Episode 5 Rip Off Britain

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

and you contacted us in your thousands.

You've told us about the companies you think get it wrong

and the customer service that simply is not up to scratch.

I've complained and complained and nobody takes any notice of me.

In all honesty, I think it's just a way for the shops

to make more money.

You've asked us to track down the scammers who stole your money

and investigate the extra charges you say are unfair.

You don't want to spend any more, but yet they're always trying

to offer you little things extra.

When you've lost out but no-one else is to blame

you've come to us to stop others falling into the same trap.

Rang up the company and they went, "Oh, it isn't our fault."

So, whose fault is it?

So, whether it's a blatant rip-off or a genuine mistake...

We're here to find out why you're out-of-pocket

and what you can do about it.

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

Hello and welcome to Rip-Off Britain, where

today we're going to be trying to make sense of how things

are supposed to work if you need to return something

that you've bought, either because it's faulty

or perhaps even dangerous.

And, of course, while it should all be

very straightforward, even big name stores and companies

don't always make it easy.

Or indeed get it right.

Because there are very clear-cut rules firmly on the side

of the consumer and while you may think that they'd be hard to argue

with, you're constantly telling us all here in the office

about occasions when arguing is exactly what the businesses

involved will do.

Well, in a classic Rip-Off Britain move, we've done our own test to see

if some of the country's biggest and best known names would give us

the right answer when we tried to return something faulty

and you'll be surprised at the ones that got it wrong.

But, don't worry. They might not be clear on our rights but we certainly

are and by the end of the programme, you will be, too.

Coming up...

If you've got one of the millions of tumble dryers at risk of catching

fire, how long should you have to wait for the company responsible

to check if it's safe?

I mean, I was literally horrified.

11 months before someone could even come out and put the machine right?

It just, to me, was totally unacceptable.

And the high street stores getting your rights wrong.

By that point I was just so angry because it was like

I was being disbelieved.

In our last series, we looked at concerns about how good

manufacturers are at letting us know if a product we bought

may have a fault that could be dangerous.

And we met a woman whose tumble dryer had actually caught fire

because she had no idea of the risk.

Well, since then, the effectiveness of product recalls and safety

warnings has been called into question and yet

again, it's tumble dryers at the heart of it all.

New figures revealed that firefighters attend almost one

blaze a day caused by tumble dryers, which catch fire.

Millions of households in Britain have a tumble dryer built by

one of the biggest and best-known home appliance manufacturers

in the world, Whirlpool.

But last year, the group's European brands Hotpoint,

Creda and Indesit hit the headlines when it was revealed that more

than 5 million of their dryers could be at risk of catching fire.

'A review discovered potential safety issues where excess fluff

'in the dryers could catch in the heating element.'

Investigators discovered that Whirlpool's dryers had been linked

to at least 750 house fires since 2004.

'This used to be the family's tumble dryer,

'but when they saw flames coming from the back of the appliance

'they fled the family home and ran to safety.'

As a result, Whirlpool has launched

the biggest safety alert in British history.

Good afternoon, you're through to Whirlpool,

you're speaking to Heather, how can I help?

All 5 million dryers need to be inspected and, if they're

found to be among those at risk, repaired.

'Whirlpool says that customers can carry on using their dryers

'until the modification, if needed, has been made.'

Laura Whitley from Bristol has one of the dryers that could be

dangerous and after discovering that, she doesn't dare

use it until Whirlpool can confirm it's safe.

But she's had a long wait.

Who's this? Dada.

Laura had been using her Hotpoint dryer for 18 months

when she received the e-mail warning it could be dangerous.

I'd seen a couple of news stories but I didn't know that my machine

was a problem at all.

And it wasn't until I had an e-mail asking me to check the serial number

of my machine, that I realised there was a problem.

Laura put her serial number into the Hotpoint website and it

confirmed her dryer was among those that were potentially faulty.

It told her she needed to arrange for an engineer

to visit and if necessary, modify the appliance to ensure that

fluff can't come into contact with the heating element,

which could cause a fire.

I was actually quite worried because I'd been using this

machine, my son's in the house, my husband's in the house

and you hear these horror stories of what can happen

if the machine catches fire.

Now, Whirlpool hasn't actually recalled these tumble dryers,

despite suggestions from critics that it should have done.

Instead, it's issued a safety notice and a large-scale

modification programme, which aims to fix all the affected

machines instead of recalling them.

Whirlpool insists that the dryers are still safe to use

in the meantime, but just to be absolutely sure, the company has

told owners not to leave their dryers unattended when it's switched on

and to check and clean the filter after every use.

For Laura, however, any risk was enough to stop her

using her dryer altogether.

I definitely don't feel safe taking their advice.

Certainly, the week all this happened there were two news stories

where people had had their machine catch fire

but I'm not going to wait for that to happen

just because I put my tumble dryer on.

Whirlpool launched a massive programme of repairs

with 1,500 engineers sent out to check more

than 4,000 tumble dryers everyday.

But with 5 million to get through, that's not been a speedy process.

So when, in December 2015, Laura called to book an appointment to see

if her dryer was safe, she couldn't believe

what she was told -

the next available slot wasn't until the following November!

I mean, I was literally horrified.

That is such a long time to have to wait.

11 months before someone

can even come out and put the machine right?!

It just, to me, was totally unacceptable.

With her second child due in three months,

Laura was really hoping for a quicker solution.

She didn't want to be stuck with a dryer she couldn't be sure was safe.

After I got over the shock of the wait time, I picked up

the phone to try to see if there was anything I could do

and I was told I was one of the millions of people

that was in the same situation and I literally

had to wait my turn.

Dozens of Rip-Off Britain viewers have been in touch with similar

concerns about the wait to have their appliance checked out.

The whole procedure taking so long is ridiculous for a company who says

customer safety comes first.

On my second telephone conversation with a call centre, I was told

that it wouldn't be six weeks, it would be next February '17

and I'm not very pleased with that.

Hotpoint customer services were not easy to contact over the phone.

Continually left on hold.

When they did answer, they had no idea how

to deal with my enquiry.

Others have e-mailed us asking if their home insurance would pay

out if a dryer known to be at risk did cause a fire

before it could be fixed.

Well, we put that to the Association Of British Insurers,

who said it wouldn't expect such a claim to be declined.

But there's another big bone of contention among

Whirlpool customers who've contacted us, because the company has

come up with a solution for customers who don't want to wait

months for an engineer to come round.

It says they can buy a brand-new dryer, which isn't

affected by the same fault, for ?99.

It says that's a third of the normal price.

But many of the people we've spoken to, Laura among them,

don't see why they should have to pay anything to resolve a safety

issue that isn't their fault.

'I just don't think it's fair for Whirlpool to ask

'us to spend more money out of our own pocket'

for a replacement machine.

So, Laura's resigned to waiting for the engineer's visit,

which has at least been brought forward to September,

though that's still almost ten months after she first booked it.

I spent ages researching the right tumble dryer to buy and now I'm left

with a room with a machine in it, with a machine I can't use

and it's ridiculous.

I look at it every day and I can't put any washing in it.

'It's not just Whirlpool customers unhappy with the length of time

'all this is taking to sort out.

'The retail ombudsman Dean Dunham would also have liked to see

'the affected dryers repaired more quickly.

'And he thinks there should be tighter rules around how quickly

'manufacturers are obliged to respond to safety concerns.'

There is no law that says when there is an issue or a safety

notice issued or a product recall

that says how quick they have to act.

That's a huge flaw in the law.

It needs to be updated.

Manufacturers like Whirlpool, when they know there's a problem,

they should be dealing with issuing notices at a certain period of time

and get engineers out to either uplift the goods

or to repair them, again, within a very tight timetable.

And what, therefore, do you think that Whirlpool should have done

that they haven't done?

Well, what Whirlpool should have done in this

situation is they should have acted far quicker.

The moment they discovered the problem, they should have put

more staff on the situation, more staff answering phones,

more engineers out to people's houses and dealt with it quicker.

Whirlpool did employ hundreds of new call centre staff

and engineers to tackle this faster

but its efforts to contact customers were hampered by the fact

that only around one quarter of the 5 million

who'd brought one of the affected dryers had registered it

with Whirlpool, leaving more than 3 million people

that the company couldn't locate.

That's a problem we've reported on before and it's one affecting any

manufacturer that might need to contact customers.

If you've bought a tumble dryer or any other electrical appliance

you will have seen a big sticker on the front saying

"register your warranty, call this number or send

"us an e-mail." Most people don't do that.

In fact, fewer than half of us typically register

our new appliances, which you can understand makes it hard for

manufacturers to trace us

if they issue a recall or, as in the case of Whirlpool,

a safety notice.

Last year we told you about a service called

"Register my appliance", which allows customers to do just that

so the manufacturer can contact them if their product is recalled.

But the Retail Ombudsman believes that still relies on customers

taking the time to register.

They're behind a simple idea which, if it takes off, could help put that

right by registering appliances at the time they're bought.

When the retailer sells you the goods, they don't tell

the manufacturers of your details.

That means you're completely invisible to them.

They don't know about you.

We've created a central register.

We're now calling for all retailers that when they

sell electrical goods,

they register the person's details and the serial number and everything

else and then when a manufacturer has a product recall,

or safety recall, they can notify that register and in turn that

can notify consumers.

The register went live in June 2016 at ukrecall.org.uk and you can

still make sure your details are on it, even if they weren't

collected when you bought your appliance.

There's two things you can do in that situation.

The register does now deal with old machines,

so you can go to the register and you can register your old machine.

It will then pick up on any product recalls and safety notices.

Of course the other thing you can do is look at the sticker on the front

if it's still there and register it direct with the manufacturer.

In the best case scenario, do both.

And Dean has no doubt about what he believes

the crucial benefit will be.

This is going to save lives.

Our own website, bbc.co.uk/ripoffbritain has

details of other ways you can keep track of which products

may have been the subject of a recall or safety notice

with links to easily searchable websites we've featured on the programme last year.

As for Whirlpool and its tumble dryers, well, earlier this year

with so many viewers contacting us about this, we asked the company

if we could follow its teams working to inspect and where necessary

modify all those 5 million tumble dryers.

Initially, Whirlpool said yes, but later changed its mind.

The company was, however, happy to talk to us about what it's doing

to make sure all the affected machines are seen to as quickly

as possible, and to address the point raised by our viewers

that it's all simply taking too long.

Whirlpool stressed that safety is its number one priority

and it's working hard to speed up the whole process,

reiterating that it's taken on hundreds of extra engineers

and call centre staff and is continually looking into

alternative options to help reduce waiting times.

It says it's now contacted more than 3.6 million customers

with at least 1.4 million of those registering for the

free modification.

The company apologised to Laura for her long delay but said

it has now offered a solution she's happy with.

And it insisted the appliances ARE safe to use while awaiting

modification, repeating its advice that they shouldn't be left

unattended while also recommending users...

There's more information about how to check if your tumble dryer

is affected on our website.

And, of course, on Whirlpool's website, too.

As for the Retail Ombudsman's scheme to encourage more people

to register their appliances, Whirlpool said it welcomes such

initiatives, but as this one hadn't been worked out in consultation with

manufacturers, it pointed consumers to the industry approved

"Register my appliance" scheme.

But you can't help thinking the more ways manufacturers can track down

customers in an emergency, the better, especially if it means

the wait to get a problem sorted out won't stretch on for months.

I feel really angry at the fact that I was using this machine daily

and it could have been us, it could have been my family

that was put at that risk and that makes me feel really angry.

Our consumer rights when it comes to shopping were recently made

a little bit clearer when a rewrite of the law,

laid out in very simple

black and white terms, said what we should and shouldn't expect

a shop to do if we want to take something back.

But we've discovered that some of our best known chains don't seem

to have got the message.

But fear not, by the end of this film you should have no doubts

whatsoever about what exactly you're entitled to and who knows,

you might even be able to set the shop straight, as well.

Now, there was a time when the customer was always right,

which isn't a bad starting point if there is a disagreement over

something you've bought.

But these days, things aren't always that simple.

If you're not happy with a purchase because, let's say,

it's faulty or damaged, the store may not always see things your way

and knowing what your rights are and for how long you'd be entitled

to get your money back, can baffle even the savviest of shoppers.

I think on average it is two weeks, 14 days, I think.

As long as you haven't worn it and you've still got your receipt

you can take things back within a month.

It's normally about 14 days, 28 days.

Well, some of them were close, but none was completely right.

The Consumer Rights Act of 2015 makes it clear that

if an item is faulty

or simply "not fit for purpose", that's the phrase, then return it

with your receipt and you're legally entitled to a refund

within a minimum of 30 days.

Beyond that, you can still expect a repair or replacement,

but if you want your money back it's really important to act fast.

And while all that might sound clear-cut,

for some of you, returning

goods has proved anything but.

Jane Owen from Chelmsford, for one.

She thought that she knew what she was entitled to

when she needed to return some trainers that she'd bought

for her daughter Emily.

I was really excited about getting the trainers

because it was my birthday and I'd wanted them for ages.

The trainers were especially important for Emily

because she was just starting to get back on her feet after

recovering from a very serious traffic accident.

Go, come to me.

That's it, do it slowly.

The accident in 2014 left Emily hospitalised

but after months of painful physiotherapy, in August 2015 she

began walking again.

Good girl, well done.

It was an extra special present for all the hard work she'd put in

to getting back to walking after such a long time.

Emily's choice was these trainers from JD Sports,

the self-proclaimed King of Trainers.

She was thrilled to start wearing them

but after just two outings she began to notice that something was wrong.

She said, "Mum, they're really uncomfortable,

"there's something sticking in the back of my leg,"

and when I felt inside it, there was like a hard piece

of plastic or metal sticking out into the back of her foot.

Now, walking was hard enough for Emily

but this problem made it too painful for her to even try.

I can't wear them.

I have to take them off as soon as I put them on because it hurts.

Jane asked JD Sports for a replacement pair,

but much to her surprise, the store told her that they needed

to send them off for inspection first and when that was complete,

Jane and Emily were staggered to be told that the fault

wasn't with the shoes, but the way Emily had put them on.

The inspection said she must have rammed her feet into them.

I was quite angry that they'd actually come up with this

conclusion when it wasn't physically possible for Emily to do this,

because after Emily's accident we were still actually

putting her shoes on for her and doing them up.

Just really upset because I didn't have the strength to do that

so they were saying that I'd put them on the wrong way and I didn't

even have the strength to ram my feet in.

When Jane objected, JD Sports agreed to inspect the shoes again

but the eventual response was just the same.

By that point I was just so angry because it was like I was being

disbelieved because Emily couldn't physically do that at that time.

JD Sports however insisted that unless an independent inspection

of the trainers proved otherwise, it wouldn't be taking responsibility

for the fault in the trainers.

I just want them to admit that there was something

wrong with the trainers, not that we'd done anything to them.

When we got in touch with JD Sports, the store told us that it's sorry

that Jane is unhappy with its findings

but after a full internal review, it stands by its view that...

However...

It offered Emily a gift card matching the value

of the trainers so that she can choose another pair.

Whatever the explanation in this particular case,

you might have hoped that taking back what was after all still

a new pair of trainers would have been more straightforward

and certainly one purpose of the new Consumer Rights Act

was to make it clearer for shoppers and retailers alike

exactly when we should and shouldn't expect a refund.

But, the question is, have all the big stores

really got the message?

Under the new rules, if an item was faulty

when the shopper bought it, they have 30 days to take it

back for a full refund, and six months to ask for it

to be repaired or replaced.

What's more, during that period, if the store doesn't believe

the fault was present at the time of purchase, it is now up

to them to prove that.

But according to Peter Cartwright, who is a professor in consumer law

at Nottingham University, even big-name retailers

often get this wrong.

One reason I think why consumers get confused is because shopkeepers

and shop assistants are sometimes confused about this.

This might be in part because the law is quite complex,

but it also might be because they have not had

the training that they need to be able to communicate effectively

what the law is to consumers.

# Lifting me, lifting me up

# Just keeps lifting me... #

So, to test how often store staff do know their stuff,

we've enlisted the help of this gospel choir from Leicester.

They're going to swap the high notes...

# ..Lifting me higher and higher

# Higher... #

..for the high street.

Hi, there. Nice to see you. Hello. How are you? Good to see you.

To see if some of the big-name stores are all singing

from the same hymn sheet when it comes to consumer rights.

Peter has asked members of the choir to pop into branches

of Britain's best-known retailers and report back

on the advice that they are given

about getting a refund on a faulty item.

So, what we want you to do is to go to some of the top retail stores,

tell them that you want to return some goods that are faulty,

and ask them clearly, "How long have I got to do that?"

OK? Good luck with that.

Now, a good answer from one of the stores would mention

either the minimum 30-day limit the customer is legally entitled to,

or refer to the shop's own policy,

which, in some cases, might be more generous than the law requires.

Anything less than the 30 days is incorrect.

First stop, in the choir's home town of Leicester, Marks Spencer.

With 914 UK stores, its staff should be up to speed

with the ins and outs of what a customer is legally entitled to.

So, was that the case?

She said you can bring it back. She wants to see it.

She can't make a decision without seeing the jumper,

but there's a clear sign saying,

"If you have changed your mind about something,

"bring it back within 35 days."

Now, it's fair enough that the assistant wouldn't commit

without seeing the item.

But 35 days to return a product is above and beyond

the 30-day minimum that the law insists upon.

Next, Next.

A high-street giant with 500 stores in the UK and Ireland.

Let's see what we were told in the Leicester branch.

So, I went into Next and if the item is faulty,

then they said it is going to be at a manager's discretion

whether you can get the refund back.

That's not so good.

If it's a genuine manufacturing fault,

it isn't up to the manager to decide.

You have a right to a refund.

We also spoke to staff in the Leicester branches

of eight other high-street names.

And between them all, we were only given the wrong advice twice.

But we also sent our choir to branches of the same stores

in a different city -

34 miles up the road in Nottingham.

Kicking off, once again, in Marks Spencer.

She said, "Sometimes it's six months, sometimes it's a year."

So, she wasn't sure of the time.

Also, she said dependent on the fault and where it is.

Well, the staff member here wasn't as sure of their facts

as in the last branch and didn't seem to know either the law

or the store's own policy.

And we weren't given strictly accurate advice

in the Nottingham branch of Next either,

although staff did appear quite flexible in their approach.

If it's the manufacturer's fault, there is no timescale, really.

It's at the manager's discretion.

On this occasion, the shop workers of Nottingham

weren't quite as up to scratch on consumer rights

as the ones in Leicester,

because half of the shops we checked gave us the wrong advice.

And of the ten high-street names,

there were only five

where the staff gave us correct advice in both cities.

Topman, Matalan, Asda, H and Debenhams,

where, each time, we were directed to either the 30-day legal minimum

or their own more generous returns policy.

The information from the rest was mixed and sometimes,

I'm afraid, just plain wrong.

Hi, guys. Hello. So how did it go today? Well, very interesting.

So, do you think that the shops just didn't know what your rights were?

I don't think they know.

Because some was talking about it depends on a manager's discretion,

and which manager you get to get a refund for a faulty item

if you haven't got a receipt,

so it comes down to the manager at some point.

But if shop staff don't always get it right,

it's no wonder we can end up confused,

or worse still, not getting what we are entitled to.

So, to get a bigger picture,

researchers from the Rip-off Britain team

also either phoned or popped into branches

of those same ten retailers in Liverpool,

Manchester, and Chelmsford.

And again, there was quite a difference in what we were told.

By now, in total, we'd asked the same question on refunds

in 50 stores across the UK

and we put the results into a table

to see which chains fared best overall.

Bottom of our list was Next,

with staff failing to give accurate advice

in any of the five stores we checked.

Not far behind,

Primark also got it wrong more often than getting it right.

Our results were a mixed bag at New Look and Debenhams and Tesco.

But the advice was more consistent at H, M, and Matalan -

each of which was let down by just one store from the five we checked.

But at the top of the table were Asda and Topman,

where we got the correct information

from all five of the branches we spoke to.

When we put our findings to the stores that,

on this occasion, came out worst,

they stressed their commitment is to making sure

the staff get this right.

Next told us it's rolling out an updated staff training module...

And Primark also said

it would be strengthening its training on this...

But to make sure you're armed with the right information

on all of this whenever you need it,

do go to our website...

And there, you'll find a handy downloadable guide,

spelling it all out.

Still to come on Rip-off Britain,

the big name in furniture that may charge to return those faulty goods.

I was furious. I was upset.

I felt as if I was being bullied into giving them money

to take away a product that they'd delivered to me damaged.

Once again, we've taken Rip-off Britain out onto the road,

so that we can meet and help as many of you as we can in person.

I watch it occasionally. You do? I do, yeah.

You're my perfect man, then!

Our pop-up advice clinic checked into Manchester this year

and our team of experts was kept busier than ever before.

Steve Dalton came to seek personal finance whiz Sarah Pennells

after having trouble with an old energy supplier

that proved surprisingly difficult to leave behind.

We changed providers in March last year

and First Utility continued to bill us.

Did they confirm that they'd closed the account? Yes, they did.

How much, then, was the bill that you continued to get?

We continued to receive bills monthly, for the next nine months.

For how much? Hundreds of pounds.

?150, ?250, ?70.

Every one was different.

And what did they say when you got in touch with them again?

That they were looking into it, they were sorry for the inconvenience.

We had e-mails confirming that.

First Utility agreed that Steve had been billed incorrectly

and refunded the hundreds of pounds

that he quite wrongly had been asked to pay.

But billing errors across all energy companies

remain disappointingly common.

I can understand why you're fed up,

and I think it's really frustrating

when an energy company can't bill you correctly.

And I have to say that your energy supplier is not the only one

that's had billing problems.

This whole sector, large parts of it seem fairly incapable

of producing an accurate bill,

which you wouldn't think would be rocket science.

And a couple of companies have been hauled over the coals

by the regulator precisely for this.

And Steve's problems with First Utility weren't over yet.

Months later, the company was back in touch.

In February this year, they put us into debt management.

So, they sent debt collectors,

or they sent you a debt collector's letter.

Yeah, and issued a debt management order,

and, effectively, blackened our name.

Well, certainly, you don't want to have that,

meaning that you can't get good deals on borrowing in the future.

I bet you were really shocked and angered by that. I was, yeah.

Yeah, because you felt that you have done anything right. Yeah. Yeah.

Nine months after he'd closed his account,

the energy supplier was pursuing Steve for a final bill of ?173,

when as far as he was concerned, the account was all settled.

Worried about his credit rating and the demanding letters,

Steve paid up.

But he remains unhappy,

so Sarah has offered to take up his case.

Well, there's two things that we'll do.

One is I will go back to the company.

We'll take copies of what we need to.

And I'll, basically, kind of, you know,

be like a terrier with a bone on this one. Thank you.

And the other thing is,

I'll ask them to produce a copy of your credit record

to make sure that there isn't an impact on that, as well.

If you could do that, I'd be very grateful.

When Sarah did get in touch with First Utility,

the confusion here became clear.

It turns out that when Steve had closed his account,

he'd been given incorrect advice about his balance and what he owed.

The company accepts that, on this occasion, it got it wrong.

So, as well as refunding the money

that Steve hadn't known he needed to pay,

it's given him a goodwill gesture to make up the inconvenience

and apologised for the frustration that the errors caused.

Without Rip-off Britain's help and advice,

I don't think we would have ever resolved this.

Meanwhile, we were out and about with our experts

in the rest of the shopping centre...

You're, um...!

Yes, I am!

..to help more people brush up on their retail rights.

Do you reckon you know all your rights from shopping online?

Absolutely not. You don't.

Right, well, let me introduce the lady from Trading Standards,

Sylvia, who will tell you what your rights are.

When you buy from a shop, you don't have the right to return

something if you just change your mind.

But you do if you buy online.

So when you buy something online, generally, you've got 14 days

in which you can decide whether you want to keep it,

and if you don't, you can send it back and get your money back.

One thing I would say,

if you see a .co.uk website, what does that tell you?

I think it's from the UK.

It's a company in the UK, right? Is it? No!

Not necessarily.

That's what a lot of people think, but you can buy a .co.uk website.

So, just because you see it and you think it's reassuring,

it's a good idea to do some checks.

You can actually put the name into a domain searcher, such as Who.Is.

It'll tell you where that address is registered. Thank you very much.

Have you found that helpful? Yeah, really helpful.

Especially the .co.uk - I didn't know that. That's quite shocking.

As we heard earlier, the law says when you buy something

that's faulty, you are entitled to a refund or a replacement.

Now, your consumer rights really are very clear on that matter.

But the people in our next film were left feeling that their rights

really didn't matter much at all

to the company that sold them faulty furniture.

Right, let's recap our finance offer...

It's a big company, whose ads you've probably seen on TV.

Pay no deposit...

And it makes equally big promises about the quality of its products.

..A place of dovetail joints, beautiful details.

So, let's furnish the land!

It was those TV adverts that first caught Diane Perrin's eye

when she was looking for a new sofa for her home in Staffordshire.

They come across as a really friendly company

that is very hot on customer service,

that makes sure that their quality control is really high.

Diane didn't just want any old sofa,

not least because the narrow doorways in her cottage

make it hard to get most big furniture through the door.

But Oak Furnitureland sold a recliner

that she and her husband, Mark, couldn't resist.

It ticked every box that we had.

It was pretty to look at.

The upholstery was soft and very comfortable

and we'd never had luxury like a plug-in,

electric reclining sofa before.

It was perfect.

Diane and her husband were sold.

And they bought the sofa under the store's interest-free credit offer

for a total price of ?848 -

including insurance and delivery.

We were over the moon. I know it sounds ridiculous for a settee,

but we'd been so long without a decent sofa.

A week later, in May 2016, the new sofa arrived.

The drivers unwrapped and assembled it and a neighbour helped Diane,

who'd just had surgery on her hands, tidy up the packaging.

But it wasn't long before she spotted a problem.

There was a pull in the fabric,

which I thought they could probably come and fix,

but then, as I ran my hand across the fabric,

I noticed that there was a big dent just by the arm.

The dent that's in the cushion

is easily three inches wide

and it's 19 inches long, when I measured it.

With the delivery drivers long gone,

Diane picked up the phone to Oak Furnitureland.

I wanted to try and get it replaced

with one that didn't have this damage to it.

Diana assumed that getting a replacement

would be straightforward. How wrong she was!

The store asked her to send photos of the damage,

then said that, rather than replacing the item,

it would send someone round to repair the furniture,

which she wasn't happy with at all.

That just didn't seem fair to me.

That's it's a lot of money, it's a big piece of furniture,

and if it's not arriving in pristine showroom condition,

it should be replaced.

Oak Furnitureland was adamant that it was under no obligation

to replace the sofa, as the fault was only minor.

But when Diane checked the store's terms and conditions,

she couldn't find anything that backed up what she was being told.

Nowhere in here does it say that we won't replace faulty goods.

In fact, in several places,

it says we will replace where furniture is faulty.

Thoroughly confused, Diane called customer services again,

demanding a replacement.

This time, Oak Furnitureland said that she could return the sofa,

but in doing so, she was effectively refusing a repair,

so wouldn't get a full refund.

Instead, she'd need to pay a ?225 cancellation charge,

almost a third of what she paid for the sofa.

I was furious.

I was upset.

I felt as if I was being bullied into giving them money

to take away a product that they delivered to me damaged.

The store's lengthy terms and conditions

do state that, because all sofas are made to order,

they are excluded from the company's seven-day money-back guarantee.

But Diane could find no reference to facing a 30% charge

to return faulty goods if you're not willing to accept a repair.

And she can't see how that could be right.

I just can't understand where this policy came from.

And why they think... Why they set on that figure.

Convinced that she was entitled to a full refund

if no replacement was forthcoming, Diane refused to back down.

And though the company did refund the money

that she paid for the insurance and cancelled her finance agreement,

she was then billed for the ?225 Oak Furnitureland insisted

that she should pay.

It's just outrageous. It's just so...

It's just so wrong.

And Diane is not alone in thinking that.

In fact, you could fill several sofas with the people

who've contacted us with similar stories.

Jo Thomas reluctantly accepted a repair to her sideboard

that was faulty on delivery,

as she was told that it would not be possible

to refund or replace it free of charge.

Meanwhile, Jenna Slowey felt that she had no choice

but to accept a repair to her faulty sofa,

after, once again, being told that she would be charged to return it.

But Diane remains convinced

that what Oak Furnitureland has told her is wrong.

So, to find out for sure,

we brought her to meet Tony Shore

from Staffordshire Trading Standards.

Well, the law is very clear in relation to faulty goods.

If you advise them that they are faulty,

within that 30-day period,

you're entitled to a refund of your money.

So, from the point of view of the Consumer Rights Act,

you're entitled to a full refund of your money.

And that means that there's no costs involved for you

as an individual at all.

But if the Consumer Rights Act is so clear,

saying that you are entitled to a full refund within 30 days,

Diane can't see how Oak Furnitureland's terms and conditions

can say that sofas are excluded from the store's seven-day guarantee.

And Tony agrees with her.

I felt powerless.

Are companies like Oak Furnitureland

allowed to write their own terms and conditions like this? No.

Your statutory rights are there regardless of any policies

or any documentation that the company provides.

These are rights that you've got in law

and nobody can take those away.

Now, Oak Furnitureland does make clear on its website

that its Ts and Cs are subject to your statutory rights.

But when its terms appear to say something that's different,

you can see why Diane is so keen to get this cleared up.

So, Tony's advice to Diane is absolutely not to give up.

He recommends that she writes to the company's chief executive,

clearly stating her case, and asking for a full refund,

quoting the crucial passage from the Consumer Rights Act,

which, by the way, you can find on our website.

But in the end, that wasn't needed.

When we contacted Oak Furnitureland about Diane's case,

it immediately and unreservedly apologised,

agreeing that she was...

and that, on this occasion, its...

As such, it's repaid the money and reviewed its processes

to enable specialist staff to work...

It told us the other two cases we mentioned have also both

been resolved and that, as a result...

And though that isn't what was offered to Diane,

whose purchase came several months after that change came in,

the store went on to tell us

that all its customer service team is being retrained.

And it made clear that its seven-day money-back guarantee

is in addition to customer's statutory rights.

As well as her refund,

Oak Furnitureland sent Diane flowers and chocolates as an apology,

and though she very much appreciates all that,

she wants to make sure anyone else who ends up with faulty goods -

wherever they bought them - knows exactly what they're entitled to.

It's not just the money that I was distressed about

and that I was angry about.

I think they've got a lot to sort out internally.

If you got a story you'd like us to investigate,

then you can get in touch with us via our Facebook page,

our website...

or e-mail.

And, of course, you can send a letter to our postal address.

Well, after seeing our reports today, hopefully,

both you and the shops themselves are going to be a lot clearer

on exactly what you are entitled to if, for whatever reason,

you need to take something back.

Because it would certainly seem that perhaps in the past,

you may not always have been given the right information.

It seems that's especially the case when it comes to that old chestnut

of whether you should get a full refund

or just be happy with an exchange or credit note.

So, I have to say, it's a great relief to finally have that one

cleared up once and for all. Now that you know your rights,

make sure that nobody tries to bamboozle you

by telling you anything different.

And if you do run into problems when it comes to getting a refund,

a replacement, or a repair for something faulty,

why not share what happened on our Facebook page?

I'm sure this is a topic we're going to be looking at again.

In the meantime, keep shopping and keep taking back where necessary.

But for now, thank you very much for joining us.

And from all of us here, goodbye. Goodbye. Goodbye.

MUSIC: Powerful by Major Lazer

GUN CLICKS