Episode 18

Download Subtitles

Transcript

0:00:02 > 0:00:05We asked you to tell us what's left you feeling ripped off

0:00:05 > 0:00:07and you contacted us in your thousands.

0:00:07 > 0:00:09You've told us about the companies you think get it wrong

0:00:09 > 0:00:14and the customer service that simply is not up to scratch.

0:00:14 > 0:00:16People should expect more when they pay for something.

0:00:16 > 0:00:20Everything you buy, I just think we're getting ripped off.

0:00:20 > 0:00:23You've asked us to track down the scammers who stole your money

0:00:23 > 0:00:27and investigate the extra charges you say are unfair.

0:00:27 > 0:00:29We rely on them giving you a fair price for something.

0:00:29 > 0:00:31You can't always rely on that.

0:00:31 > 0:00:33You don't want more hassle.

0:00:33 > 0:00:36You want them to honour their agreement with you.

0:00:36 > 0:00:39And, when you've lost out but no-one else is to blame,

0:00:39 > 0:00:43you've come to us to stop others falling into the same trap.

0:00:43 > 0:00:44That is disgusting!

0:00:46 > 0:00:49So, whether it's a blatant rip-off or a genuine mistake...

0:00:49 > 0:00:52We're here to find out why you're out of pocket,

0:00:52 > 0:00:54and what you can do about it.

0:00:54 > 0:00:59Your stories, your money. This is Rip-Off Britain.

0:01:01 > 0:01:04Hello, and welcome once again to the Rip-Off Britain office

0:01:04 > 0:01:07where you can see, as ever, the team is busy reading

0:01:07 > 0:01:10some of the thousands of letters and e-mails you very kindly send us,

0:01:10 > 0:01:13and, by the way, we're very grateful for every single one

0:01:13 > 0:01:15and we read every single one.

0:01:15 > 0:01:18But while many of those letters are about subjects we've heard about,

0:01:18 > 0:01:21or even investigated in the past, some stand out

0:01:21 > 0:01:24as they're unlike any experience we've ever heard of before.

0:01:24 > 0:01:27It's some of those unique and, in some cases, quite extraordinary

0:01:27 > 0:01:30stories that we'll try to get to the bottom of today.

0:01:30 > 0:01:33And while each one of them truly is a one-off,

0:01:33 > 0:01:36there IS something that each of them has in common.

0:01:36 > 0:01:39They're all situations that aren't clear-cut,

0:01:39 > 0:01:42where it's not easy to pin down who is at fault.

0:01:42 > 0:01:45And that may be because there's been some sort of circumstance

0:01:45 > 0:01:49or even coincidence that, quite frankly, no-one saw coming.

0:01:49 > 0:01:52But equally it could be because according to the rules,

0:01:52 > 0:01:55or even, indeed, the letter of the law,

0:01:55 > 0:01:58no-one has actually done anything wrong.

0:01:58 > 0:02:00Which means that, however desperate the situation,

0:02:00 > 0:02:03it's been really difficult to find a way of putting it right.

0:02:03 > 0:02:05So we're going to be seeing

0:02:05 > 0:02:08whether or not we can help find a way to move things forward.

0:02:10 > 0:02:13Coming up, two churches hoping to make pennies from heaven

0:02:13 > 0:02:15thanks to solar panels.

0:02:15 > 0:02:18So why has one of them had no return on its investment?

0:02:19 > 0:02:22If we'd known the problems we were going to have when we started,

0:02:22 > 0:02:24we wouldn't have done this.

0:02:24 > 0:02:27And how the wrong advice meant making a complaint

0:02:27 > 0:02:30cost this man tens of thousands of pounds.

0:02:30 > 0:02:34The consequence is that I may end up losing my house here,

0:02:34 > 0:02:39given that the amount of money that I now owe is something like 86,000.

0:02:43 > 0:02:47Next, how a community building with its roots in the past,

0:02:47 > 0:02:49but definitely an eye to the future, has ended up losing out

0:02:49 > 0:02:52to the tune of thousands of pounds

0:02:52 > 0:02:55thanks to quite an extraordinary disagreement over a question

0:02:55 > 0:02:57that, when you hear it, you might think someone really

0:02:57 > 0:03:01should have been able to come up with a definitive answer.

0:03:03 > 0:03:06People may like to think of Britain as somewhere damp and rainy.

0:03:06 > 0:03:09But, as you know, the sun shines rather a lot sometimes

0:03:09 > 0:03:13and over half a million households and public buildings in the UK

0:03:13 > 0:03:18have now decided to cash in on that sunshine by installing solar panels.

0:03:20 > 0:03:23The power they generate is fed into the national grid and,

0:03:23 > 0:03:27in turn, homeowners are paid for the electricity their panels produce,

0:03:27 > 0:03:30meaning they can be something of a money-spinner.

0:03:31 > 0:03:33TILL RINGS

0:03:33 > 0:03:37These two churches both have plenty of roof space to put to good use

0:03:37 > 0:03:39generating power with solar panels.

0:03:39 > 0:03:41And because they're both in Devon, a county that gets

0:03:41 > 0:03:45one of the highest numbers of sunshine hours in the country,

0:03:45 > 0:03:48they were keen to tap into some of that sunny money action.

0:03:48 > 0:03:52For Reverend Paul Booth of Culm Valley Methodist church,

0:03:52 > 0:03:54it's been a great experience.

0:03:54 > 0:03:58We're generating around £1,600 worth of electricity.

0:03:58 > 0:03:59It's a no-brainer, really.

0:03:59 > 0:04:03We'll have paid off the cost of putting it in, in a very short time,

0:04:03 > 0:04:07and then continue to receive money to help the church.

0:04:07 > 0:04:10Culm Valley got their solar panels in 2011

0:04:10 > 0:04:12and have been earning money from them ever since.

0:04:12 > 0:04:16Back then, the whole process was pretty straightforward.

0:04:16 > 0:04:22CONGREGATION SINGS

0:04:22 > 0:04:23But an hour down the road,

0:04:23 > 0:04:27Kingsbridge Church has found their experience a lot less simple.

0:04:27 > 0:04:31They took out a loan for £25,000 to pay for solar panels

0:04:31 > 0:04:33in the summer of 2012,

0:04:33 > 0:04:36confident in the belief that the money they generated

0:04:36 > 0:04:39would cover the monthly loan repayments

0:04:39 > 0:04:42AND leave some cash to put back into the church.

0:04:42 > 0:04:45For Church Treasurer, David, it seemed as though these panels

0:04:45 > 0:04:48might be the answer to his prayers.

0:04:48 > 0:04:50# Praise to the Lord... #

0:04:50 > 0:04:53The day came, the firm installed them,

0:04:53 > 0:04:56a meter was placed in the church

0:04:56 > 0:05:02so we could record how many units of electricity we were generating.

0:05:02 > 0:05:05At first, there was a little bit of excitement

0:05:05 > 0:05:07to see how much was being generated.

0:05:07 > 0:05:10But the excitement was premature.

0:05:10 > 0:05:12Before they could start earning anything back

0:05:12 > 0:05:14from their energy supplier EDF,

0:05:14 > 0:05:17they had to have a formal application approved.

0:05:17 > 0:05:21But that approval seemed to be taking a very long time to arrive.

0:05:21 > 0:05:26We heard nothing for four months, and then when we contacted

0:05:26 > 0:05:29EDF Energy, they told us there was a problem,

0:05:29 > 0:05:33that we would not get the money we expected

0:05:33 > 0:05:37because we needed an Energy Performance Certificate.

0:05:38 > 0:05:41An Energy Performance Certificate, or EPC,

0:05:41 > 0:05:44rates the energy efficiency of a building.

0:05:44 > 0:05:47But before the panels were installed here an independent inspector

0:05:47 > 0:05:51had told David that churches don't need to have one.

0:05:51 > 0:05:54When we went back to EDF Energy

0:05:54 > 0:05:59and OFGEM to say that we were told we didn't need a certificate

0:05:59 > 0:06:01and churches were exempt,

0:06:01 > 0:06:05they said they had classified us as a day centre

0:06:05 > 0:06:08and said we needed an Energy Performance Certificate.

0:06:08 > 0:06:12That seemed quite ridiculous

0:06:12 > 0:06:16and we pointed out we were a place of worship and proud of it

0:06:16 > 0:06:18and no way were we a day centre,

0:06:18 > 0:06:20but they wouldn't shift their position.

0:06:20 > 0:06:22For the four months it had taken

0:06:22 > 0:06:25to find out that they needed an energy certificate,

0:06:25 > 0:06:28the solar panels WERE generating power and feeding it

0:06:28 > 0:06:30back into the National Grid,

0:06:30 > 0:06:33but the church wasn't seeing a penny for it.

0:06:33 > 0:06:36David decided to go back to the original assessor

0:06:36 > 0:06:38to see if he could help.

0:06:38 > 0:06:41When I went back to the independent assessor to tell him that,

0:06:41 > 0:06:46after four months, they were telling us we needed an EPC,

0:06:46 > 0:06:49he was quite angry.

0:06:49 > 0:06:54He felt that they were questioning his professional ability.

0:06:54 > 0:06:55The assessor checked his facts,

0:06:55 > 0:06:59but was adamant his original decision was correct.

0:06:59 > 0:07:02He then said he would issue a certificate at that stage,

0:07:02 > 0:07:05with a caveat to say he still felt we didn't need one,

0:07:05 > 0:07:08just to get us over the question of the finance.

0:07:08 > 0:07:11The certificate being issued DID mean that the application

0:07:11 > 0:07:14would finally be processed by EDF,

0:07:14 > 0:07:17but the church's battle was far from over.

0:07:17 > 0:07:21EDF Energy refused to accept that as being submitted on the day

0:07:21 > 0:07:23the application went in.

0:07:23 > 0:07:25They were saying it was four months late,

0:07:25 > 0:07:28although that four months was due to their inefficiency

0:07:28 > 0:07:30and nothing to do with ourselves.

0:07:30 > 0:07:33The church had been expecting the highest of three standard rates

0:07:33 > 0:07:36set by the Government called Feed In Tariffs.

0:07:36 > 0:07:39That would have seen the power generated by the panels

0:07:39 > 0:07:44bought by EDF for 16.8 pence per kilowatt hour.

0:07:44 > 0:07:46But that rate is only paid for applications sent

0:07:46 > 0:07:50with one of those Energy Performance Certificates.

0:07:50 > 0:07:53Those made without an EPC, as Kingsbridge's was,

0:07:53 > 0:07:56are paid a much lower rate, 9p per kilowatt hour.

0:07:57 > 0:08:00And the fact the church did now have an EPC

0:08:00 > 0:08:02made no difference whatsoever

0:08:02 > 0:08:06because once an application is submitted it cannot be changed.

0:08:06 > 0:08:10As a result, the money the church would earn would be much less

0:08:10 > 0:08:13than they'd banked on and might not even pay off the £25,000

0:08:13 > 0:08:16they'd borrowed to install the panels in the first place.

0:08:18 > 0:08:20We weren't able to accept that.

0:08:20 > 0:08:23They've offered a couple of even lower tariffs

0:08:23 > 0:08:27if we didn't sign up in full and final settlement immediately,

0:08:27 > 0:08:30which, of course, we haven't been able to do.

0:08:30 > 0:08:32So now, it's stalemate!

0:08:32 > 0:08:35The contract for the Feed In Tariff remains unsigned,

0:08:35 > 0:08:39and all the time the church's solar panels are generating energy

0:08:39 > 0:08:41that they're not being paid for.

0:08:41 > 0:08:43I don't know quite how we're going to resolve it.

0:08:43 > 0:08:47I've done my best to negotiate a solution,

0:08:47 > 0:08:51only to find that the next e-mail or the next telephone call

0:08:51 > 0:08:53shatters that opportunity.

0:08:53 > 0:08:56But remember the Culm Valley Methodist church

0:08:56 > 0:08:57on the other side of the county?

0:08:57 > 0:09:00Well, THEY didn't need an energy certificate

0:09:00 > 0:09:04when they had their panels installed back in 2011.

0:09:04 > 0:09:07But while that sounds like they've been treated differently,

0:09:07 > 0:09:10in fact they had applied before a change in the rules,

0:09:10 > 0:09:14which is why they continue benefitting from those higher rates.

0:09:14 > 0:09:17Luckily, we didn't need an Energy Performance Certificate

0:09:17 > 0:09:23because that regulation only came in on the 1st April, 2012.

0:09:23 > 0:09:27So, our paperwork and progress to getting the solar panels in place

0:09:27 > 0:09:30was a lot easier than for many other places.

0:09:32 > 0:09:36Meanwhile, the team at Kingsbridge Methodist Church are still

0:09:36 > 0:09:39paying off the loan they took out to have the panels installed,

0:09:39 > 0:09:42but not making a single penny from them.

0:09:42 > 0:09:45When we spoke to EDF, the company told us...

0:09:47 > 0:09:50It's sorry for the "distress or inconvenience" that the problem

0:09:50 > 0:09:53has caused, but that under Feed in Tariff legislation,

0:09:53 > 0:09:57if a building doesn't have an Energy Performance Certificate rating of

0:09:57 > 0:10:02level D or above by the time solar panels are installed, customers

0:10:02 > 0:10:05"will receive a lower rate for the electricity they generate."

0:10:07 > 0:10:10EDF reiterated that the church was informed incorrectly,

0:10:10 > 0:10:14that a certificate wasn't needed and it's not possible to

0:10:14 > 0:10:17increase the rate now that one has been provided because

0:10:17 > 0:10:21there is no discretion under the legislation to amend the tariff.

0:10:21 > 0:10:25The company added that if and when the church signs the agreement,

0:10:25 > 0:10:29it'll backdate payments to cover power generated right back to

0:10:29 > 0:10:33when the panels were installed, albeit at the lower rate of 9p.

0:10:36 > 0:10:39Both EDF and the regulator Ofgem are adamant that the church

0:10:39 > 0:10:43always required the vital energy certificate that caused all

0:10:43 > 0:10:46this bother in the first place, so we also spoke to the independent

0:10:46 > 0:10:50energy assessor, who'd said one wasn't required.

0:10:52 > 0:10:55He maintained that he had acted in accordance with both industry

0:10:55 > 0:10:59guidelines and advice from his own certificating body,

0:10:59 > 0:11:02which state that churches should not be issued with an EPC.

0:11:05 > 0:11:09But as far as David's concerned, it doesn't feel right that the

0:11:09 > 0:11:12church has lost out because of confusion over this one point.

0:11:14 > 0:11:19The situation that we find ourselves in has been really quite

0:11:19 > 0:11:23strange because we were wanting to support environmental projects,

0:11:23 > 0:11:27yet if we'd known the problems we were going to have when we started,

0:11:27 > 0:11:29we wouldn't have done this.

0:11:34 > 0:11:38Not all the situations you write to us about can be resolved easily,

0:11:38 > 0:11:42because although it might seem pretty obvious that something

0:11:42 > 0:11:47has happened, it's not at all clear how it's happened or,

0:11:47 > 0:11:51more importantly, who's in a position to put things right.

0:11:51 > 0:11:53And that's very much the case in our next story,

0:11:53 > 0:11:56which has rumbled on now for several years.

0:11:56 > 0:11:58The couple who're at the heart of it all

0:11:58 > 0:12:02absolutely dread even the slightest threat of rain

0:12:02 > 0:12:07because they say that puts their home at serious risk.

0:12:10 > 0:12:13It rains one day out of every three in the UK

0:12:13 > 0:12:16and most rainwater goes into drains, or seeps into the ground

0:12:16 > 0:12:18without causing a problem.

0:12:18 > 0:12:22But when heavy rain falls around Alan Scott's home in Bedford,

0:12:22 > 0:12:25the water doesn't seep away.

0:12:25 > 0:12:28It's all flooded down here.

0:12:28 > 0:12:32When we called round at Alan's house, it had been quite dry.

0:12:32 > 0:12:35But even so, there were still signs of the problem.

0:12:35 > 0:12:38This is where most of the damage happens because the

0:12:38 > 0:12:41water flows down from the back of the garden,

0:12:41 > 0:12:42all the way down here.

0:12:43 > 0:12:46The garden is completely ruined.

0:12:46 > 0:12:48But the garden isn't the worst of it

0:12:48 > 0:12:52because the water doesn't just collect outside Alan's home.

0:12:52 > 0:12:56We found the water seeping up through the parquet

0:12:56 > 0:13:00flooring down here, so I had to remove the floorboards

0:13:00 > 0:13:05and cut the carpet away and then the mould and the damp was

0:13:05 > 0:13:10rising in this area down here and it absolutely stinks in this cupboard.

0:13:10 > 0:13:14As Alan's home video shows, heavy rainstorms have been leaving

0:13:14 > 0:13:17his home and garden much wetter than you'd expect

0:13:17 > 0:13:18for the past eight years.

0:13:18 > 0:13:21The garden and the ground beneath the house can be

0:13:21 > 0:13:25sodden for weeks after a storm, and when things are really bad,

0:13:25 > 0:13:28pools of water can be found under the floorboards.

0:13:28 > 0:13:32Two and a half, three inches deep now it's getting.

0:13:32 > 0:13:35Alan and Pat are adamant none of this happened

0:13:35 > 0:13:37in the first seven years of living here.

0:13:37 > 0:13:40It's built on the ground near our property.

0:13:42 > 0:13:45They say all this only started after a large area

0:13:45 > 0:13:49of land near their house was chosen to become a new community forest.

0:13:49 > 0:13:52And the access to that forest was to run along the side

0:13:52 > 0:13:56of their house, by upgrading an old dirt track.

0:13:56 > 0:13:59Work began in January, 2006,

0:13:59 > 0:14:02and the charity behind the project, the Marston Vale Trust,

0:14:02 > 0:14:07installed drains alongside the track to take away excess rainwater.

0:14:07 > 0:14:11But a few months after the work was finished, Alan made the discovery

0:14:11 > 0:14:15that has had huge repercussions for the couple ever since.

0:14:15 > 0:14:22I came downstairs and I saw the garden was flooded.

0:14:22 > 0:14:25Shortly afterwards, the water began coming up

0:14:25 > 0:14:27through the flooring in the hallway.

0:14:27 > 0:14:29Lifting the floorboards to investigate,

0:14:29 > 0:14:31they found the timbers were soaking wet.

0:14:31 > 0:14:35Well, we felt really frightened when it first happened.

0:14:35 > 0:14:39I mean, if you have water in a large void under your house,

0:14:39 > 0:14:41where's it going to go to?

0:14:42 > 0:14:45The only reason they could come up with was

0:14:45 > 0:14:49the new access track through the field next to their house.

0:14:49 > 0:14:51They wondered if perhaps the rain water that used to seep

0:14:51 > 0:14:55through the old dirt track was now running into their land instead.

0:14:55 > 0:14:59Worried, they went to see the farmer who owned the field.

0:14:59 > 0:15:05He said that the fields always had drainage problems,

0:15:05 > 0:15:10but we have got photographs showing what it was like prior to the track.

0:15:10 > 0:15:14Yes, there was water that used to lay on the surface,

0:15:14 > 0:15:17but it never used to come into the garden,

0:15:17 > 0:15:20so there was something different happening

0:15:20 > 0:15:22since the track was put down.

0:15:22 > 0:15:25The landowner said that it was nothing to do with him,

0:15:25 > 0:15:27it wasn't his responsibility,

0:15:27 > 0:15:30and for us to speak to The Forest of Marston Vale.

0:15:32 > 0:15:34So, Alan did just that.

0:15:34 > 0:15:38As a gesture of goodwill, the charity upgraded its drainage system

0:15:38 > 0:15:42and at the same time also dug a trench alongside the back and side

0:15:42 > 0:15:44of Alan's property...

0:15:44 > 0:15:46but it didn't stop the water coming in.

0:15:46 > 0:15:50And the Trust told Alan that there was no evidence the track

0:15:50 > 0:15:53definitely was the cause of their flooding.

0:15:53 > 0:15:55Over the following months and years,

0:15:55 > 0:15:58Alan and Pat have tried to get that proof,

0:15:58 > 0:16:01but further surveys haven't been able to establish any

0:16:01 > 0:16:03definite connection between the track and the flooding.

0:16:03 > 0:16:09We were absolutely devastated because we were worried

0:16:09 > 0:16:12about the ongoing damage to the house

0:16:12 > 0:16:15and what we were going to do.

0:16:15 > 0:16:18We wouldn't be able to sell the house.

0:16:18 > 0:16:21So, to see if we can shed any light on what's going on,

0:16:21 > 0:16:25we asked independent chartered surveyor Roger Southam

0:16:25 > 0:16:26to inspect the damage.

0:16:26 > 0:16:30- Morning.- Good morning. How are you? - Very well.

0:16:30 > 0:16:33Roger's been in the business for more than 30 years

0:16:33 > 0:16:36and over that time, his expertise has been called on by everyone

0:16:36 > 0:16:39from the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors,

0:16:39 > 0:16:42to the City of London and the Bank of England.

0:16:42 > 0:16:44The first thing that was evident when I opened the door was

0:16:44 > 0:16:47the smell of damp that just hit you straight in the nostrils.

0:16:47 > 0:16:50Having now put the damp meter into the timbers, there is clearly

0:16:50 > 0:16:52a major problem going on in this house.

0:16:52 > 0:16:54Those timbers to be as damp as they are for a period

0:16:54 > 0:16:57that hasn't been that wet and, certainly since February,

0:16:57 > 0:17:00we haven't seen a huge amount of rain in this area.

0:17:00 > 0:17:03There are other tell tale signs of damp that Roger doesn't need

0:17:03 > 0:17:06special equipment to examine.

0:17:06 > 0:17:09It looks like it's all the same cause, because it's coming

0:17:09 > 0:17:13in on this side of the property, it looks like it's emanating from

0:17:13 > 0:17:17outside in the amount of water that's making its way into the house,

0:17:17 > 0:17:20causing the issue with the timbers, causing the mould on the wallpaper.

0:17:20 > 0:17:24Clearly a major problem and we've got to find a solution for it.

0:17:24 > 0:17:28Outside, he tries to look for a probable cause.

0:17:28 > 0:17:30Standing in the garden, I notice two things.

0:17:30 > 0:17:31Firstly, there's a drainage channel

0:17:31 > 0:17:35on the outside of the fence that's going to be having no effect

0:17:35 > 0:17:37or impact in terms of removing the water.

0:17:37 > 0:17:40The second thing I see is there's one heck of a slope on this

0:17:40 > 0:17:44garden from the front to the back and on the adjoining land.

0:17:44 > 0:17:47Just like the rainwater, the ball's running straight

0:17:47 > 0:17:48down towards the house.

0:17:48 > 0:17:51After three hours surveying the damage,

0:17:51 > 0:17:55Roger is confident about what he thinks is responsible.

0:17:55 > 0:17:58He believes that the drain that's added behind the house,

0:17:58 > 0:18:01isn't draining water, it's collecting it.

0:18:01 > 0:18:05And when it's full, it overflows into Alan and Pat's garden

0:18:05 > 0:18:07and from there, into the house,

0:18:07 > 0:18:10presenting a real risk to their home.

0:18:10 > 0:18:13Well, the most extreme situation with the property,

0:18:13 > 0:18:15Alan's going to be facing wet rot, leading to dry rot,

0:18:15 > 0:18:20leading to structural integrity problems with the property.

0:18:20 > 0:18:22If Alan left the house and did absolutely nothing,

0:18:22 > 0:18:26then ultimately, of course, the house could well fall down.

0:18:26 > 0:18:29If I were to be put on the spot in terms of responsibility,

0:18:29 > 0:18:31it certainly seems to be underpinned

0:18:31 > 0:18:33by that roadway that's been installed.

0:18:33 > 0:18:36The heavy-duty nature of the road way, and the foundations

0:18:36 > 0:18:40that must be sitting beneath it, seem to be acting as a dam.

0:18:40 > 0:18:43Even if the flooding is stopped, Roger estimates that Alan

0:18:43 > 0:18:47and Pat would need to spend tens of thousands of pounds

0:18:47 > 0:18:48on repairing the damage.

0:18:48 > 0:18:52Looking at Alan's house, certainly it can be fixed

0:18:52 > 0:18:54and it can be solved, but it's wanting to make sure

0:18:54 > 0:18:57that you're dealing with the outside parts first

0:18:57 > 0:19:01because otherwise it's like putting a sticking plaster on a broken leg.

0:19:01 > 0:19:05When we spoke to the Marston Vale Trust about all this,

0:19:05 > 0:19:09it told us that though sympathetic to Alan and Pat's problem,

0:19:09 > 0:19:13and keen to help resolve it, it doesn't agree that

0:19:13 > 0:19:16the construction of the track is connected to the flooding.

0:19:16 > 0:19:19The Trust said it has gone out of its way to help,

0:19:19 > 0:19:23for example, by installing new drainage channels not because

0:19:23 > 0:19:25of any responsibility to do so,

0:19:25 > 0:19:28but to help a neighbouring landowner.

0:19:28 > 0:19:31And it reiterated that if Alan could prove that construction of the track

0:19:31 > 0:19:35caused the flooding, then either their insurance, or the landowner's

0:19:35 > 0:19:36will deal with the matter.

0:19:36 > 0:19:40The representative of the landowner agreed with that,

0:19:40 > 0:19:43making it clear that Alan needs to prove, in engineering terms,

0:19:43 > 0:19:47how the track could possibly have caused the flooding.

0:19:47 > 0:19:50They point out that various reports have found no evidence

0:19:50 > 0:19:54of this and that the opinions of the expert we sent aren't

0:19:54 > 0:19:58the way to deal properly with such a technical matter.

0:19:58 > 0:20:01They added they have been happy to assist Alan and have

0:20:01 > 0:20:05remained open minded and ready to consider any case put to them,

0:20:05 > 0:20:09but they maintain no such case has been put forward.

0:20:10 > 0:20:13But Alan and Pat simply can't afford the kind of detailed

0:20:13 > 0:20:17engineering report they hope could settle this once and for all.

0:20:18 > 0:20:21- It just gets you down, doesn't it? - It gets you down,

0:20:21 > 0:20:24but you keep your spirits up. That's all you can do, isn't it?

0:20:24 > 0:20:27We've got to live here, we can't move.

0:20:27 > 0:20:30With all conscience, you couldn't sell it and pretend

0:20:30 > 0:20:32there's nothing wrong with it because

0:20:32 > 0:20:35it's obvious with the damp creeping up the walls.

0:20:43 > 0:20:47Still to come on Rip Off Britain, why this designer thinks

0:20:47 > 0:20:49the similarities between her T-shirts

0:20:49 > 0:20:54and those from a big name store aren't just a coincidence.

0:20:54 > 0:20:57I was really disappointed to find out that something similar

0:20:57 > 0:21:01to our own original design was available in the high street.

0:21:07 > 0:21:09We're so delighted that so many people have

0:21:09 > 0:21:12decided to join us at our pop up shop here in the West Midlands.

0:21:12 > 0:21:16What I like more than anything else is actually meeting everybody

0:21:16 > 0:21:21face to face and hearing about their consumer issues.

0:21:21 > 0:21:28I agreed to do that, so I ended up paying a total of £299.

0:21:28 > 0:21:30And do you know what I like even better?

0:21:30 > 0:21:32The fact that our team of experts solve them.

0:21:32 > 0:21:36Bernie Eddisford called in for legal advice from Gary Rycroft

0:21:36 > 0:21:40after realising she could no longer contact the solicitors

0:21:40 > 0:21:43who held her will and the deeds to her house.

0:21:43 > 0:21:50I had to change my executors and when I went to do that,

0:21:50 > 0:21:54I discovered that the company had gone into liquidation and I couldn't

0:21:54 > 0:21:58trace my will or my deeds.

0:21:58 > 0:22:01- How long ago did this happen? - About two years ago.

0:22:01 > 0:22:04And you've been trying to track down where your will is

0:22:04 > 0:22:07and where the deeds are? And you've got nowhere?

0:22:07 > 0:22:09Nowhere, absolutely nothing.

0:22:09 > 0:22:13I do believe, from reading your notes,

0:22:13 > 0:22:16that you have a receipt from the solicitors concerned,

0:22:16 > 0:22:19so you have evidence that your deeds and your will were lodged

0:22:19 > 0:22:22with that particular firm of solicitors.

0:22:22 > 0:22:25That is a very good starting point and a good lesson

0:22:25 > 0:22:28for everyone is if you get a receipt from a solicitor

0:22:28 > 0:22:30or indeed anyone else, keep it safe.

0:22:30 > 0:22:32Now, the good thing about using a solicitor

0:22:32 > 0:22:34is that they do have succession.

0:22:34 > 0:22:37There should be a firm that's taken over responsibility

0:22:37 > 0:22:39for that firm's business.

0:22:39 > 0:22:43But when Bernie found out who that succession firm was

0:22:43 > 0:22:46and contacted them, they claimed they couldn't find

0:22:46 > 0:22:48any trace of her will or her deeds.

0:22:48 > 0:22:51- I think, Angela, that this is a case of Bernie being fobbed off.- Exactly.

0:22:51 > 0:22:55The solicitors who took over the previous firm, on the face of it,

0:22:55 > 0:22:57have responsibility.

0:22:57 > 0:23:01You need to be booking an appointment with a senior partner,

0:23:01 > 0:23:03saying, "I want answers here."

0:23:03 > 0:23:05Now, he may get himself off the hook

0:23:05 > 0:23:08by saying, "We didn't take over responsibility

0:23:08 > 0:23:11"for the wills and deeds from the previous firm,"

0:23:11 > 0:23:13but he's got to prove that to you.

0:23:13 > 0:23:16If your house is registered with the land registry,

0:23:16 > 0:23:19then the loss of the deeds isn't a massive problem

0:23:19 > 0:23:23because the land registry will be able to send you a copy.

0:23:23 > 0:23:26It's actually only £3 for a copy of the land register

0:23:26 > 0:23:29and £3 for a copy of the land registry plan.

0:23:29 > 0:23:30It's not a great expense.

0:23:30 > 0:23:34If yours is one of the properties in England and Wales that's not

0:23:34 > 0:23:38registered, and there are still many thousands that aren't,

0:23:38 > 0:23:40then your deeds will have to be reconstructed.

0:23:40 > 0:23:44The cost of reconstructing those deeds should lie with the people

0:23:44 > 0:23:47who are responsible for looking after your will and deeds.

0:23:47 > 0:23:50That firm may have ceased to trade, but another firm,

0:23:50 > 0:23:52on the face of it, has taken over.

0:23:52 > 0:23:55Just make sure that they recognise

0:23:55 > 0:23:57that you're not going to go away, that they do

0:23:57 > 0:24:01have responsibilities and they have got to pay up

0:24:01 > 0:24:04or produce the will and the deeds, one or the other.

0:24:04 > 0:24:07- True?- Absolutely true.

0:24:07 > 0:24:10Since filming with us, Gary has traced the firm of solicitors,

0:24:10 > 0:24:14who have taken responsibility for Bernie's property deeds,

0:24:14 > 0:24:15which is a huge relief for her.

0:24:15 > 0:24:17But the hunt for her will goes on.

0:24:19 > 0:24:22Outside, in our gripe corner, you couldn't wait to

0:24:22 > 0:24:25sound off about some particularly common complaints, quite a few

0:24:25 > 0:24:28of which we've been investigating through this series.

0:24:28 > 0:24:31What really annoys me is cold calling.

0:24:31 > 0:24:33Can't we stop it?

0:24:33 > 0:24:35Well, we think England shirts are an absolute rip off.

0:24:35 > 0:24:3857 quid?!

0:24:38 > 0:24:41I'm only 16, he's 15. How are we going to afford that?

0:24:41 > 0:24:46I couldn't believe how much it cost me to phone an 0845 number.

0:24:46 > 0:24:49It was £7 for 20 minutes.

0:24:49 > 0:24:52I didn't get to speak to anybody and, worst of all, it was the NHS.

0:24:54 > 0:24:57And even Julia couldn't resist a gripe.

0:24:57 > 0:25:01I hate it when you ring someone up and all you get is

0:25:01 > 0:25:06a recorded message or even worse music, music, music, music.

0:25:06 > 0:25:08They've ruined Vivaldi's Four Seasons for me

0:25:08 > 0:25:10and I'm very, very cross about it!

0:25:14 > 0:25:17Now, as you know, hundreds of thousands of small businesses

0:25:17 > 0:25:20start up every year, so to really make a go of things, each of them

0:25:20 > 0:25:22needs to be able to offer something unique.

0:25:22 > 0:25:25But here's someone who thought she'd come up with some

0:25:25 > 0:25:28really quirky ideas to set her apart from everybody else,

0:25:28 > 0:25:31only to discover that one of the industry's big players

0:25:31 > 0:25:34was selling stuff very much along the same lines.

0:25:34 > 0:25:37In the end, trying to prove who got there first

0:25:37 > 0:25:40is not as simple as you might have thought.

0:25:43 > 0:25:46Claire Mullan has long had an eye for a funky design,

0:25:46 > 0:25:50so much so, that for the last nine years she's made a living

0:25:50 > 0:25:52turning her imaginative ideas into T-shirts.

0:25:54 > 0:25:56Tee and toast designs are happy, carefree,

0:25:56 > 0:26:01they're a little bit quirky, they're designed to get people to smile.

0:26:01 > 0:26:05The business has a loyal fan base, both in Claire's native Belfast

0:26:05 > 0:26:09and right across the UK, thanks to her online shop.

0:26:09 > 0:26:10The T-shirts sell well,

0:26:10 > 0:26:13but not in such numbers that Claire would generally expect to see

0:26:13 > 0:26:16someone wearing one of her designs on the street.

0:26:16 > 0:26:19So when she saw what looked like just that, she was amazed.

0:26:19 > 0:26:22I was working at St George's market in Belfast

0:26:22 > 0:26:27and from a distance I was excited to see who I thought was a customer

0:26:27 > 0:26:32walking towards me wearing one of my T-shirt designs, the McMullet.

0:26:32 > 0:26:33As the T-shirt came closer,

0:26:33 > 0:26:36Claire realised that it wasn't one of her T-shirts after all,

0:26:36 > 0:26:40but one that looked very similar and it was being sold at Primark.

0:26:42 > 0:26:45I was really disappointed to find out that something

0:26:45 > 0:26:49similar to our own original design was available in the high street.

0:26:49 > 0:26:53It looked like Claire's unique design wasn't so unique after all.

0:26:53 > 0:26:56Something that seemed very close to it was being

0:26:56 > 0:26:59sold by one of the biggest names on the high street.

0:26:59 > 0:27:04This is our McMullet design. It was designed in 2004,

0:27:04 > 0:27:08it was one of our original designs and we've seen something very

0:27:08 > 0:27:13similar to it that came from Primark in 2012.

0:27:13 > 0:27:16The style is a little bit different but you can see from a distance,

0:27:16 > 0:27:18they look very similar.

0:27:18 > 0:27:21But you know what they say, great minds think alike.

0:27:21 > 0:27:24Claire thought it was probably just coincidence,

0:27:24 > 0:27:27but then it happened again.

0:27:27 > 0:27:29When the second one happened a few months later,

0:27:29 > 0:27:31I didn't know what to do.

0:27:31 > 0:27:35I was getting phone calls, texts, e-mails, all from family

0:27:35 > 0:27:40and friends and loyal fans, so they started flooding in with responses

0:27:40 > 0:27:44of, "Have you seen this? This looks like yours."

0:27:44 > 0:27:47This time, the similarity between the T-shirts was perhaps even

0:27:47 > 0:27:51more of a surprise, with Primark's design having an uncanny resemblance

0:27:51 > 0:27:55to one Claire had started selling several years earlier.

0:27:56 > 0:27:58So, this is our design on the left.

0:27:58 > 0:28:03It's got the unicorn with a speech bubble, the shape of a cloud,

0:28:03 > 0:28:05with the words "I'm magic" inside.

0:28:05 > 0:28:08Then Primark have a version with a unicorn

0:28:08 > 0:28:12in a different kind of illustration style, but then in a very similar

0:28:12 > 0:28:14font, they have the words "I'm magic".

0:28:14 > 0:28:18Claire could never have imagined that almost five years after

0:28:18 > 0:28:21her design, a very similar one would appear

0:28:21 > 0:28:23in the stores of a much bigger company.

0:28:23 > 0:28:27You feel a bit sick, you start researching, you're mad,

0:28:27 > 0:28:31you're angry, you're disappointed, you're disappointed for your fans

0:28:31 > 0:28:34and your followers because they're buying something that's not meant

0:28:34 > 0:28:36to be found in the high street.

0:28:36 > 0:28:39Claire was convinced that one of Primark's designers

0:28:39 > 0:28:40must have seen her work.

0:28:40 > 0:28:43She tried to take the matter up with Primark directly,

0:28:43 > 0:28:46but when she couldn't get through to anyone who could help, Claire asked

0:28:46 > 0:28:50a lawyer specialising in copyright issues to look into her case.

0:28:53 > 0:28:55But after much thought, Claire decided that she

0:28:55 > 0:28:58didn't have the resources to attempt legal action

0:28:58 > 0:29:01against one of the biggest forces on the high street.

0:29:03 > 0:29:06The energy and the time it would have taken away from running

0:29:06 > 0:29:11my business to deal with a high street chain, I just thought my

0:29:11 > 0:29:16time was going to be put to better use by focusing on my business.

0:29:16 > 0:29:20But just three months later, Claire was astonished when she was told of

0:29:20 > 0:29:25another Primark T-shirt that seemed remarkably like one of her designs.

0:29:25 > 0:29:30So on the left, we have our moose-tache design, a moose with

0:29:30 > 0:29:34a moustache and on the right we have Primark's design.

0:29:34 > 0:29:37With Primark, the phrase three times a charm,

0:29:37 > 0:29:40it wasn't funny the third time.

0:29:40 > 0:29:44We ran both sets of designs past an intellectual property lawyer

0:29:44 > 0:29:47to see if he thought this could be just a coincidence.

0:29:47 > 0:29:49What we've got here is images that look at least to me

0:29:49 > 0:29:53to be extremely similar. Clearly there's a bit of deviation,

0:29:53 > 0:29:56but the idea behind it looks, to me, to be very similar.

0:29:56 > 0:29:59And then when you see that something even more similar has

0:29:59 > 0:30:02happened in respect of the mullet/moustache design,

0:30:02 > 0:30:05again, it might be just about different enough in copyright

0:30:05 > 0:30:11terms, but it certainly looks like a shared amount of inspiration there.

0:30:11 > 0:30:14Proving that there had genuinely been any copyright infringement

0:30:14 > 0:30:17can be extremely hard in a court of law.

0:30:17 > 0:30:22The courts will always tell you that copyright doesn't protect ideas,

0:30:22 > 0:30:23it protects how they are expressed.

0:30:23 > 0:30:26It's a very fine line to walk between doing something

0:30:26 > 0:30:28that's obviously inspired by something else

0:30:28 > 0:30:31and something that is just a direct imitation.

0:30:32 > 0:30:36When we contacted Primark, the store said it was saddened

0:30:36 > 0:30:39by Claire's allegations, which it says are simply wrong.

0:30:39 > 0:30:42It told us the buyers who commissioned and developed

0:30:42 > 0:30:45its T-shirts were not familiar with Claire's company

0:30:45 > 0:30:51or designs and at no time copied or took inspiration from them.

0:30:51 > 0:30:55Primark added that, like all high street fashion retailers,

0:30:55 > 0:30:59it follows emerging trends, which Claire's designs also reflect.

0:30:59 > 0:31:02While the store would agree there are similarities,

0:31:02 > 0:31:06it says these arise from fashion trends, not Claire's designs.

0:31:09 > 0:31:12So if all retailers and their designers are chasing

0:31:12 > 0:31:15the same trends and fads every season, perhaps it's no

0:31:15 > 0:31:19surprise that sometimes the end results can have a lot in common.

0:31:19 > 0:31:23But there are things that small businesses like Claire's can do

0:31:23 > 0:31:24to protect their ideas.

0:31:26 > 0:31:27Document everything.

0:31:27 > 0:31:29If you come up with something that you've...

0:31:29 > 0:31:32say a visual design like this, take date stamp photos,

0:31:32 > 0:31:36keep records of absolutely everything to prove when you came up with it,

0:31:36 > 0:31:37that it was you that came up with it.

0:31:37 > 0:31:40Claire still believes that Primark's designers were at least

0:31:40 > 0:31:42inspired by her ideas,

0:31:42 > 0:31:45but it seems she may just have to draw a line under it

0:31:45 > 0:31:47and move onto her next creation.

0:31:47 > 0:31:51I'm going to continue making really fun, quirky,

0:31:51 > 0:31:54happy designs that make people laugh, that make people smile.

0:31:54 > 0:31:58And as long as I love drawing silly doodles, that's what I'll be doing.

0:32:04 > 0:32:08Now there are some occasions in life where we have no choice

0:32:08 > 0:32:10but to turn to a professional for help.

0:32:10 > 0:32:13But if you weren't happy with the job they did,

0:32:13 > 0:32:15would you know where to turn?

0:32:15 > 0:32:18And if you took professional advice on what to do next and it turned

0:32:18 > 0:32:22out to be wrong, should it be you that ends up paying the price?

0:32:23 > 0:32:27No-one wants extra stress when dealing with the death of a parent,

0:32:27 > 0:32:30but Paul Cowdrey has found himself with plenty of that

0:32:30 > 0:32:33since his father Bill died in 2008.

0:32:34 > 0:32:37Ready? Yeah!

0:32:37 > 0:32:40Paul's father had appointed his own solicitor to be

0:32:40 > 0:32:42the executor of the will.

0:32:43 > 0:32:46- Hi, Julia.- Hello, Paul.

0:32:46 > 0:32:49But Paul became unhappy with aspects of how the solicitor was

0:32:49 > 0:32:52dealing with his father's estate and the time and money

0:32:52 > 0:32:54he felt it was taking,

0:32:54 > 0:32:56so he made a complaint to the solicitor,

0:32:56 > 0:32:59but how that could be dealt with was going to prove much more

0:32:59 > 0:33:01complicated than he had expected.

0:33:03 > 0:33:06The solicitor came back and said that I wasn't the client

0:33:06 > 0:33:09and therefore he wasn't going to deal with the complaint.

0:33:09 > 0:33:12I was the beneficiary under my late father's estate,

0:33:12 > 0:33:15so, technically, I wasn't the client.

0:33:15 > 0:33:19The solicitor himself was actually the client in this respect

0:33:19 > 0:33:23because he was appointed the executor of the estate.

0:33:23 > 0:33:26The solicitor made clear he didn't work for Paul,

0:33:26 > 0:33:30but his late father's estate, and that wasn't just legal semantics.

0:33:30 > 0:33:34It was a distinction that would soon snowball with severe consequences.

0:33:36 > 0:33:38So what did you do then?

0:33:38 > 0:33:42I pursued the matter through the Legal Complaints Service.

0:33:42 > 0:33:45The Legal Complaints Service was at the time the body

0:33:45 > 0:33:49responsible for investigating complaints made against solicitors.

0:33:49 > 0:33:52But before going any further, Paul wanted to know whether the cost of

0:33:52 > 0:33:56pursuing his complaint was something the solicitor could charge him for.

0:33:58 > 0:34:02I checked with the case worker, I asked her point blank

0:34:02 > 0:34:06whether I could be charged, and I was assured that I couldn't.

0:34:06 > 0:34:09Reassured, Paul went ahead, and his complaints were referred

0:34:09 > 0:34:12up to the Solicitor's Regulation Authority.

0:34:12 > 0:34:16They too appeared sympathetic to Paul's case on the basis that

0:34:16 > 0:34:19although Paul wasn't the solicitor's client, in a case like this,

0:34:19 > 0:34:22he should be treated in the same way as if he was.

0:34:22 > 0:34:24But the solicitor didn't agree.

0:34:24 > 0:34:28With his costs for dealing with Paul's complaints mounting, he

0:34:28 > 0:34:32sent a legal letter warning how much he'd expect to be paid for that,

0:34:32 > 0:34:33and it was a lot.

0:34:36 > 0:34:41He sent me a letter of claim for 17,500 covering the SRA

0:34:41 > 0:34:46and the legal complaints investigation.

0:34:46 > 0:34:49It must have been quite a shock when you opened that letter?

0:34:49 > 0:34:52It was a shock and, to be honest, the amount of money,

0:34:52 > 0:34:55it was a horrendous amount of money.

0:34:56 > 0:34:59And what made it worse was the fact that Paul was being asked

0:34:59 > 0:35:04to stump up £17,500 after being assured by legal experts

0:35:04 > 0:35:08that making a complaint shouldn't cost him anything.

0:35:09 > 0:35:13With the solicitor adamant that he was entitled to recover his costs,

0:35:13 > 0:35:16and the very real threat that the way for that to happen was for it

0:35:16 > 0:35:18to come out of the estate,

0:35:18 > 0:35:21potentially affecting all the beneficiaries,

0:35:21 > 0:35:24it seemed the only way forward was for the case to be settled in court.

0:35:27 > 0:35:29And, thanks to the support he'd had from the

0:35:29 > 0:35:31Solicitors Regulation Authority,

0:35:31 > 0:35:33Paul felt confident about his position.

0:35:34 > 0:35:37Well, I had the backing of the SRA.

0:35:37 > 0:35:41The Legal Complaints Service had told me that

0:35:41 > 0:35:47I couldn't be charged and I felt that I was completely in the right.

0:35:47 > 0:35:49You can make a complaint about a doctor

0:35:49 > 0:35:53and you don't get charged, or a dentist,

0:35:53 > 0:35:55but you make it against a solicitor

0:35:55 > 0:35:57and you know, you end up being charged.

0:35:58 > 0:36:02Unable to afford to pay for someone to represent him in court,

0:36:02 > 0:36:04Paul decided to represent himself.

0:36:04 > 0:36:06He was sent a statement of support from the

0:36:06 > 0:36:10Solicitors Regulation Authority, which he was able to use

0:36:10 > 0:36:11while making his case.

0:36:11 > 0:36:14But despite this, the judge found against Paul.

0:36:16 > 0:36:21What the judge said to me is, "I'm not here to determine

0:36:21 > 0:36:23"whether your complaint was justified or not."

0:36:23 > 0:36:26That's the crux of the matter, really.

0:36:27 > 0:36:29The ruling, on a point of law,

0:36:29 > 0:36:33was as Paul had initially been told by his father's solicitor.

0:36:33 > 0:36:36Because he wasn't the client, he could be charged for the time

0:36:36 > 0:36:39the solicitor spent defending the complaints made against him.

0:36:39 > 0:36:42But Paul now also had to pay all the costs

0:36:42 > 0:36:45and charges associated with the case coming to court,

0:36:45 > 0:36:50meaning the total amount he owed was rapidly spiralling out of control.

0:36:50 > 0:36:54So what was it like for you when you heard the judge ruling against you?

0:36:54 > 0:36:58- It was devastating. - And the consequence is?

0:36:58 > 0:37:02Well, the consequence is that I may end up losing my house here

0:37:02 > 0:37:08because the amount of money that I now owe is something like £86,000.

0:37:08 > 0:37:09Whatever the legal judgment,

0:37:09 > 0:37:13that's a devastating price to pay for pursuing a complaint.

0:37:13 > 0:37:16Paul continued to fight his case, enlisting the help

0:37:16 > 0:37:21of his local MP Simon Danczuk, who tried taking it right to the top.

0:37:21 > 0:37:26My constituent, Paul Cowdrey, is to lose his home after raising

0:37:26 > 0:37:28concerns about overcharging.

0:37:28 > 0:37:30I'm happy to look into this case.

0:37:30 > 0:37:33As the honourable gentlemen will know, the legal regulators are

0:37:33 > 0:37:38independent from Government, so it's not possible to intervene directly.

0:37:38 > 0:37:41But there was nothing that could change Paul's situation or

0:37:41 > 0:37:43overrule the word of law.

0:37:43 > 0:37:46In a further blow to Paul, the Legal Complaints Service, the body

0:37:46 > 0:37:49which advised him on his complaint in the first place,

0:37:49 > 0:37:50has since disbanded.

0:37:50 > 0:37:54But Paul feels someone should still be responsible for decisions

0:37:54 > 0:37:56they made in the past.

0:37:56 > 0:37:59I sought advice from the Legal Complaints Service

0:37:59 > 0:38:04and said, "Could I be charged if I made a complaint?"

0:38:04 > 0:38:06And they assured me I couldn't.

0:38:06 > 0:38:11I got bad advice and I don't think that was reasonable or fair.

0:38:11 > 0:38:12At the time we filmed with him,

0:38:12 > 0:38:16the amount Paul owed the solicitor and had to pay off the rest

0:38:16 > 0:38:18of the associated legal fees

0:38:18 > 0:38:22had ballooned to a total of £129,000.

0:38:22 > 0:38:25We asked the Solicitor's Regulation Authority what

0:38:25 > 0:38:29they now think of Paul's case, and they told us that while they

0:38:29 > 0:38:33sympathise with Paul, and normally would not expect solicitors

0:38:33 > 0:38:37to charge for dealing with complaints, in this case, the costs

0:38:37 > 0:38:42incurred from dealing with Paul's complaints went beyond the usual.

0:38:42 > 0:38:45They said that Paul ably argued his case,

0:38:45 > 0:38:47and that the issues were properly debated,

0:38:47 > 0:38:51but once the court had ruled on the question of charging, it would

0:38:51 > 0:38:56be inappropriate for the SRA to seek to deal with the issue.

0:38:58 > 0:39:01We also contacted the solicitor Paul had

0:39:01 > 0:39:03complained about in the first place.

0:39:03 > 0:39:07His representatives stressed that his work as executor had

0:39:07 > 0:39:09benefitted the estate as a whole,

0:39:09 > 0:39:12and that Paul's complaint against him was not supported

0:39:12 > 0:39:16by his siblings, the only other beneficiaries of the estate.

0:39:16 > 0:39:19They went on to say that the matter has been subject to careful

0:39:19 > 0:39:24and detailed scrutiny in court on five separate occasions

0:39:24 > 0:39:27and each time the decision has been against Paul.

0:39:27 > 0:39:31And they recommended that anyone considering making a complaint

0:39:31 > 0:39:36of this kind exercise considerable care when doing so as in their

0:39:36 > 0:39:40view, if Paul had taken independent legal advice at various stages,

0:39:40 > 0:39:45he'd almost certainly not find himself in his present predicament.

0:39:47 > 0:39:51But at least the situation shouldn't now get any worse.

0:39:51 > 0:39:56To stop the amount owed spiralling further, in July, 2014, Paul

0:39:56 > 0:39:59and his wife pulled together as many assets as they could to make

0:39:59 > 0:40:03a settlement with the solicitor that resolves the debt

0:40:03 > 0:40:05and allows them to keep their home.

0:40:05 > 0:40:08But Paul still feels that he was given the wrong advice

0:40:08 > 0:40:11by the Legal Complaints Service at the very start

0:40:11 > 0:40:15and he doesn't see why he should be paying the price for that.

0:40:15 > 0:40:20I'm not prepared to back down any further and, you know, if I have to

0:40:20 > 0:40:25take it to the European courts, I'm perfectly prepared to do that.

0:40:25 > 0:40:27Very determined.

0:40:34 > 0:40:37Here at Rip Off Britain, we're always ready to investigate

0:40:37 > 0:40:41more of your stories on any subject. Are you confused over your bills?

0:40:41 > 0:40:45Or just trying to wade through never-ending small print?

0:40:45 > 0:40:49It's very frustrating because it makes what should be a simple job

0:40:49 > 0:40:50a lot more complicated.

0:40:50 > 0:40:53I think some people just give up, so they don't get the best deal.

0:40:53 > 0:40:56Maybe you're unsure what to do, when you discover

0:40:56 > 0:40:59you've lost out, and that so-called great deal

0:40:59 > 0:41:01has ended up costing you money.

0:41:01 > 0:41:04People are buying into this, I did,

0:41:04 > 0:41:07and are they going to be as awkward with them as they were with me?

0:41:07 > 0:41:09You might have a cautionary tale of your own

0:41:09 > 0:41:12and want to share the mistakes you made with us.

0:41:12 > 0:41:17It upsets me an awful lot, because I'm retired and I...

0:41:17 > 0:41:21begrudge having to pay that kind of money out.

0:41:23 > 0:41:25You can write to us at...

0:41:31 > 0:41:34Or you can send us an email to...

0:41:38 > 0:41:42Remember that the Rip Off team is ready and waiting to investigate

0:41:42 > 0:41:43your stories.

0:41:46 > 0:41:50It's sometimes easy to hear the stories we look into on the programme

0:41:50 > 0:41:54and think, "Oh, I'd never fall for that," or at least think that,

0:41:54 > 0:41:57if you did, you'd know exactly what to do to get your money back.

0:41:57 > 0:42:01But I have to say that today's stories simply do not fall into that category.

0:42:01 > 0:42:05It's hard to see how any of the people we've met could have seen what was coming.

0:42:05 > 0:42:10That's especially the case where people took advice that ultimately let them down.

0:42:10 > 0:42:12Of course, there are always two sides to every story,

0:42:12 > 0:42:16but you can't help sympathising with the predicament of those who tried

0:42:16 > 0:42:19to find out the best thing to do, and yet were steered

0:42:19 > 0:42:22in the wrong direction with very little they can do about it.

0:42:22 > 0:42:26If you're facing a situation like any of the people we featured in today's programme,

0:42:26 > 0:42:31where it's not really clear how things have ended up quite the way they have,

0:42:31 > 0:42:34or you don't know which way to turn next,

0:42:34 > 0:42:36then do please let us know.

0:42:36 > 0:42:41However bad things seem, there may yet be something we can do

0:42:41 > 0:42:44to point you in the direction of, well, if not a solution,

0:42:44 > 0:42:46then at the very least some further help.

0:42:46 > 0:42:50We'll be back soon to do exactly that with more of your stories,

0:42:50 > 0:42:54- so thanks for watching us today. Goodbye.- Bye-bye.- Bye.