,

the frustration is the same,

and never more so when you've been hit with costs you hadn't expected to pay.

Absolutely right. Because it's those charges that seem to come from nowhere

which you often tell us drive you mad.

And perhaps what's most worrying about the examples we're going to be hearing about today

is that they're all pretty much situations that any one of us could very easily find ourselves in.

And maybe that's why so many of you have already been caught out.

But don't panic. Because sometimes, however much of a shock you may have got when the bill first arrived,

if you look that bit closer, you could find that you may have anticipated some of those charges.

So we're going to have some advice which hopefully

will try and stop at least some of them heading your way.

On today's programme, the families billed hundreds of pounds

for something they never knew they'd bought.

I said to him, "Do you realise what you've done? When you were playing that game, you said it was free."

Findlay was devastated.

All he could say through his tears was, "Daddy, it said it was free. It was free!"

Why this woman faces losing her home

because of a bill that's rocketed from £30 a year to £10,000.

I thought, "Where on earth am I going to find that kind of money?

"This is not possible." I just couldn't believe it.

Plus all the action from our pop-up shop.

Don't you just hate it when a regular payment suddenly goes up?

So put yourself in the shoes of teacher April Evans

who, after years of paying an annual charge of £30.

has now seen it rocket to 10,000, and it seems there's not much she can do about it.

Hoylake, on The Wirral, is where for the last 34 years

secondary school teacher April Evans has called this three-bed property by the sea home.

It's easy to see why she's so attached to it.

And it was this view that captivated April back in 1979

when she and her former husband bought the lease on this land

and built their new home on it.

When we built the house, it was very exciting.

It was quite a nerve-wracking time as well

because you think that things are going to go wrong

and you're not going to manage it.

But at the end of the day, it paid off.

Because we had a house with a lovely view in Hoylake.

In the late 1970s, the land was split into four very desirable sea-front plots

that were leased out to people like April who wanted to build a house here.

Like any leasehold contract,

April and her ex-husband would own the house itself,

but the land would remain the property of the landlord.

We had a solicitor who was acting for us

who pointed out that it was leasehold.

But that wasn't a problem.

We bought the right to build on it.

We didn't actually buy the land.

The duration of the lease was 999 years.

And when we started to build, there were at least 960 years left on it.

People were saying to us, "It's as good as freehold.

"It's going to see you out in your time. It's not a problem."

The couple signed a leasehold contract

that committed them to pay the landlords £30 a year in ground rent.

They built their house, moved in,

and over the next three decades, April brought up the family there.

And all was well until June 2010

when the management company that collects the ground rent on behalf of the landlord

delivered some shocking news.

My ground rent for the year was now going up from £30 to £10,000 a year.

Such a huge rise meant that April's landlord wanted her to pay

more than 330 times her current ground rent.

£10,000 a year is a lot of money.

I was a part-time teacher at the time.

I thought, "Where on earth am I going to find that kind of money?

"This is not possible." I just couldn't believe it.

I was shocked and angry and confused.

But there was nothing April could do.

The lease she and her former husband signed when they built the house

clearly states that the landlord can review the ground rent every 33 years.

I thought it must have been some awful mistake.

This shouldn't be allowed to happen.

It's too much of a rapid rise.

Unfortunately for April,

the clause in the lease agreement is very clear

and the company that owns the land is completely within its rights

to put up the ground rent.

April was aware that the amount she paid was due to go up,

but is struggling to understand why it's gone up so much.

I would have needed a crystal ball to see the amount that it actually rose.

I was expecting a reasonable amount.

My £30 to go up to possibly £200 a year. I would have felt that that was reasonable.

In fact, though it's hard to imagine

anyone would welcome such a huge rise,

it seems the proposed increase isn't out of line with what the land is worth.

But it's money April can't afford

and had never realised she could be asked to pay.

She's tried asking if the increase could be smaller

and although the landlord and property management company

is not putting her under any pressure or imminent deadline

and has expressed sympathy for her situation,

she will, at some point, end up having to pay.

One option might be for her to buy the freehold herself

but that could cost up to £160,000.

In order to buy the freehold, I would have to actually sell the house.

Because I haven't got that kind of capital

or even with a whip-round my family and friends,

I'm not able to raise that kind of money now.

All of which means April is faced with having to sell her family home,

a house full of memories of the last three decades.

I'm so upset most of the time, I can wake up in the middle of the night

and then I can't get back to sleep for the worry.

And unfortunately for April,

according to this property expert,

there's nothing else she can do.

In the eyes of the law, she freely entered into a contract with another party.

She signed it of her own free will.

She's taken advice all the way through.

There's been no coercion, no suggestion that she's been bullied

or strong armed.

That's terribly sad, but I'm afraid that this is a commercial agreement

and one that the law will ensure is enforced.

While cases like this don't mean leasehold purchases should be avoided,

it does mean you should take professional advice.

A word of warning to anybody who is looking to buy a new lease

on a new development today.

Please bear in mind that some developers

are increasing the frequency of ground rent reviews

and they're installing calculations, tables, by which you are able to increase that rent

perhaps double or even triple it, every decade.

So take advice when it comes to buying a leasehold property

and make sure you're not storing up a potential time bomb

for somebody who comes to buy your flat in years to come.

Meanwhile, April is facing up to the fact

that the only way to pay what she owes is to sell her home.

Her best option seems to be to combine a sale with the purchase of the freehold

so she can sell the land and the house together.

But all that will cost tens of thousands of pounds she doesn't have.

And by the end of it, she'll walk away with a fraction of the money she thought she could retire on.

Every emotion under the sky, through shock, horror,

sleepless nights, worry.

How on earth could this happen to me?

We contacted the surveyors who represent the landlord.

They told us they'd gone out of their way to accommodate April

to the point that the matter has been put on hold

until she sells her home.

At which point April will have to pay the full amount of rent

out of the proceeds of sale.

They reiterated that they've not put her under any pressure.

But for April, knowing that she'll have to pay eventually

has caused a huge amount of unexpected stress.

Her case is a reminder of the need to take professional advice when entering into any long-term contract

because a clause that may not present obvious problems at the time you sign

may turn out to have unexpected repercussions later on.

This is my retirement. I was going to retire to this house.

I was going to potentially downsize in my 80s

and live in a nice bungalow and afford to be able to buy somewhere

hopefully still here in Hoylake.

But now it's just not possible. It can't happen.

Whenever you see someone glued to a Smartphone or a tablet,

it may look as if they're hard at work.

But chances are, they're engrossed in one of the apps they've downloaded.

Now, these apps, short for applications,

can be anything from games to sophisticated programs

that let you shop, book a holiday

or turn your device into a sat-nav or indeed a television.

As you know, there's an app for any occasion

and it's because they're so easy to use

that they have so quickly become indispensable for many.

Kids who've got into trouble with apps have made the headlines this year.

Take this little chap, six-year-old Danny Kitchen.

In March, he hit the papers after he ran up a whopping £1,700 bill

on his parents' iPad by mistake

whilst playing an apparently free game.

I like zombie games, card games,

monster games,

dinosaur games.

Mum Sharon explains how it happened.

We were all in this room. He was playing on the iPad

and I recall him saying to his dad,

"Can I have the pass code?", and he said, "No."

So he said, "Please, it's a free game. I really want to play this game."

Again, I recall Greg keying in the pass code

and he gave it back to Danny.

In order to obtain even free items from the App Store,

you have to enter a password, a precautionary measure to stop lots of things being downloaded.

Danny played the free game for around ten minutes

and when he stopped, the family thought no more about it.

Until the next day, that is,

when Sharon received a call from the family's credit card company

asking about unusual activity on their card.

An awful lot had suddenly been spent on their iTunes account.

We received a phone call from the credit card provider

saying was it normal that this amount of transactions had gone through.

At that time, it was £1,300.

I put two and two together and recalled Danny playing on the iPad the day before.

And just quickly went into my emails and examined them.

Whenever money is spent on iTunes, you get a receipt.

And Sharon could see that she'd received lots of them.

Another one. 333 keys, 69.99.

But she didn't instantly understand what they were for.

The only description that was on the emails were "keys" and "bombs".

So I was still baffled and thought this must be a mistake.

Because you can't buy keys and bombs!

Not real ones, of course.

But you can buy pretend keys and bombs in the game that Danny had been playing.

It turned out he'd unintentionally bought them

at a hefty £69 a pop

in what's called "in-app" purchases within the game.

Now, although the game itself is free as you play,

messages pop up asking if you'd like to buy various items

to help you proceed.

Not appreciating there was a charge each time, Danny said yes.

I said to him, "Do you realise what you've done?

"When you were playing that game, you said it was free."

And he said, "But it was!" And he got quite upset.

Confused as to how Danny could have spent such a huge amount of money in just ten minutes,

his parents contacted iPad manufacturer Apple.

The company explained that after you first enter your password,

which Danny's dad had done for him,

there's a 15-minute window in which purchases can be made without needing to enter it again.

And poor Danny had racked up that enormous bill in that brief time.

All Sharon could do was explain the situation to Apple

and hope that they would be sympathetic.

We had two days of worry.

That was when the panic began to set in

and I started to think

we could possibly not get our money back.

Apple then told the family that Danny had spent a total of just over £1,700.

Luckily, after a few days of waiting and uncertainty,

the Kitchens had a full refund.

But it's made them extremely wary of what the children are playing.

My message to other families would be to make sure that they are very careful

with what the children are playing with.

And to analyse the games that they're playing

because when it says "free", it doesn't necessarily mean "free".

Lots of games that are free to play

have these in-app purchases.

But plenty of children like Danny have found that out too late.

This is Findlay Copeland.

Like any eight-year-old, he likes to keep himself entertained.

Findlay will play on the computer most days.

He loves the games. You can often hear him laughing away.

We've never had a problem before.

Whenever he has an iPhone,

he will always ask whether he can download a particular app

and he'll show it to us.

But one Saturday morning, the calm of the Copeland household was disturbed by an unwelcome discovery.

We came upstairs where my husband was

and he immediately sat Findlay down and said, "Sometimes people do things that are wrong

"but they don't realise they're wrong when they're doing it."

At that point I could tell this was something quite serious.

Findlay's dad had come across reams of receipts from iTunes.

Once we totted it all up,

we came to the sum of just over £400.

All done very, very quickly.

Findlay was devastated.

All he could say through his tears was, "But Daddy, it said it was free. It was free."

Findlay knows the password for his parents iTunes account,

which is how he was able to download the in-app purchases.

But because what he'd bought was virtual,

he hadn't realised it was costing real money.

Never before have we had this happen to us.

Never before have we had this problem.

He'll ask us. "This game is such and such, can I download it?

"It says it's free, or it's 69p", or whatever.

And we will say, "Yes, you can" or "No, you can't."

We'll have a look at it and see what it's like.

He is trusted with the password.

To avoid getting caught out the same way on iPhones and iPads,

it's quite simple to disable the in-app purchase function.

In the settings menu under restrictions,

make sure you've set it to "off".

They usually come with it set to "on".

Incidentally, the company behind the game Danny played

didn't comment on the price of his purchases

but told us it's essential for parents to guide and assist children

when buying online, and to evaluate the costs.

And they say they strictly follow all relevant guidelines.

When we contacted Apple about the Copelands' case,

they said they could only investigate once the family raises its concerns direct with them.

But the best advice for this and all other company's devices,

is to make sure you don't share your password with anyone,

not even your own kids.

Treat it like you would the pin number on a bank card.

And so that you don't get a whopping bill like Danny's family did,

keep in mind that there can be that window of time after you enter the password

when additional in-app purchases can be made

without having to enter it in again.

The Office of Fair Trading is investigating

whether children are being unfairly encouraged or pressured

to pay for additional content in free app-based games

and they'll report back later this year.

In the meantime, irate mums Sharon and Annie know exactly what they think.

I'm shocked by the developers of the games

that they manage to get away with what they're selling.

I feel the developers of these programmes know exactly what they're doing.

It is a cynical exercise to target children.

They know they can make a lot of money very, very quickly

with these in-app purchases.

It's misleading. Totally, totally misleading.

We've opened up our annual pop-up shop. This year, we were in Liverpool,

where for one weekend our team of experts was on hand

not just to try and solve your consumer problems face to face,

but to run street workshops full of practical tips and advice.

Set parental controls to keep your children safe.

And check reviews and ratings.

Back inside, you kept us all very busy

with a common theme wanting information on how to get your money back.

It's going to cost you £35, I believe, to make that claim.

I would think it's probably a good investment.

Mary is hoping communications expert David McClelland

can help after finding herself unexpectedly out of pocket

following a call she made to a directory enquiry service.

They gave me the number and asked would I like to be put through.

So I said yes.

When I got my bill through for the call from the provider that I used,

there was a £50 charge.

What I did was, I rang my provider up and asked them how come I'd been charged £50 for this call.

What they said to me was, it's happening all the time

and there's nothing you can do about it.

The problem is this. When you phone one of these 118 directory services,

they do charge quite a bit of money.

Now, if they ask, "Can we put you through?"

then they will carry on charging you that same rate

for the duration of that call.

Ofcom has been doing some investigation into directory services numbers

and they have asked that these services be simplified.

That hasn't happened yet, but hopefully that will happen soon.

So what I recommend is you do put through a formal complaint to them

using their complaints procedure.

Am I right in thinking that they didn't tell you

that they would carry on charging you for the call they connected?

No, they didn't tell me. They just asked would I like to be put through.

If I were you, as part of your complaint you say, "At no point in the call was I made aware

"that by you putting me through that I would carry on being charged

"and now I've got a £50 bill as a result of this."

See what they say. If they come back to you with something that isn't to your satisfaction,

then I suggest you go through either Ombudsman Services

or one of the independent alternate dispute resolution services

and see if they will find in your favour.

It's a bitter lesson to learn

with one of these 118 numbers,

particularly when you're in a panic.

-The other thing is, you won't make that mistake again!

-No.

Someone else feeling they've had a raw deal was Roger.

He wanted advice from finance expert James Daley

about a tracker mortgage that seems to be drastically varying its terms.

I signed up for a tracker mortgage in 2007.

A few months ago, they wrote to me saying they were increasing my tracker rate

from 1.5 per cent to 2.49 per cent in May.

-And then in October, it's going to 4.49 per cent.

-Wow.

-Which is a big...

-That's a big leap, isn't it?

Roger checked his mortgage documents

and in the small print, there was a clause saying whenever it wanted to,

his bank could change the rate of interest.

What they're saying is, "We inserted a little clause in the small print

"that says, actually, although you've got a base rate tracker,

"we can do what we like if we feel we get ourselves into difficulty."

It is perfectly reasonable for you to have expected this to track the Bank of England base rate.

That's what they called the product, a base rate tracker.

That's not what it's doing any more.

Roger wrote to his bank complaining about the change in terms

and was astounded at the letter they sent back.

They wrote back, giving the reasons for the increase.

Because of the current financial situation, the cost of providing mortgages has gone up.

This is basically saying the product we sold you isn't really what you thought it was.

"We can do whatever we want to if things get bad enough for us as a company."

We don't think that's the way companies should be writing business.

You've done the right thing, made that complaint.

Now you need to take it on to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

-I've done that.

-Great.

-What was their response?

They wrote to me saying, "We've looked at it and we're going to investigate it further."

I'm pretty confident you'll get the right outcome here.

Let us know what happens as a result of this

because we'd like to keep track of this, as well.

Still to come on Rip-Off Britain:

Just when you thought driving couldn't get any more expensive,

we reveal a charge that you'd probably never expect.

When I got the bill, I was absolutely mortified.

My immediate reaction was, "Where was the proof?"

Now, here's something that, judging by the emails you send us,

catches out an awful lot of you.

Adverts that pop up on your computer screen that seem to offer a great deal

but which end up costing a lot more than you bargained for.

Jan Hickman from the Isle of Wight leads a busy life.

If she's not looking after her four children,

she's out performing as a belly dancer.

What appeals to me about belly dancing

is that it appeals to my creative nature.

I always wanted to be a ballet dancer, but I was too big for that.

I found these belly dancing classes

and it's great fun, a way to keep fit,

socialising and we get to wear lots of great costumes

and it makes you feel good about yourself.

But Jan wasn't left feeling so good

after taking up an offer which seemed just too good to miss.

She was on her computer one day last year

when an advert suddenly popped up on the screen.

Jan was being offered the chance to pay just £3.52

for a voucher worth £35,

ten times the value, to spend on her next supermarket shop.

But if she wanted it, she'd have to act fast.

They said, "If you want to win this voucher, there's a countdown, like 20, 19, 18."

I thought, "If I don't click on it, I won't get it. I'll miss it."

So I had to make a split decision.

So I clicked on it. It said, "Congratulations. You've won the voucher.

"Now proceed to checkout."

With an admin fee, the total she needed to pay

was just £4.52,

so Jan was confident she'd bagged herself and her family a bargain.

Once I'd won the item, it said, "Welcome to Ziinga.com.

"Please pay this amount and your voucher will be on its way to you."

So I thought, "I'll put my card details in", and I was really pleased.

Not yet realising the significance of the message "Welcome to Ziinga",

Jan looked forward to cashing the voucher in.

But the next time she tried to use the card she'd bought it with,

she had an unwelcome surprise.

We went to the petrol station. I knew I had a certain amount of money in my account.

So I thought, "I can legitimately put this amount in. Not a problem."

So I put the amount in and offered my card

and it said, "Card declined." I was quite shocked.

Confused as to why there were insufficient funds in her account,

Jan had to ask her husband Terry to pay instead.

I was quite shocked to find we didn't have any funds to pay for it in my wife's account.

Which is unusual, because she's normally so careful with our monthly budget.

'It did make for a lively discussion on the way home.

'"Where's it gone? What have you done with it?"'

My wife was very adamant that the money should be there.

She was confused herself as to where it could have gone.

Jan immediately checked her bank statements online to see what was going on.

I realised that some money had gone out of my account

and it said "Ziinga.com".

Jan was confused to see that instead of the £4.52 she had expected to pay for the voucher and admin fee,

the auction site Ziinga.com had taken a further £35 from her account.

Thinking that the company had made an error,

she got straight on the phone to them,

but quickly found out it was she that had made the mistake.

Without realising it, she'd unwittingly signed a membership contract with the company.

To my horror, what they said was,

that by entering my credit card details,

I was entering into a tacit agreement to join and pay £35 a month.

To me, that's an awful lot of money.

That's the difference between eating beans on toast for a week

or actually having some fruit and vegetables and running my car.

So I said, "No way", and I demanded my money back.

In her excitement to get the voucher,

Jan hadn't seen the small print in the terms and conditions

tying her in to a three-month contract with Ziinga,

which meant the £3.52 voucher she thought she was signing up for

would end up costing her almost £110.

I was horrified. I haven't got that sort of money to waste like that.

Jan also discovered, again without knowing it,

she'd entered into what's known as a "continuous payment authority"

with Ziinga.com.

As we've highlighted before

these are often used by companies

so that they can take payments automatically

without needing to keep getting permission.

For Jan, not only could Ziinga take £35 out of her account every month for a minimum of three months,

but they could keep doing it after that until she cancelled.

Jan was locked into a membership scheme she'd never wanted and couldn't afford.

She went to her bank for help,

but they told her they was nothing they could do

and they couldn't stop the payments.

It was a continuous payment

and Ziinga could go in and take different amounts at different times of the month without my permission.

I had no say in it whatsoever. I was really upset.

The only way to stop it was to get Ziinga to give me a cancellation order

which I could take to my bank like a naughty child

and say, "Here's the cancellation. Don't let them take any more money."

In fact, the advice Jan got from her bank wasn't correct.

They could have stopped her payments to Ziinga.

But in this kind of situation, it's not unusual for the banks to get it wrong,

as money expert Ed Bowsher explains.

Surveys have shown around 40% of bank staff

don't understand that the rules have changed.

Banks can now cancel these payments

and if they're asked to cancel them, they should do so.

Luckily for Jan, she did manage to cancel her arrangement direct with Ziinga.com

and didn't have to pay the full three months' membership.

But that came at a price.

They charged her £35 for the privilege of cancelling

and, to add insult to injury,

she never got the supermarket voucher that had started all this unexpected hassle.

I was really upset. I thought I'd better let the £35 go

and call it a good lesson learned.

But I was very upset by it.

And there are others who'd say the same.

After investigating similar complaints,

the Advertising Standards Authority has found Ziinga.com's adverts to be misleading

because people who'd believed they were getting great deals and even free products,

ended up, like Jan, signed up to a three-month membership scheme.

So, has the company now made their adverts any clearer?

Well, judging by the number of complaints in the Rip-Off Britain mailbox since then, it seems not.

Dozens of you have told us that without realising it until it was too late,

you've signed up to regular payments to Ziinga.com.

We asked Ziinga about their sign-up policy

and whether their conditions are sufficiently clear.

but despite our requests,

the company, which is based abroad,

hasn't given us a response.

And although Jan didn't end up saddled with all the costs she might have done,

thanks to that cancellation fee she's still out of pocket.

And she's angry about the whole experience.

I wouldn't go near it! If you gave me £1,000 and said, "Go on Ziinga and buy things",

I would never go on it.

If it's too good to be true, it usually is. That's what my husband says and he was right.

Sorry, I've got to say that. It's the first time I can say on camera, "My husband was right"!

We've put together a free booklet of tips and advice

to help safeguard your hard-earned cash.

You can download it from our website:

Or, for a hard copy, just send a stamped, self-addressed A5 envelope

to the address we give you at the end of the programme.

You'll also find on the website lots more information

on the topics that we tackle on the programme

with plenty of tips on how to save money and avoid being caught out.

Anyone who drives a car

is all too well aware of the costs you rack up for just keeping it on the road.

Everything from insurance to road tax, plus MOTs and any repairs.

But some of you have found yourselves hit with a charge

that is not one you would necessarily expect.

And, indeed, one you think shouldn't be down to you at all.

If you break down or have an accident,

the chances are that you are going to be sent the bill for cleaning up any damages or spillage

even if it's not clear that it was definitely your car that was responsible.

The roar of the engine, sweeping views

and the freedom of the skies.

Flying is Jeremy Rawlings' true passion.

And there's no chance of the traffic jams that he can get stuck in on the roads below.

I've always loved flying because my dad worked for British Airways.

It's always been in my blood. It's an adrenaline rush. It's brilliant.

But, after a morning's flying in June of last year,

Jeremy got a reminder that travelling back on land isn't always that safe.

I'd landed and got in my car to drive home

and the accident happened on the journey home.

The other car was coming along the road towards me

and just took the bend too quickly

and flew into the front of my car.

Fortunately, Jeremy sustained only minor injuries,

but his car was written off.

And to his complete surprise,

around two weeks later he received a letter from Northamptonshire County Council

saying it had cost £600 to clear up a spillage on the road

resulting from the accident,

and that they'd be trying to get that money back.

Which left Jeremy rather puzzled

because despite his car being a write-off,

he's not convinced that any oil leaked.

And even if there had been some oil on the road,

how could it cost £600 to clean it up?

I'm absolutely certain there was no oil.

Of course, there was broken glass from the headlights and broken bits of bumper, stuff like that,

but there was no damage to the road.

Jeremy couldn't understand why he or his insurer

faced being charged for the damage caused by an accident

that definitely was not his fault.

The other driver has since been prosecuted for driving without due care and attention.

What's more, there was no breakdown of the costs in the letter the council sent him.

It simply said...

There was no explanation as to why that charge had been laid,

or why it was so high.

It was just a fait accompli

that the insurance company would just pay it without question.

And that shocked me, to be honest.

Though they can come as a surprise,

these charges are routinely levied by the Highways Agency

and local authorities throughout the UK,

as Carol and Gary Ponder from Warrington found out

after their car broke down on the M40.

We were in the middle lane and the car lost power.

We virtually just drifted over straightaway onto the hard shoulder and stopped.

And it is quite frightening when you stop on the hard shoulder

cos then you realise how fast cars go.

Carol used the emergency phone

and eventually, they were towed to safety.

Though the car was a write-off, the couple were unhurt

and thought they could put the whole thing behind them.

Until, that is, in October of last year,

when Carol received an unexpected bill

for nearly £600.

When I got the bill, I was absolutely mortified.

My immediate reaction was, "Where was the proof?"

The couple were being chased for costs incurred by a company called Carillion,

who repair damaged roads after an accident or breakdown

of behalf of the Highways Agency.

The bill was for the clean-up of oil on the road, which they insisted came from Carol's car.

But she was adamant that wasn't the case.

I know that our car could not have caused this damage

because we came off the middle lane

and we stopped straightaway on the hard shoulder.

If there had been any oil, it would have come from the middle lane to where we stopped.

So Carol asked them for photographic evidence

that it was her car that caused the spillage.

When I actually got the photographs through,

it showed parallel lines of what looked to me like old oil

going from where we broke down

right back to the bridge, which was a good half a mile away.

I knew then that this oil could not possibly have come from our car.

So I knew it wasn't us. To me, it was totally unjustified.

I just thought, "I have to fight this."

Eventually, after Carol's persistent protests,

Carillion withdrew their bill.

But why was she being asked to pay it in the first place?

Carillion told us...

"..when there's been damage to the road.

"The amount charged is based on..."

They say it's appropriate that the responsible party pay.

But in this case, they accept there was only circumstantial and not photographic evidence

to prove that the oil came from Carol's car.

So the claim to recover costs was withdrawn.

We've spoken to a number of other drivers

who dispute the bills that they've been sent to cover the cost of clearing up the road

after an accident or breakdown.

Like Carol, many insist that their vehicle was not to blame.

And in some cases when they've contested them,

their bills were also withdrawn.

So, is there enough information out there for drivers who are hit with these charges?

There's definitely a lack of transparency about these charges.

You may find information on some highway authorities websites.

Drivers find it quite a surprise to receive a bill in the post

from perhaps a vehicle breakdown

and they weren't even aware that they were causing damage to the road.

That's what frustrated Jeremy about the letter he got from the council

following his accident.

Not only did he worry that he was being hit with a sky-high bill,

but he couldn't understand how they'd worked out the costs.

So we asked Northamptonshire County Council how they'd arrived at the figure.

They reiterated that it's standard procedure to write to all drivers involved in a collision

saying that they will...

They explained that their standard charge for an emergency carriageway clearance is...

They then add to that any additional costs

for things like materials or traffic management.

They point out that the letter sent to Jeremy didn't apportion blame for the accident.

And when they heard that the other driver's insurance company

had accepted liability,

it was them, and not Jeremy, who were asked to pay the cost.

They say that had Jeremy asked for a breakdown of their costs,

they would have provided one.

Jeremy was relieved to hear he wouldn't end up footing the bill.

But it isn't always the case that insurance companies will pick up this kind of cost.

So, to avoid ending up with a charge like this

that you think is unjustified,

the AA has some simple advice to keep in mind.

It's certainly worth drivers checking their insurance policy

to see if they're covered for this sort of eventuality.

They certainly may be, although the excess on the policy is something to consider.

The next thing, if anything does happen to you on the roadside,

is to make a note of the circumstances - time, date,

who turns up if someone comes to clear the road,

what vehicles are used, how many operatives there are.

Maybe take a photograph if there's a possibility of doing that safely.

Then should you get a bill, at least you'll have information that you can use

should you want to challenge the charge.

And, of course, challenging one of these charges can be successful,

as Carol was delighted to find out.

My advice for the motorists, if they ever get a bill like this,

respond straightaway, challenge the bill, ask for photographic evidence.

I'm glad to say it's all been resolved.

I would urge any other motorist to do the same as me.

Whether they're buried in the small print,

added on before you pay

or taken from your account as a penalty,

there can't be many of us who haven't been hit with charges

that we didn't expect or didn't agree with.

The arrangement fees on the mortgage. That was a 'mare.

-Yeah. We had to pay quite a lot.

-What was that for?

What was that for?

I don't know! We paid it, but I don't know!

You get a little bit confused about everything, don't you? It's always a pain.

Unexpected charges can crop up anywhere

and they can be big earners for business.

The fight against unfair charges

is one that the Office of Fair Trading

takes very seriously.

In the past year, airlines have been ordered to make their extra charges clearer.

The Government also banned excessive booking fees when shopping online

after it was revealed that in 2010

these charges cost us a staggering £300 million!

But if these unexpected extras aren't annoying enough,

you told us it's even more frustrating

to find that you're paying for something that you never intended to.

You order something online

and you're asked, "Would you like a voucher off your next purchase?"

You say you'd like a voucher and tick the box

and before you know it, you've signed up for paying £10 a month

or whatever it is for tips on how to save money or joining a club or something like that.

The people who are doing this in some cases know perfectly well

that we don't all read 84-page terms and conditions.

They can bury things away, really beyond our notice.

But reading the small print is the easiest way to know what you're getting yourself into.

It's often said the biggest lie of all

is the box you tick saying, "I have read and understood the terms and conditions."

How many of us really do that?

Here at Rip-Off Britain, we're always ready to investigate

more of your stories.

Are you confused over your bills?

Why is it in small print, as if they don't want you to read it.

Unsure what to do when you discover 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 you made with us

so that other people don't do the same.

I had no idea this company with this wonderful website was going to be so poor.

You can write to us at:

Or send an email to:

The Rip-Off team is ready and waiting

to investigate your stories.

As we've heard, when you think you're on top of exactly how much money you're spending,

a sudden extra cost can knock you for six,

especially when it's hundreds of pounds or a charge you never realised you might have to pay.

As ever, in some of these situations,

the devil is in the detail.

It can be the dread of small print that's at the root of the problem.

It's always worthwhile ploughing through those terms and conditions,

however detailed they may be,

especially if you're buying online.

And it can be so tempting to skip them.

But don't just click the box saying that you've read them when you haven't!

Because you could end up with an expensive shock a bit later on.

I'm afraid that's all we've got for today. Thank you once again for joining us

and we'll see you again very soon with more of your stories

and, indeed, more advice to stop you feeling ripped off.

-But until then from all of us, bye-bye.

-Bye-bye.

-Goodbye.

Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd