0:00:03 > 0:00:05We asked you to tell us what's left you feeling ripped off and you
0:00:05 > 0:00:07contacted us in your thousands.
0:00:07 > 0:00:10You've told us about the companies you think get it wrong and the
0:00:10 > 0:00:13customer service that's simply not up to scratch.
0:00:13 > 0:00:14When you have to call them,
0:00:14 > 0:00:17it takes ages and somebody else answers the phone,
0:00:17 > 0:00:19who pretty much doesn't know what you're saying.
0:00:19 > 0:00:23The customer is not benefiting and, no, I'm not getting value for money.
0:00:23 > 0:00:26You've asked us to track down the scammers who stole your money and
0:00:26 > 0:00:30investigate the extra charges you say are unfair.
0:00:30 > 0:00:34They don't deserve to be in any form of business whatsoever and they just
0:00:34 > 0:00:36want shutting down.
0:00:36 > 0:00:38And when you've lost out, but no-one else is to blame,
0:00:38 > 0:00:41you've come to us to stop others falling into the same trap.
0:00:41 > 0:00:44They took the money out of my account and I don't even know who it
0:00:44 > 0:00:45was that was scamming me.
0:00:45 > 0:00:49So whether it's a blatant rip-off or a genuine mistake...
0:00:49 > 0:00:53..we're here to find out why you're out of pocket and what you can do about it.
0:00:53 > 0:00:55Your stories, your money.
0:00:55 > 0:00:57This is Rip-Off Britain.
0:01:00 > 0:01:02Hello and welcome once again to Rip-Off Britain where today
0:01:02 > 0:01:05we're going to be shining a light on some of the tactics
0:01:05 > 0:01:07that companies use to convince us that we simply
0:01:07 > 0:01:10cannot do without whatever it is they're trying to sell us.
0:01:10 > 0:01:12The best sales techniques, of course,
0:01:12 > 0:01:15can work magic for the businesses that are involved,
0:01:15 > 0:01:17but not always for us.
0:01:17 > 0:01:20So how do you tell a good sales pitch from a dodgy one?
0:01:20 > 0:01:23We're going to be highlighting the difference between perfectly
0:01:23 > 0:01:27legitimate ways to make a product stand out from the rest and some of
0:01:27 > 0:01:30the rather vague or even downright suspect claims that encourage us
0:01:30 > 0:01:32to part with our money.
0:01:32 > 0:01:35As we'll see, some of those can be horribly effective,
0:01:35 > 0:01:37leading to the loss of thousands of pounds.
0:01:37 > 0:01:40Not good, and I'm sure we've all been on the receiving end
0:01:40 > 0:01:43of particularly effective sales patter and, perhaps, as a result,
0:01:43 > 0:01:48come away wondering and, indeed, really questioning if we spent more than we should.
0:01:48 > 0:01:50So to stop you getting into situations like that,
0:01:50 > 0:01:54we'll expose some of the hard sells to be wise to and, indeed, some of
0:01:54 > 0:01:57the softer methods of persuasion - there's that good word again -
0:01:57 > 0:01:59that may not be everything that you think.
0:02:01 > 0:02:03Coming up, revealed at last,
0:02:03 > 0:02:07the secret sales techniques used to pressure older customers into buying
0:02:07 > 0:02:09products they simply can't afford.
0:02:09 > 0:02:12It's just a month of my pension gone.
0:02:12 > 0:02:13Can't just give it away.
0:02:15 > 0:02:18And behind the scenes at the testing centre deciding what should win its
0:02:18 > 0:02:20highly-prized endorsement,
0:02:20 > 0:02:24but is it being exploited by products that don't deserve it?
0:02:24 > 0:02:28I absolutely took comfort in the fact that it was a really good brand
0:02:28 > 0:02:30that was promoting this product,
0:02:30 > 0:02:33so I didn't have to think too much about whether I did it or not.
0:02:37 > 0:02:38Now, I don't know about you,
0:02:38 > 0:02:41but cold callers and companies delivering a hard sell
0:02:41 > 0:02:43get such a short shrift from me
0:02:43 > 0:02:46and I'm often amazed that they ever make any money at all.
0:02:46 > 0:02:48But, of course, the way that some of them do it
0:02:48 > 0:02:49is by targeting people who,
0:02:49 > 0:02:53for whatever reason, can find it difficult to say no.
0:02:53 > 0:02:55Those, in other words, who are more vulnerable,
0:02:55 > 0:02:59or even, as I'm afraid we're about to hear, who might developing dementia.
0:02:59 > 0:03:02And it seems that is definitely the case with one of the companies in
0:03:02 > 0:03:06our next story, which used an elaborate pantomime of a sales pitch
0:03:06 > 0:03:09to convince people to part with thousands of pounds of their money
0:03:09 > 0:03:13that they really didn't need to spend.
0:03:13 > 0:03:15PHONE RINGS
0:03:15 > 0:03:17Often when the cold callers strike,
0:03:17 > 0:03:21Ron Jarman likes to have a bit of fun with them.
0:03:21 > 0:03:22Hello?
0:03:22 > 0:03:24We do get a few cold calls.
0:03:24 > 0:03:27About, perhaps, one a day or something like that.
0:03:27 > 0:03:29I have a little joke with them sometimes
0:03:29 > 0:03:31and they put the phone down.
0:03:32 > 0:03:34But in February 2015,
0:03:34 > 0:03:39one particular call managed to engage Ron in more than just banter
0:03:39 > 0:03:42because, for once, they appeared to be selling something that he and his
0:03:42 > 0:03:44wife Valerie actually needed.
0:03:44 > 0:03:48They phoned up and said they were in the area,
0:03:48 > 0:03:51so could they come and demonstrate this bed?
0:03:51 > 0:03:54Well, we were thinking of getting another bed anyway.
0:03:54 > 0:03:56Valerie can't walk unaided,
0:03:56 > 0:03:59so she relies on Ron to help her get around.
0:03:59 > 0:04:04She can't stand up on her own, so I have to lift her into the wheelchair.
0:04:04 > 0:04:09I lift her in and out of bed and practically lift her into the car.
0:04:09 > 0:04:11So it's not as easy as it seems.
0:04:11 > 0:04:13I need more support, don't I?
0:04:13 > 0:04:14Yeah.
0:04:14 > 0:04:16You couldn't do it on your own, anyway.
0:04:18 > 0:04:21The cold caller was keen for his company to show the couple an
0:04:21 > 0:04:24adjustable bed, something that really appealed,
0:04:24 > 0:04:26given Valerie's mobility issues.
0:04:26 > 0:04:28She really needed another bed
0:04:28 > 0:04:30because she kept falling out of her bed.
0:04:30 > 0:04:32Well, one or two times, didn't you?
0:04:32 > 0:04:34Yes.
0:04:34 > 0:04:38It wasn't long before a salesman arrived with a demonstration bed
0:04:38 > 0:04:41to show the couple and so impressed were Ron and Valerie
0:04:41 > 0:04:44that they signed up for one on the spot.
0:04:44 > 0:04:47At ?2,000 it's naturally not cheap,
0:04:47 > 0:04:50but it would be specially measured and built just for Valerie.
0:04:50 > 0:04:51So the couple put down a deposit.
0:04:53 > 0:04:55We gave him a cheque for ?500
0:04:55 > 0:05:02and he said somebody would come and measure the old bed and
0:05:02 > 0:05:05we left it at that.
0:05:05 > 0:05:09They were told to expect a call within the week to arrange the measurement visit.
0:05:09 > 0:05:13But after almost three weeks, that call still hadn't come.
0:05:14 > 0:05:17So in the end, I said to Val,
0:05:17 > 0:05:22"I think we'll cancel this bed," and I phoned them up and said,
0:05:22 > 0:05:25"We want to cancel this order," and they said, "Oh, you're too late."
0:05:26 > 0:05:29The company told Ron that he couldn't cancel the order
0:05:29 > 0:05:32because the 14-day cooling off period had passed.
0:05:32 > 0:05:35But the couple say they had never been told about any cooling off
0:05:35 > 0:05:39period and even so, they'd been waiting for the company to call them
0:05:39 > 0:05:41to arrange to take the measurements.
0:05:41 > 0:05:43I mean, if you're going to buy something,
0:05:43 > 0:05:45they should deliver it and that's it, you know?
0:05:45 > 0:05:47But they just didn't do anything about it.
0:05:47 > 0:05:51Didn't carry out their promises. No.
0:05:51 > 0:05:54Ron says, although he was told there'd be no refund,
0:05:54 > 0:05:57he was so unhappy with the company's actions up until now that he
0:05:57 > 0:06:02cancelled the order anyway and the couple wrote off the ?500 they'd paid.
0:06:03 > 0:06:05Just a month of my pension gone.
0:06:05 > 0:06:07Just can't give it away.
0:06:07 > 0:06:09I'd rather spend it on Val.
0:06:11 > 0:06:12Chalking it down to experience,
0:06:12 > 0:06:17Ron and Valerie didn't tell anybody about the incident and almost a year
0:06:17 > 0:06:19passed before Valerie's son Peter found out,
0:06:19 > 0:06:22after finding a torn up sales agreement at the house.
0:06:23 > 0:06:27I think they was so embarrassed about the whole episode that they
0:06:27 > 0:06:29hadn't told me anything about it,
0:06:29 > 0:06:35but it wasn't until I extracted the information as to what it was that I
0:06:35 > 0:06:37found out this complete saga.
0:06:37 > 0:06:41And searching the name of the company on the internet soon turned
0:06:41 > 0:06:44up plenty of similar stories.
0:06:44 > 0:06:49I found out that I wasn't alone in as much that there were an awful lot
0:06:49 > 0:06:52of uncomplimentary statements being made about this company.
0:06:52 > 0:06:57So Peter picked up the phone and asked the company for his mum and
0:06:57 > 0:06:58stepdad's money back.
0:07:00 > 0:07:03I was told the matter was closed as far as they were concerned.
0:07:03 > 0:07:06There was no way they were going to refund the money.
0:07:06 > 0:07:11It was almost as if, "We've got your money, now go run."
0:07:11 > 0:07:13Peter's next call was to Trading Standards,
0:07:13 > 0:07:17who made it clear that it was a company already very firmly on its
0:07:17 > 0:07:21radar after hearing dozens of similar stories from other elderly
0:07:21 > 0:07:23customers of the same company.
0:07:24 > 0:07:28And a subsequent investigation suggested that the company's sales
0:07:28 > 0:07:32staff had no qualms about trying to sell to people with dementia
0:07:32 > 0:07:33or Alzheimer's,
0:07:33 > 0:07:38who find it hard to say no to the sales staff in their own homes.
0:07:38 > 0:07:41Of course, this sort of targeting of older or more vulnerable people is
0:07:41 > 0:07:43something we hear about an awful lot,
0:07:43 > 0:07:47but now, at last, the secrets of exactly how they do it
0:07:47 > 0:07:51are being exposed and I've come to see a familiar face,
0:07:51 > 0:07:55the Trading Standards Institute's Sylvia Rook to find out more.
0:07:55 > 0:07:58Do you find that this kind of high-pressure stuff
0:07:58 > 0:08:00is really prevalent everywhere?
0:08:00 > 0:08:03It is, but it's quite hard to prove,
0:08:03 > 0:08:07particularly, if anybody is elderly and they have dementia, Alzheimer's,
0:08:07 > 0:08:10anything like that, they don't know they're being conned.
0:08:11 > 0:08:15Now, usually, that makes prosecuting and investigating cases like this
0:08:15 > 0:08:19very hard, but at the start of 2016,
0:08:19 > 0:08:22one company made headlines after a four-year Trading Standards
0:08:22 > 0:08:26investigation into aggressive targeting and mis-selling
0:08:26 > 0:08:29to customers, many of whom were elderly and vulnerable.
0:08:29 > 0:08:33Both directors of the window and roofing company Summit Roofguard
0:08:33 > 0:08:37were imprisoned and three sales staff were given suspended sentences
0:08:37 > 0:08:40after overcharging and mis-selling products to customers
0:08:40 > 0:08:42who found it very hard to say no.
0:08:44 > 0:08:49And exactly how they did it was laid bare in a 21-page training manual
0:08:49 > 0:08:52that investigators had been able to get their hands on,
0:08:52 > 0:08:56setting out in black and white a 14-step guide to all the tricks and
0:08:56 > 0:08:59techniques the team used to make
0:08:59 > 0:09:02what it would call "a successful sale".
0:09:02 > 0:09:04What exactly happened and what led to this case going to court?
0:09:04 > 0:09:08There's one lady here who was 86. She had dementia.
0:09:08 > 0:09:10She was sold windows and guttering to replace products
0:09:10 > 0:09:12she'd only had four years earlier.
0:09:12 > 0:09:15There was one elderly lady who'd entered into a contract
0:09:15 > 0:09:18and her sister then cancelled it because she had dementia,
0:09:18 > 0:09:20she didn't need the product and a salesperson immediately
0:09:20 > 0:09:23went back and re-sold it and they had to cancel again.
0:09:23 > 0:09:27This pattern of mis-selling was all coordinated by the detailed guide
0:09:27 > 0:09:31the company's employees were given, outlining how to win a sale.
0:09:31 > 0:09:34This was like, what, their sales Bible? Yes, it was the sales Bible.
0:09:34 > 0:09:38The whole ethos of this 14 Steps To A Sale guide was to ensure that
0:09:38 > 0:09:41consumers thought they were getting a really good deal and to try and
0:09:41 > 0:09:44get the sales any way they could -
0:09:44 > 0:09:47misleading people, acting aggressively.
0:09:47 > 0:09:49Reading through the script,
0:09:49 > 0:09:52you can see each sales meeting would be a mammoth session,
0:09:52 > 0:09:54sometimes lasting up to six hours,
0:09:54 > 0:09:58in which staff were told to start with excessively high quotes.
0:09:58 > 0:10:02Then they'd reduce slowly the price with deals and offers they said were
0:10:02 > 0:10:07unique to that sale, but, of course, turned out to be the same every time.
0:10:07 > 0:10:10One of the things that the company did was they would offer you the
0:10:10 > 0:10:13opportunity to have your house as "a show home", in inverted commas,
0:10:13 > 0:10:15and if your house qualified,
0:10:15 > 0:10:17and they'd have to check that it would qualify,
0:10:17 > 0:10:20there were different grades and you'd get a different discount
0:10:20 > 0:10:22depending on what the grade was.
0:10:22 > 0:10:24The manual instructed, "Call your manager,
0:10:24 > 0:10:26"push for the best grading possible."
0:10:26 > 0:10:29Everybody got the highest grade, everybody got the discount.
0:10:29 > 0:10:32With that apparently Grade-A discount secured
0:10:32 > 0:10:36and customers encouraged to believe that they were bagging a bargain,
0:10:36 > 0:10:39the next step for the sales team was to swear them to secrecy as the
0:10:39 > 0:10:44guide says, the price they've paid must remain confidential.
0:10:44 > 0:10:47One of the shocking things about this particular case
0:10:47 > 0:10:50is they actually got consumers to sign a confidentiality clause,
0:10:50 > 0:10:54that you weren't allowed to tell people how much the cost was.
0:10:54 > 0:10:57Really?! Yes. Many of the complainants were elderly.
0:10:57 > 0:10:59If they told family, family would say, that's ridiculous,
0:10:59 > 0:11:01don't spend the money.
0:11:01 > 0:11:03And there is this thing that somebody tells you,
0:11:03 > 0:11:06"It's a really good deal, but it's our secret," people do.
0:11:06 > 0:11:09After reducing the cost of the work by thousands,
0:11:09 > 0:11:12the sales staff were then given a script for how to win over someone
0:11:12 > 0:11:15who still thinks it's more than they wanted to spend,
0:11:15 > 0:11:18offering special finance packages,
0:11:18 > 0:11:21or breaking payments down into manageable chunks.
0:11:21 > 0:11:24And finally, once the customer was reeled in,
0:11:24 > 0:11:26the guide had one more critical instruction -
0:11:26 > 0:11:29telling the sales person to stop talking.
0:11:29 > 0:11:32Now, shut up and wait for a response.
0:11:32 > 0:11:34He who speaks first buys the product.
0:11:35 > 0:11:37And remember, in many cases,
0:11:37 > 0:11:40that came at the end of a five- or six-hour sales pitch.
0:11:41 > 0:11:43The regulations that these charges were taken under say
0:11:43 > 0:11:48it's an aggressive practice if you carry on a sale for too long.
0:11:48 > 0:11:52You should be able to give people time to think and to go away and,
0:11:52 > 0:11:56certainly, five hours is far too long for any sales pitch.
0:11:56 > 0:11:59Now, there are other companies that may well use similar sales
0:11:59 > 0:12:02techniques, but in the case of Summit Roofguard,
0:12:02 > 0:12:04all of those instructions in the training guide
0:12:04 > 0:12:07were combined to create a deliberately misleading,
0:12:07 > 0:12:10confusing and lengthy session,
0:12:10 > 0:12:13especially likely to wear down someone who might be vulnerable.
0:12:14 > 0:12:17Do you think that this is going to be a warning to other companies?
0:12:17 > 0:12:21It's not a problem to give guidance to your sales staff on what to say
0:12:21 > 0:12:24and what they can't say, but if you're encouraging your staff
0:12:24 > 0:12:28to mislead consumers, then they need to know it wasn't just the directors
0:12:28 > 0:12:30of the company that were prosecuted in this case,
0:12:30 > 0:12:32it was the sales people, as well.
0:12:32 > 0:12:35So it's important that all parties know that they have a responsibility
0:12:35 > 0:12:38to ensure that consumers are treated fairly.
0:12:38 > 0:12:43And to avoid being taken in, Sylvia has some no-nonsense advice.
0:12:43 > 0:12:45If you ever get somebody knocking on the door and trying to sell
0:12:45 > 0:12:47something, always say, "Thanks. But, no, thanks."
0:12:47 > 0:12:50If people are selling and they make a cold call,
0:12:50 > 0:12:52actually, I would usually say just hang up.
0:12:52 > 0:12:55Be aware that, when that friendly salesperson is saying
0:12:55 > 0:12:57something to you, he could be following a script
0:12:57 > 0:12:59and his objective is to get a bonus.
0:12:59 > 0:13:03And what about being railroaded into signing something on the day?
0:13:03 > 0:13:05Never. Never sign anything on the day.
0:13:05 > 0:13:07Say you want to think about it.
0:13:07 > 0:13:09Well, if you're worried about a friend,
0:13:09 > 0:13:13relative or neighbour who you feel might be targeted by this kind of
0:13:13 > 0:13:16company and may find it hard to say no,
0:13:16 > 0:13:18there is a new scheme that could help.
0:13:18 > 0:13:21It's called Friends Against Scams and it's all about getting people to
0:13:21 > 0:13:25work together to keep an eye out for elderly and vulnerable people
0:13:25 > 0:13:28in their area and make sure that they're not caught out.
0:13:28 > 0:13:31You can find more details about it on our website...
0:13:36 > 0:13:40And it's ideas like this that Peter hopes will stop others losing out in
0:13:40 > 0:13:42the way his mum and stepdad did.
0:13:42 > 0:13:47I think people have to be very, very wary of door-to-door salesmen
0:13:47 > 0:13:49promising anything, basically.
0:13:49 > 0:13:57Elderly people are vulnerable and I think a lot of companies do prey on
0:13:57 > 0:13:59that aspect, their vulnerability.
0:13:59 > 0:14:01And I think it's very, very sad.
0:14:08 > 0:14:10Now, when you're buying something new,
0:14:10 > 0:14:11it isn't always easy to choose
0:14:11 > 0:14:15between two products that cost about the same, look pretty much the same
0:14:15 > 0:14:17and do essentially the same thing.
0:14:17 > 0:14:20So often, for me, what turns out to be the clincher
0:14:20 > 0:14:24is if I see that one of them has won an award or if it's been tested
0:14:24 > 0:14:27and endorsed by a name that I trust. But I never really stopped
0:14:27 > 0:14:30to wonder exactly what does go on behind the scenes to make sure that
0:14:30 > 0:14:34each product really does deserve that coveted endorsement,
0:14:34 > 0:14:38so I did go behind the scenes at one of the most recognised names around
0:14:38 > 0:14:41to see just what it takes to get their stamp of approval.
0:14:44 > 0:14:48Whether it's jeans or jam, tomatoes or tumble dryers,
0:14:48 > 0:14:50wellies or washing powder,
0:14:50 > 0:14:53how do you decide between two seemingly identical products?
0:14:55 > 0:14:58Well, for many of us, what might swing it is that one of them
0:14:58 > 0:15:02carries a sticker suggesting it's been through a battery of rigorous
0:15:02 > 0:15:05tests or, indeed, won a seal of approval from an organisation
0:15:05 > 0:15:06that knows its stuff.
0:15:08 > 0:15:10And for manufacturers,
0:15:10 > 0:15:14having that sort of recognition from a respected organisation can really
0:15:14 > 0:15:15give you the edge,
0:15:15 > 0:15:18as we heard last year, when I went behind the scenes at the consumer
0:15:18 > 0:15:20organisation Which?
0:15:20 > 0:15:24to see how they decide which products deserve to be
0:15:24 > 0:15:25one of its coveted Best Buys.
0:15:25 > 0:15:28We have over 8,000 reviews of products,
0:15:28 > 0:15:30telling you which are the best,
0:15:30 > 0:15:33which are the worst, and we decide what we want to test simply
0:15:33 > 0:15:36by talking to consumers, finding out what they want advice about.
0:15:38 > 0:15:41But Which? isn't the only consumer group that puts products through
0:15:41 > 0:15:45their paces to help shoppers make informed decisions.
0:15:45 > 0:15:49The Good Housekeeping Institute has been doing it for over 90 years,
0:15:49 > 0:15:52assessing a huge range of everyday products and essentials
0:15:52 > 0:15:54that we all use around the home.
0:15:55 > 0:15:59So today, I've come along to the Institute to find out how they go
0:15:59 > 0:16:02about testing all those thousands of products every single year.
0:16:03 > 0:16:04I'm hoping to learn some of the secrets
0:16:04 > 0:16:07of the Institute's famous seal of approval,
0:16:07 > 0:16:10with the help of Good Housekeeping's publishing director,
0:16:10 > 0:16:11Judith Secombe.
0:16:11 > 0:16:15We have about 165 product categories that we test across,
0:16:15 > 0:16:19so all the white goods - tumble dryers, washing machines,
0:16:19 > 0:16:20dishwashers, etc,
0:16:20 > 0:16:23through the small appliances, kettles, toasters,
0:16:23 > 0:16:26things like hair products, hair dryers, hair straighteners,
0:16:26 > 0:16:27that sort of thing.
0:16:28 > 0:16:33The most highly-prized endorsement from here is the seal that says
0:16:33 > 0:16:35Good Housekeeping Institute Approved
0:16:35 > 0:16:38and last year, more than 2,500 products got it,
0:16:38 > 0:16:42helping some of them become bestsellers.
0:16:42 > 0:16:45What is the value of getting one of your seals of approval?
0:16:45 > 0:16:48We do know that sales of a product tend to increase
0:16:48 > 0:16:52once it's known that Good Housekeeping have tested it.
0:16:52 > 0:16:54If we put our endorsement on a particular washing machine
0:16:54 > 0:17:00or a tumble dryer, then nine times out of ten, it ends up selling more.
0:17:00 > 0:17:02But those endorsements are hard-won,
0:17:02 > 0:17:05food can be rated by dozens of testers and appliances
0:17:05 > 0:17:08and electronics like these vacuum cleaners have to pass
0:17:08 > 0:17:10tests in four categories -
0:17:10 > 0:17:15design, ease of use, performance and clarity of instructions.
0:17:15 > 0:17:18We've clearly come to the vacuum cleaner room,
0:17:18 > 0:17:21where you're going to do a bit of testing. What's the criteria here?
0:17:21 > 0:17:23Well, we look at a variety of things,
0:17:23 > 0:17:25but predominately, dust pick-up.
0:17:25 > 0:17:28So we try and mimic it as closely as it would be in a domestic
0:17:28 > 0:17:31environment, so we use a mixture of sand and flour,
0:17:31 > 0:17:34we use digestive biscuits, real pet hair,
0:17:34 > 0:17:36which we actually get from Battersea Dogs Home.
0:17:36 > 0:17:38So you're looking for the suction value in this case.
0:17:38 > 0:17:41Yes, and we test it across a variety of different flooring types.
0:17:41 > 0:17:44We've got laminate, we've got floorboards and carpet.
0:17:44 > 0:17:46OK, I think we'll go on the carpet, actually.
0:17:46 > 0:17:49Yeah, why not? So you're going to put some of your stuff on it.
0:17:49 > 0:17:51Yes. Let's get some. Because this carpet looks altogether too clean.
0:17:51 > 0:17:52It does.
0:17:52 > 0:17:55Now, it may look simple, sprinkling down some dirt,
0:17:55 > 0:17:58but there is a meticulous method to all of this.
0:17:58 > 0:18:01Once the dust mix or dog hairs are sprinkled on the floor,
0:18:01 > 0:18:05they are trodden in with the roller 30 times to simulate
0:18:05 > 0:18:07a day's worth of footfall.
0:18:07 > 0:18:11A series of five individual sweeps is then done and in between
0:18:11 > 0:18:13each one, the bag is weighed,
0:18:13 > 0:18:16to see exactly how much dust has been picked up.
0:18:16 > 0:18:18Once the testing is complete,
0:18:18 > 0:18:21the results will be posted on the Institute's website or put in the
0:18:21 > 0:18:23magazine as part of a feature.
0:18:23 > 0:18:27And if the cleaners score highly in all four key categories,
0:18:27 > 0:18:30they'll be able to carry the Institute's approved logo
0:18:30 > 0:18:32on their packaging and advertising,
0:18:32 > 0:18:35provided, that is, that the manufacturer
0:18:35 > 0:18:36is willing to pay for it.
0:18:36 > 0:18:39If you're independent, and some manufacturers pay
0:18:39 > 0:18:41to have their product assessed,
0:18:41 > 0:18:45where does the integrity and the independence come in,
0:18:45 > 0:18:46if they're paying for it?
0:18:46 > 0:18:48We have very strict testing protocols
0:18:48 > 0:18:50and our standards are very high.
0:18:50 > 0:18:53And it's very common for us to fail a product.
0:18:53 > 0:18:56So they may have come to us, paid for us to test it.
0:18:56 > 0:18:58If it's not good enough, I'm afraid it doesn't pass.
0:18:59 > 0:19:03Three-quarters of the products tested do make the grade and the
0:19:03 > 0:19:07manufacturers can pay an annual fee to use the Institute's endorsement.
0:19:07 > 0:19:10And while some products are chosen to be part of the regular testing
0:19:10 > 0:19:14programme, manufacturers can apply for a more bespoke going-over,
0:19:14 > 0:19:16again, at a cost.
0:19:16 > 0:19:19Manufacturers will contact us if they have a new product
0:19:19 > 0:19:21or a product they are particularly proud of
0:19:21 > 0:19:24that they think is possibly the best in market.
0:19:24 > 0:19:26And they come to us and they will
0:19:26 > 0:19:28ask us to test that product for them.
0:19:28 > 0:19:30And do they pay for the privilege?
0:19:30 > 0:19:34They do, if they approach us. And we publish a scale of charges,
0:19:34 > 0:19:38depending how complicated the testing is, how long it takes,
0:19:38 > 0:19:41and how detailed the results need to be.
0:19:43 > 0:19:45If that testing is successful,
0:19:45 > 0:19:47companies then pay again for the right
0:19:47 > 0:19:49to use the Good Housekeeping Institute logo
0:19:49 > 0:19:53on their packaging, as well as online and in any TV ads.
0:19:54 > 0:19:56Or at least, that's what should happen.
0:19:58 > 0:19:59But perhaps inevitably,
0:19:59 > 0:20:01the value and trust that the Institute's endorsement
0:20:01 > 0:20:05has built up over the decades is now being exploited,
0:20:05 > 0:20:08because some less-scrupulous businesses have falsely used the
0:20:08 > 0:20:13approved logo to trick new customers into buying their product.
0:20:13 > 0:20:16Sue Bay from Kent is an avid online shopper.
0:20:16 > 0:20:19When she saw an advert on her Facebook page for diet pills
0:20:19 > 0:20:22that seemed to carry the Good Housekeeping endorsement,
0:20:22 > 0:20:25it gave her the confidence to place an order.
0:20:25 > 0:20:29Seeing the Good Housekeeping brand there did, you know,
0:20:29 > 0:20:30give me a bit of comfort, thinking,
0:20:30 > 0:20:32"Oh, yes. This might even work, this one."
0:20:32 > 0:20:35"It might not just be a scam."
0:20:35 > 0:20:37So that's why I went for it.
0:20:39 > 0:20:41The pills had a free trial and all Sue had to do
0:20:41 > 0:20:44was pay something like ?2.69.
0:20:44 > 0:20:48But two months later, she discovered she'd fallen into a trap
0:20:48 > 0:20:51that we hear about a lot, when she noticed ?160
0:20:51 > 0:20:54had been paid out of her bank account.
0:20:54 > 0:20:57The terms and conditions, that I didn't read,
0:20:57 > 0:20:59that I should have gone and looked at,
0:20:59 > 0:21:05say that you get your free 30-day trial of these tablets, but...
0:21:05 > 0:21:08if you're not going to carry on,
0:21:08 > 0:21:11you have to return them within 14 days,
0:21:11 > 0:21:18otherwise you get billed ?79.99 per pot of these tablets.
0:21:19 > 0:21:23Of course, the endorsement that had convinced Sue to give the pills a go
0:21:23 > 0:21:24was fake as, in fact,
0:21:24 > 0:21:27the Good Housekeeping Institute has never endorsed
0:21:27 > 0:21:30any type of diet pill.
0:21:30 > 0:21:32Now, I'm going to be much more careful now.
0:21:32 > 0:21:35If I hadn't seen that name come up, I doubt I would have bought them.
0:21:35 > 0:21:38I absolutely took comfort in the fact that it was a
0:21:38 > 0:21:43really good brand that was promoting this product,
0:21:43 > 0:21:47so I didn't have to think too much about whether I did it or not.
0:21:47 > 0:21:50But this is just one of a number of bogus claims
0:21:50 > 0:21:52the Institute is aware of.
0:21:52 > 0:21:58We've had quite a lot of our readers in touch over the last 18-24 months,
0:21:58 > 0:22:02where they have bought a product or a service
0:22:02 > 0:22:05believing that it's been endorsed by Good Housekeeping
0:22:05 > 0:22:07and it turns out not to be the case.
0:22:07 > 0:22:09What are you doing about all this scamming?
0:22:09 > 0:22:11How are you attacking that?
0:22:11 > 0:22:15We try and have them shut down, we try and have the sites closed,
0:22:15 > 0:22:18and we enforce the removal of our trademark.
0:22:18 > 0:22:20How would the consumer know?
0:22:21 > 0:22:23They need to check on our website.
0:22:23 > 0:22:27If it's been tested by us, the results are available free,
0:22:27 > 0:22:31so if anyone's concerned about our product and it's making claims that
0:22:31 > 0:22:34they're not quite sure about or our involvement with it,
0:22:34 > 0:22:38then they need to check online or contact us.
0:22:38 > 0:22:41Products that genuinely earn the Institute's logo are put
0:22:41 > 0:22:45through tests designed to replicate what you would do with them at home.
0:22:48 > 0:22:52So that means, for example, washing machines have to prove that they can
0:22:52 > 0:22:58shift 13 typical stains including red wine, foundation and mud.
0:22:58 > 0:23:00Kettles need to boil within a certain time
0:23:00 > 0:23:03and keep the noise to a minimum of decibels while doing it.
0:23:03 > 0:23:08Waterproof clothing goes through a rigorous shower spraying and is then
0:23:08 > 0:23:10checked to see if there are any leaks within the fabric.
0:23:10 > 0:23:13But to be quite honest, what I was most interested in was seeing the
0:23:13 > 0:23:16Institute's food and drink tests,
0:23:16 > 0:23:18in which a panel of up to ten trained experts
0:23:18 > 0:23:23and 50 consumers go through blind tasting to grade every product
0:23:23 > 0:23:25on a set of four different criteria.
0:23:25 > 0:23:27So, it's jam today that we're doing?
0:23:27 > 0:23:29Yes, strawberry jam we're doing today.
0:23:29 > 0:23:31So when you're actually testing, what are you looking for,
0:23:31 > 0:23:33what are the factors?
0:23:33 > 0:23:35So, we look at taste, texture, appearance,
0:23:35 > 0:23:37aroma and the overall eating quality of the food.
0:23:37 > 0:23:39And is this...?
0:23:39 > 0:23:42It's a blind testing, in that they don't know which jam is in what container?
0:23:42 > 0:23:46Yes, everything is blind and coded with numbers, so it's labelled up.
0:23:46 > 0:23:48They have no idea what anything is.
0:23:48 > 0:23:50I bet you've no difficulty getting volunteers.
0:23:50 > 0:23:51No, we don't struggle at all!
0:23:53 > 0:23:57The jams being tested are given a score out of 100 and I can't resist
0:23:57 > 0:24:01volunteering my own services, all in the name of research, of course.
0:24:01 > 0:24:03I do love a bit of strawberry jam on a scone.
0:24:05 > 0:24:09Today's lowest scorer with 64 out of 100 points won't be able to claim
0:24:09 > 0:24:12it's Good Housekeeping Institute approved.
0:24:12 > 0:24:15But the highest rated, with 84 points, certainly will,
0:24:15 > 0:24:19provided the company behind it is happy to pay for the privilege.
0:24:19 > 0:24:23And while I can't claim to have been in any way properly trained,
0:24:23 > 0:24:24certainly, some of the jams I tasted
0:24:24 > 0:24:27would get the Hunniford Seal Of Approval.
0:24:28 > 0:24:30I like the first one the best, you know?
0:24:36 > 0:24:39Still to come on Rip-Off Britain,
0:24:39 > 0:24:42if you buy a product that's won an impressive-sounding award,
0:24:42 > 0:24:46was the competition quite as fierce as you might have assumed?
0:24:46 > 0:24:48Consumers might realistically expect
0:24:48 > 0:24:51that that was the best product in the world
0:24:51 > 0:24:55and, therefore, we interpret it as being, "Wow!"
0:24:55 > 0:24:59When, really, it's only a little, "Yay..."
0:25:03 > 0:25:05Welcome to the Rip-Off Britain pop-up shop.
0:25:05 > 0:25:08You know, we've brought together a fantastic team of top experts
0:25:08 > 0:25:11and they are all ready and willing to try and solve
0:25:11 > 0:25:12your consumer problems.
0:25:12 > 0:25:15They certainly are and this year, we've come to Manchester,
0:25:15 > 0:25:19to one of the biggest and busiest shopping centres in the whole of the country.
0:25:19 > 0:25:22We want to see as many people as possible to try and get some of
0:25:22 > 0:25:24those consumer problems sorted out.
0:25:24 > 0:25:28So let's get this pop-up shop well and truly open.
0:25:37 > 0:25:38And once we got down to business,
0:25:38 > 0:25:41some of the people who called in found themselves with two experts
0:25:41 > 0:25:43for the price of one.
0:25:43 > 0:25:44Solicitor Gary Rycroft
0:25:44 > 0:25:46and Trading Standards officer Sylvia Rook
0:25:46 > 0:25:49teamed up to help and advise June Jones,
0:25:49 > 0:25:54who's found herself out of pocket to the tune of thousands of pounds.
0:25:54 > 0:25:55Can I introduce June,
0:25:55 > 0:25:58who has come to us because she's had a huge
0:25:58 > 0:26:01and horrible problem involving caravans?
0:26:01 > 0:26:05June owns two caravans on a site in a seaside resort and rents
0:26:05 > 0:26:07them out to generate some extra cash.
0:26:07 > 0:26:11But as she isn't always around, she decided to enlist some help.
0:26:11 > 0:26:16So as I could free up time, I had two gentlemen manage it for me,
0:26:16 > 0:26:20rent it out, give people the keys, meet and greet,
0:26:20 > 0:26:23do the cleaning and ready for the next guests.
0:26:23 > 0:26:27The people June decided to use already performed a similar service
0:26:27 > 0:26:28for other owners on the site.
0:26:28 > 0:26:31So after meeting them, June went ahead,
0:26:31 > 0:26:34but the rental money she'd expected them to pass on didn't arrive
0:26:34 > 0:26:36when she thought it would.
0:26:36 > 0:26:38One season went past and, towards the end,
0:26:38 > 0:26:42I noticed that there no money had been going into the bank.
0:26:42 > 0:26:45So when I approached them, they said, "We've all sorted it,
0:26:45 > 0:26:46"we've put the cheques in today."
0:26:46 > 0:26:51And cheques were then paid directly into June's account at the caravan site.
0:26:51 > 0:26:54But the staff there soon got in touch with some bad news.
0:26:54 > 0:26:59I got a phone call from the office about a fortnight later,
0:26:59 > 0:27:01telling me all the cheques had bounced.
0:27:01 > 0:27:05June, can I just ask you at this point, how much were the cheques?
0:27:05 > 0:27:07Approximately ?7,500.
0:27:07 > 0:27:09?7,500? Yes.
0:27:09 > 0:27:13June immediately tried contacting the couple who'd been renting out
0:27:13 > 0:27:16her caravans, but she says, despite numerous calls,
0:27:16 > 0:27:20she couldn't get any straight answers, much less her money.
0:27:20 > 0:27:22And as she investigated further,
0:27:22 > 0:27:25she discovered there were other owners on the site in exactly
0:27:25 > 0:27:26the same boat.
0:27:26 > 0:27:28From what I heard,
0:27:28 > 0:27:30there was ten or 11 of us altogether
0:27:30 > 0:27:35and we were looking at approximately ?30,000.
0:27:35 > 0:27:37June reported the matter to the local police,
0:27:37 > 0:27:40but was surprised at their response.
0:27:40 > 0:27:43They said, "There's nothing we can do."
0:27:43 > 0:27:44So by this time,
0:27:44 > 0:27:46I was pulling my hair out by this time
0:27:46 > 0:27:48because I'd lost all this money.
0:27:48 > 0:27:53June was stuck, as the agreement had been a business arrangement,
0:27:53 > 0:27:55the police considered it a civil matter,
0:27:55 > 0:27:57but she saw it very differently.
0:27:57 > 0:27:58So I was quite shocked.
0:27:58 > 0:28:01At the end of the day, it's theft.
0:28:01 > 0:28:03You've stolen my money.
0:28:03 > 0:28:05Yes, I was going to ask Gary,
0:28:05 > 0:28:07is it normal for the police to treat a case
0:28:07 > 0:28:10like this in the way they did?
0:28:10 > 0:28:11Well, I'm afraid to say,
0:28:11 > 0:28:14we often hear of the police saying it's a civil matter,
0:28:14 > 0:28:15it's not a criminal matter.
0:28:15 > 0:28:18In order to prove that what happened was criminal,
0:28:18 > 0:28:20June would need to show that the men
0:28:20 > 0:28:23intended to steal her money all along.
0:28:23 > 0:28:26But Gary thinks, because there are others in the same position,
0:28:26 > 0:28:29she shouldn't give up and could well have a case.
0:28:29 > 0:28:33I think there is evidence here that you should take forward and
0:28:33 > 0:28:35investigate further.
0:28:35 > 0:28:38You need to turn into Miss Marple, please.
0:28:38 > 0:28:42Right. And you need to do some of the groundwork.
0:28:42 > 0:28:45So you need a case history for each person
0:28:45 > 0:28:48and how much they are missing.
0:28:48 > 0:28:52Then you need to send that to a senior police officer.
0:28:52 > 0:28:54Gary also recommends that June tries contacting
0:28:54 > 0:28:56her local Police and Crime Commissioner.
0:28:56 > 0:28:58But if that proves fruitless,
0:28:58 > 0:29:01Sylvia suggests changing tack and taking the couple
0:29:01 > 0:29:03through the civil courts.
0:29:03 > 0:29:04You entered into a contract,
0:29:04 > 0:29:07they are in breach of that contract because they didn't provide the
0:29:07 > 0:29:08service you agree to,
0:29:08 > 0:29:11and, therefore, you can sue them for the money that they owe you.
0:29:11 > 0:29:13Because they have to respond.
0:29:13 > 0:29:16And if they ignore it, then you'll get judgment by default,
0:29:16 > 0:29:19so there is still hope for you to get the money back.
0:29:19 > 0:29:22So, quite a lot of stuff you've been asked to do.
0:29:22 > 0:29:24Do you think you're going to manage to do it all?
0:29:24 > 0:29:28I will. I'm quite a determined lady. Your blood's up. Quite right, too.
0:29:29 > 0:29:31Well, since June came to see us,
0:29:31 > 0:29:33she has taken on Gary's advice
0:29:33 > 0:29:35and has been collecting lots of information
0:29:35 > 0:29:37from other affected owners.
0:29:39 > 0:29:42Meanwhile, we sent our experts out and about in the shopping centre to
0:29:42 > 0:29:44share some of their best hints and tips.
0:29:46 > 0:29:48Technology journalist David McClelland
0:29:48 > 0:29:49was particularly keen to talk to
0:29:49 > 0:29:52passing shoppers about their most treasured possession,
0:29:52 > 0:29:54their mobile phone -
0:29:54 > 0:29:56and how to keep it safe.
0:29:56 > 0:29:59What would you do if you reached into your pocket or your handbag
0:29:59 > 0:30:01and your phone wasn't there? Total panic.
0:30:01 > 0:30:03My phone's my life. I don't even know my home phone number,
0:30:03 > 0:30:05I don't think, that's on there.
0:30:05 > 0:30:06If you left it on a bus or on a train,
0:30:06 > 0:30:09how would you try and recover that phone, do you think?
0:30:09 > 0:30:10I wouldn't know. You wouldn't know?
0:30:10 > 0:30:12I wouldn't know. I wouldn't have a clue.
0:30:12 > 0:30:16300,000 smartphones were stolen last year but, in many cases,
0:30:16 > 0:30:19once the criminals got hold of the SIM card,
0:30:19 > 0:30:21the handset itself is discarded.
0:30:21 > 0:30:25So David has a tip for how you and your phone can be reunited.
0:30:25 > 0:30:27There is a national property register
0:30:27 > 0:30:29that you can register your phone with.
0:30:29 > 0:30:31They reunite thousands and thousands
0:30:31 > 0:30:33of people with their phones every year.
0:30:33 > 0:30:36To get your phone registered, so that it can be returned,
0:30:36 > 0:30:38you need to know your phone's identity number
0:30:38 > 0:30:40and here's how you can find it.
0:30:40 > 0:30:43Each phone's got its own unique code called an IMEI number,
0:30:43 > 0:30:44and the way to find out your number,
0:30:44 > 0:30:48I've got a glamorous assistant who's going to show you how to find that.
0:30:48 > 0:30:51Just type in *#06#
0:30:51 > 0:30:52You can try it yourself.
0:30:52 > 0:30:54Just type this code into your phone
0:30:54 > 0:30:56and it will reveal your handset's
0:30:56 > 0:30:58unique identification number.
0:30:58 > 0:30:59Then you need to go to the website,
0:30:59 > 0:31:02tap in that IMEI number and pop it on there.
0:31:02 > 0:31:04Really useful tip. Brilliant.
0:31:04 > 0:31:07And if your phone is simply lost, rather than stolen,
0:31:07 > 0:31:10David's got an even simpler do-it-yourself tip.
0:31:10 > 0:31:11Can I show you something?
0:31:11 > 0:31:14This is really, really low-tech.
0:31:14 > 0:31:19On the back of my phone, I've got a little post-it note,
0:31:19 > 0:31:22so if anyone finds my phone and wants to know who to give it back to,
0:31:22 > 0:31:24that's all they need to know.
0:31:24 > 0:31:25That's brilliant.
0:31:25 > 0:31:28David's put down his Twitter handle for people to track
0:31:28 > 0:31:31him down, but an e-mail address would work just as well.
0:31:31 > 0:31:32I'm putting that on mine.
0:31:32 > 0:31:34Do it. I'm putting that on mine!
0:31:35 > 0:31:38And David has another crucial piece of advice.
0:31:38 > 0:31:40If your phone does go missing, for whatever reason,
0:31:40 > 0:31:43report it lost as soon as you can.
0:31:43 > 0:31:46If someone does nick your phone and starts making premium-rate calls,
0:31:46 > 0:31:48do you know how much you're liable for?
0:31:48 > 0:31:51No. I don't. No.
0:31:51 > 0:31:55If you tell your network within 24 hours, it's the first ?100,
0:31:55 > 0:31:57but if you don't tell them in that 24 hours,
0:31:57 > 0:31:59then you may be liable for all of it.
0:31:59 > 0:32:02And that could leave you facing a very large bill,
0:32:02 > 0:32:05because fraudsters may use your phone to call premium-rate
0:32:05 > 0:32:07numbers that they've set themselves
0:32:07 > 0:32:11in a clever scam to generate thousands of pounds.
0:32:11 > 0:32:13Good luck. I hope you never do lose your phone but, if you do,
0:32:13 > 0:32:15make sure you report it within that 24 hours.
0:32:21 > 0:32:24Earlier in the programme, we saw what goes into testing products
0:32:24 > 0:32:27to see if they merit the Good Housekeeping Institute's
0:32:27 > 0:32:29seal of approval.
0:32:29 > 0:32:31Winning that accolade involves a rigorous
0:32:31 > 0:32:33and robust assessment process,
0:32:33 > 0:32:35but the same can't always be said
0:32:35 > 0:32:37of a whole lot of other endorsements
0:32:37 > 0:32:40you can find emblazoned on labels and packaging.
0:32:40 > 0:32:43We've been taking a close look at what some of them actually mean.
0:32:46 > 0:32:50From cars to cider, through to nappies...
0:32:50 > 0:32:51That's amazing.
0:32:51 > 0:32:53I'll tell you what's amazing.
0:32:53 > 0:32:54Aldi Mamia nappies
0:32:54 > 0:32:56beat Pampers three years running
0:32:56 > 0:32:58at the Mother and Baby Awards.
0:32:58 > 0:33:01Ads and labels can boast all sorts of awards,
0:33:01 > 0:33:02endorsements or recommendations
0:33:02 > 0:33:05that suggest they're a cut above their rivals.
0:33:05 > 0:33:08And it seems they really do influence your decision
0:33:08 > 0:33:10on which ones to buy.
0:33:10 > 0:33:13I think, initially, I do look for products that are endorsed,
0:33:13 > 0:33:17but I still sort of have my own mind and I still like to do a comparison,
0:33:17 > 0:33:20but I am influenced by an endorsement, I must admit.
0:33:20 > 0:33:22I tended to go for the thing that says "approved",
0:33:22 > 0:33:26because we tend to look for that, but I'm always very judgmental.
0:33:26 > 0:33:30You kind of trust that someone's done some kind of research,
0:33:30 > 0:33:33some kind of testing
0:33:33 > 0:33:36to say that it's the best product out there.
0:33:36 > 0:33:39But all awards are not equal and what's behind the accolades
0:33:39 > 0:33:44we see so proudly emblazoned on the packaging can vary enormously.
0:33:45 > 0:33:49Sometimes there is a competitive process to gain that coveted award,
0:33:49 > 0:33:52even if you might assume from the number of times you see it
0:33:52 > 0:33:54that everyone's a winner.
0:33:54 > 0:33:57Take the 2015 Decanter Wine Awards.
0:33:57 > 0:34:0170% of all the wines tasted came away with a recommendation.
0:34:01 > 0:34:05But look more closely, and it turns out only about 3% won gold,
0:34:05 > 0:34:1112% got silver, 30% bronze and 25% a commendation.
0:34:11 > 0:34:14And though you will see plenty of products showing off this logo
0:34:14 > 0:34:16for the Great Taste Awards,
0:34:16 > 0:34:19just a third of the 10,000 or so entrants
0:34:19 > 0:34:21were deemed good enough to use it.
0:34:21 > 0:34:24Now, it's unlikely that many casual shoppers will know
0:34:24 > 0:34:28if an award's been hard-won or given out with a minimum of effort.
0:34:28 > 0:34:31But, as Professor Vince Mitchell explains,
0:34:31 > 0:34:33we will respond very positively to the idea
0:34:33 > 0:34:36that someone's taken the time to test
0:34:36 > 0:34:39or rate a product on our behalf.
0:34:39 > 0:34:43Awards can actually have a big effect on consumers,
0:34:43 > 0:34:45particularly when they first see them.
0:34:45 > 0:34:48In that couple of seconds it takes to decide
0:34:48 > 0:34:50what you're going to buy in the supermarket,
0:34:50 > 0:34:53that award can be the piece of information
0:34:53 > 0:34:55that makes the difference.
0:34:55 > 0:34:57And there's one award that, on the face of it, suggests the winning
0:34:57 > 0:35:00products really are the cream of the crop.
0:35:00 > 0:35:02After all, it's called Product Of The Year
0:35:02 > 0:35:03and it boasts that displaying
0:35:03 > 0:35:07that title can boost a brand's sales by up to 15%.
0:35:08 > 0:35:11But what you may not realise is that there isn't just
0:35:11 > 0:35:12one Product Of The Year.
0:35:12 > 0:35:15Last year, for instance, there were 42 of them.
0:35:15 > 0:35:17So how can they all be that good?
0:35:19 > 0:35:22I think it's important for certain product awards,
0:35:22 > 0:35:24you have to look at the frame of reference,
0:35:24 > 0:35:28because consumers might realistically expect
0:35:28 > 0:35:31that that was the best product in the world
0:35:31 > 0:35:34compared to every single product.
0:35:34 > 0:35:37Whereas, in reality, the frame of reference is much smaller than that.
0:35:37 > 0:35:41And, therefore, we interpret it as being, "Wow!"
0:35:41 > 0:35:44When, really, it's only a little "Yay..."
0:35:45 > 0:35:49Product Of The Year awards its title in a number of different categories,
0:35:49 > 0:35:52but even that's not as simple as it sounds, because some of those
0:35:52 > 0:35:56categories may distinctly overlap.
0:35:56 > 0:35:57Take yoghurts, for example.
0:35:57 > 0:36:01You might assume that only one could walk away with the coveted title,
0:36:01 > 0:36:03but, guess what, in 2016,
0:36:03 > 0:36:06no fewer than four yoghurts were crowned Product Of The Year.
0:36:08 > 0:36:10So here's an example of category confusion.
0:36:10 > 0:36:12You're standing in the supermarket in front of the yoghurts
0:36:12 > 0:36:14and you want to know which is best.
0:36:15 > 0:36:19So here we have the best healthy yoghurt,
0:36:19 > 0:36:21this actually is the best kids' yoghurt,
0:36:21 > 0:36:24this one is the best dessert,
0:36:24 > 0:36:29but this one is actually the best yoghurt in the yoghurt category.
0:36:29 > 0:36:32You can see how that's confusing to a consumer
0:36:32 > 0:36:35trying to decide which one is actually best.
0:36:36 > 0:36:41Meanwhile, this Gillette shaving gel won in the toiletries category,
0:36:41 > 0:36:44but that doesn't mean the rest went home empty-handed. Oh, no!
0:36:44 > 0:36:46Others were named Product Of The Year
0:36:46 > 0:36:48in categories including toothpaste,
0:36:48 > 0:36:51oral care, wet shave razors, skincare,
0:36:51 > 0:36:53baby wipes and women's hair removal.
0:36:53 > 0:36:57They're all toiletries, but they're all also winners.
0:36:57 > 0:37:00And there's a real commercial value in them being able to say
0:37:00 > 0:37:04that because, when you see the magic words Product Of The Year,
0:37:04 > 0:37:07you may not realise that the item has won in a specific,
0:37:07 > 0:37:10sometimes rather narrow category.
0:37:10 > 0:37:13In reality, most consumers don't spend that much time
0:37:13 > 0:37:15or effort processing any product claim.
0:37:15 > 0:37:19And therefore, they simply take it at face value and assume
0:37:19 > 0:37:22that this is the product that's the best on the market
0:37:22 > 0:37:24compared to hundreds of products.
0:37:24 > 0:37:29That is actually an exaggerated interpretation
0:37:29 > 0:37:31of what it actually means.
0:37:31 > 0:37:34So here's how Product Of The Year works.
0:37:34 > 0:37:36It's open to any new product that went on sale
0:37:36 > 0:37:40in the past 18 months and is considered innovative.
0:37:40 > 0:37:44Companies can enter any product for free and they don't have to select
0:37:44 > 0:37:46which category they're entering because, in fact,
0:37:46 > 0:37:49there are no set categories.
0:37:49 > 0:37:50It's only when all the entries are in
0:37:50 > 0:37:52that the categories are announced.
0:37:52 > 0:37:57It's slightly concerning that some award organisers don't publish the
0:37:57 > 0:38:01categories until after all the entries have been submitted.
0:38:01 > 0:38:05This raises the possibility that they can create
0:38:05 > 0:38:09specific award categories which artificially increase
0:38:09 > 0:38:13the probability of those people who submitted
0:38:13 > 0:38:14actually winning.
0:38:15 > 0:38:17Product Of The Year actually guarantees
0:38:17 > 0:38:21that there will be no fewer than two, but no more than six
0:38:21 > 0:38:23products competing in the final category,
0:38:23 > 0:38:25once all shortlisted entrants
0:38:25 > 0:38:30have paid a fee of ?3,750 to be considered.
0:38:30 > 0:38:35But shoppers we met seemed surprised that the field wasn't rather wider.
0:38:35 > 0:38:37So, if something won Product Of The Year,
0:38:37 > 0:38:39it'd have to be out of thousands for me, like, literally thousands,
0:38:39 > 0:38:41or maybe hundreds, at least.
0:38:41 > 0:38:42If a product's won an award,
0:38:42 > 0:38:45it must have beaten a lot of other products on the market.
0:38:45 > 0:38:46If a product's won an award,
0:38:46 > 0:38:49it's definitely beaten hundreds of other products out there on the
0:38:49 > 0:38:51competitive market.
0:38:51 > 0:38:54Once the Product Of The Year categories have been determined,
0:38:54 > 0:38:5812,000 consumers are asked what they think of each of the final entrants.
0:38:58 > 0:39:01A couple of months later, with all those results in,
0:39:01 > 0:39:04the winning products of the year are announced,
0:39:04 > 0:39:06some with great fanfare.
0:39:06 > 0:39:09But if a company wants to make the most of its big win and display that
0:39:09 > 0:39:11vital Product Of The Year logo,
0:39:11 > 0:39:15it will have to pay a further fee of ?16,000 to do so,
0:39:15 > 0:39:20giving a final cost of ?19,750.
0:39:20 > 0:39:23Of course, as we saw earlier at the Good Housekeeping Institute,
0:39:23 > 0:39:28it's not unusual for manufacturers to have to pay to display a logo and
0:39:28 > 0:39:31most award schemes across many industries
0:39:31 > 0:39:34have a range of fees for competitors.
0:39:34 > 0:39:37But Professor Vince Mitchell isn't convinced that this kind
0:39:37 > 0:39:41of set-up benefits businesses or consumers.
0:39:41 > 0:39:46Not only do you have to pay to enter, but you have to pay to win,
0:39:46 > 0:39:48so if you have won, if you can't pay for the award,
0:39:48 > 0:39:51then you can't use it and promote it.
0:39:51 > 0:39:53I'm not sure that's clear to consumers
0:39:53 > 0:39:58and I'm not sure that that is really fair to the people
0:39:58 > 0:40:02who enter, because it seems very dependent on how
0:40:02 > 0:40:03deep your pockets are.
0:40:05 > 0:40:08However, when we got in touch with Product Of The Year,
0:40:08 > 0:40:11it stressed that, like any commercial business,
0:40:11 > 0:40:15it has running costs and its charges cover an array of expenses,
0:40:15 > 0:40:18such as an award show, a huge consumer survey,
0:40:18 > 0:40:22and a large and expensive research operation.
0:40:22 > 0:40:24And it was keen to point out that, of course,
0:40:24 > 0:40:27there's no cost to consumers who, through the scheme,
0:40:27 > 0:40:30are able to find a shortcut to good new products.
0:40:30 > 0:40:32Adding that it gets a lot of feedback
0:40:32 > 0:40:35from satisfied purchasers of Product Of The Year winners,
0:40:35 > 0:40:38it explained that while its categories are largely
0:40:38 > 0:40:41based on those already existing in supermarket aisles,
0:40:41 > 0:40:44they're determined by whatever products are nominated,
0:40:44 > 0:40:46which may change year on year,
0:40:46 > 0:40:51according to the changing trends and focus of innovation in each sector.
0:40:51 > 0:40:54Product Of The Year also said it's down to each manufacturer
0:40:54 > 0:40:57to make clear exactly which category has been won.
0:40:59 > 0:41:02But if you've ever plumped for a product because of an accolade
0:41:02 > 0:41:04displayed on the label, keep in mind that,
0:41:04 > 0:41:07while any such recognition is not to be sniffed at,
0:41:07 > 0:41:12what you assume it represents may be a little different from the reality.
0:41:12 > 0:41:15I think award schemes in general are good for consumers.
0:41:15 > 0:41:19They can save us time and help us to make quick decisions about which are
0:41:19 > 0:41:22the best products when they are done transparently.
0:41:22 > 0:41:26However, when there are multiple organisations with multiple awards
0:41:26 > 0:41:28and it's not clear how they're done,
0:41:28 > 0:41:32then they create confusion rather than clarity in consumers.
0:41:40 > 0:41:42If you've got a story you'd like us to investigate,
0:41:42 > 0:41:46then you can get in touch with us via our Facebook page...
0:41:48 > 0:41:51our website...
0:41:53 > 0:41:54or e-mail...
0:41:58 > 0:42:01And, of course, you can always send us a letter to our postal address...
0:42:13 > 0:42:17Now, of course, companies live or die on how well they can convince us
0:42:17 > 0:42:20to buy their products but, as we've seen today,
0:42:20 > 0:42:24sometimes the sales pitch just does not live up to expectations
0:42:24 > 0:42:28and no-one wants to discover that when it's too late,
0:42:28 > 0:42:31which, of course, is usually after you've handed over your cash.
0:42:31 > 0:42:34Well, it's precisely to give us confidence that we're making the
0:42:34 > 0:42:38right choice that so many of us rely on those endorsements emblazoned
0:42:38 > 0:42:41on the label or packaging. But as canny consumers,
0:42:41 > 0:42:44it's still worth checking out what's behind those endorsements.
0:42:44 > 0:42:46That said, of course, there's a world of difference
0:42:46 > 0:42:50between claims that are exaggerated or overhyped and the hard sell
0:42:50 > 0:42:53techniques designed to trick you into buying something
0:42:53 > 0:42:54that you just don't need.
0:42:54 > 0:42:57So hopefully we've been able to give you some tips
0:42:57 > 0:42:59to help navigate the incredible range of sales tactics
0:42:59 > 0:43:02that we're faced with every single day.
0:43:02 > 0:43:04Well, that point is where we're going to leave it,
0:43:04 > 0:43:07but we're going to be back with more of your stories very soon,
0:43:07 > 0:43:10so until then, from the entire Rip-Off Britain team, bye-bye.
0:43:10 > 0:43:11Goodbye. Goodbye.