Episode 1 The Legalizer

I've had an interesting life.

Coal miner,

forklift truck driver,

bricklayer,

factory production line worker,

fireman.

I've lived rough on the streets of London and Paris.

But now I've got a new job.

As a Queen's Counsel barrister,

I know the law inside out.

I've prosecuted and defended

some of the UK's most serious criminals,

but the life I've led means I know the world can be a tough place.

At some points, we've all felt ripped off,

cheated or conned.

It's frustrating, costly and stressful.

But I know consumers can fight back and get justice.

I'm not here to represent anyone.

But what I want is to empower you

to use the law to get what you are owed.

'Today I'll be helping a mother who believed she was misled

'into wasting £1,500 on a worthless modelling portfolio.'

-It's two tacky pieces of paper.

-Exactly.

With names and e-mail addresses on.

But first a narrow-boater whose dreams of a new life

on the waterway were shattered.

I was told to leave the marina immediately.

I'm going to help both of these women

work out how they've been cheated

and show them how they can use the law

to get back what they're owed.

There are 2,000 miles of canals and rivers in the UK

used by over 34,000 boats.

And the proud owner of one of them is Sue Williams.

She is a civil engineer from Surrey and she loves narrow boats.

Narrow-boating is a way of life.

It's the independence.

You just choose where you want to live and how you want to live it.

When circumstances changed in her personal life,

Sue decided to make a whole new start.

She sold her house in Surrey

and used the money to buy her very own narrow boat, My Lady.

It was going to be a big step, but I like challenges.

Sue's plan was to live aboard her boat full-time,

so she needed to find a permanent mooring to give her a base.

Fully equipped marinas offer mains water, electricity

and wi-fi broadband.

But there's a shortage of good moorings,

and many of the best marinas have a long waiting list.

So Sue was thrilled when she found an ad for a brand-new

state-of-the-art marina called Barby Moorings Ltd.

There was going to be a restaurant, cafe, shop, chandlery.

And I thought, "This will work out well."

Sue is a keen gardener, and when she read that

there would be bank-side moorings with garden plots available

it made the marina look even more attractive.

The site was still being developed, so she paid £400-deposit

to secure her place for when it was done.

And, as her plot was to have a garden,

she put all her garden furniture into storage.

But, as the months went past, the project was continually delayed.

Eventually, Sue was promised

the marina would be ready by the autumn of 2011.

Full of hope and anticipation,

she set out on the 100-mile trip to move her boat to its new home.

At every stage, she was reassured by the marina owner

that everything would be finished in time for her arrival.

But, when she finally arrived, Sue's heart sank.

The marina was like a minefield.

It was just steel coming out of the ground.

I had nothing.

Sue now realised that the facilities promised

on the Barby Moorings website just weren't there.

I just thought, "God! What have I done?!"

SHE LAUGHS

"What have I done?"

The next morning, Sue went to complain to site owner Tony McMaster.

She was in for her second shock.

He said, "Get out of my marina!"

And he wouldn't say anything else, just, "Get out, get out."

Came round the table and physically intimidated me

out of the door.

Because there were no facilities and she'd been evicted,

Sue's new life at Barby Moorings was over.

She was now homeless with nowhere to moor her boat.

It still upsets me.

This was a new start for me, literally.

You know, my whole future went in just that one thing he said -

"Get out!"

Sue has now found a new berth for My Lady

on another marina, but she wants Barby Moorings

to refund her all the money she spent moving her boat.

Sue clearly feels she was misled by the advertising of Barby Moorings

and, as the facilities that were promised weren't there,

it's not difficult to see her point.

In law, if a company makes you promises,

they should keep to them or face the consequences.

I'll be seeing Sue later to help her with her case.

Brighton, home to mother and daughter Nicki and Jan Koutris.

My name's Nicki, I'm 20.

My mum's called Jan.

Nicki's my first-born.

We go out together sometimes.

We go shopping together and coffee together.

When Nicki was on the lookout for work,

she came across a website called Candi Models.

They said they had experts in modelling

who could help you become a model.

Nicki followed the instructions on the site

and sent Candi Models a photograph of herself.

She was soon called back with some good news.

They phoned me one morning.

They said I was stunning, very photogenic,

and they said I had been selected

out of about 700 people.

They wanted me to go up to London.

Nicki and Jan were invited to an address in North London

for a test shoot at a company called Mint Brown Studios.

We were seen quite quickly.

Nicki was made up and she worked very well with the photographer.

He kept saying I was doing really well,

giving me really good feedback.

After the shoot, Nicki and Jan

were shown the photos by a female member of staff.

She said, "I'm pleased to tell you you've passed."

I was just so shocked that they thought I could be a model.

She made me believe that I stood out from the rest

and that I had a really good chance of becoming a big model.

And then came the shock.

Jan was told that if Nicki wanted to be a model

she'd need to pay for an extensive portfolio of photographs.

I hadn't gone with the intention of buying anything.

They offered Jan a portfolio,

an online version they called a "webfolio"

and a £400-list of modelling agencies.

Making a total of £1,800.

My heart sank. I had so much anxiety,

I was thinking, "This is a lot of money, my mum can't afford it."

It was what the sales assistant said next

that led Jan to make a decision.

What she actually said that sold it to me...

was that the minimum amount of money that you can make

per assignment is £1,000.

And we gasped.

I was thinking that

the money that my mum was going to pay out for all these photos

and portfolio and everything, I could earn back easily

with just a couple of photo shoots.

That's what sold it to me. On the spot, like that.

And I fell for it.

Nicki soon started to apply to the agents on the list

her mother had bought.

One of the first agents she contacted

called her in for a chat to look at Nicki's photos.

And he looked at them, at the photographs,

and he said,

"You've been to Mint Brown Studios, Candi Models."

And he said, basically, we've been scammed.

My stomach sank.

He said that he would have preferred for me

to have taken some snapshots at home and just sent those photos.

I feel embarrassed

that I've allowed myself to be taken in like this.

They lied to us, and to our faces

to get all this money out of us, and it's just worthless.

Jan is so unhappy she wants her money back.

The reason I want every single penny

from Candi Models/Mint Brown

it's because it's based on a lie.

And I don't want to give a penny of my money

to something that's a complete scam.

Jan is clearly upset that she's been persuaded to buy something

based on the promises of the salesperson

that she now feels were misleading.

If she wants to get her money back she may need to prove that,

and later I'll be there to help her.

Back now to Sue Williams,

who spent most of her savings moving her narrow boat to a new marina

she thought had a whole host of mod cons.

Only it didn't.

Sue feels she was made promises by the owner that were misleading

and now wants her money back.

I need to know more about what Sue thought

she was getting for her money.

'I'm hoping that, with my advice and help,

'Sue can resolve this problem for herself,

'and maybe get some money back.'

-Sue, Gary Bell.

-Hi, Gary.

This is what they call a narrow boat, then, is it?

Shall we go on board and get out of the wind, Gary?

-Do you think I'll fit on that, Sue?

-Mind your head.

It's not my height I'm worried about, Sue, it's my width.

You'll be fine, breathe in.

This is lovely, Sue, isn't it?

-Yup.

-There's plenty of height.

-Yes, it's not too bad.

-You have a nice little galley here.

-I have.

-Just like any other kitchen.

'Before I get carried away

'and talk myself into moving on to a narrow boat,

'I think I should find out for myself exactly

'what happened to Sue at Barby Moorings.'

So you decided you were going to sell your house...

-Yup.

-..and buy a boat.

-Yup.

-And live on the boat?

-Yup.

-With all the freedom that entails?

Yes.

And you looked for a perfect place to moor your boat.

-I did.

-And it was cheaper to live in the Midlands

-than it was in London.

-Yup.

So you found this place in Barby

-that promised the Earth and more.

-Yes.

'Sue has kept copies of the original advertising leaflets

'put out by Barby Moorings,

'and it certainly looks like a blissful place to live.'

-Was there a laundrette?

-No.

-Were there showers?

-No.

-Was there pump-out?

-Just about.

-Diesel?

-Yes.

-Wired internet?

-No.

-Wired Freeview TV?

-No.

-Electrical power?

-12 hours a day.

-So not quite as described?

-No.

So, presumably, you had a word with Mr McMaster about the fact

that the facilities were far less than had been promised?

I didn't even get an apology, nothing.

-Nothing from him at all?

-No, all he wanted was his money.

After she was evicted from the marina,

Sue received a letter from the owner, Tony McMaster,

claiming he'd been forced to evict her

because she'd breached his terms and conditions

during their argument in his office.

"On the afternoon of the 11th November,

"at the office of the company,

"within the bounds of the company property,

"your use of offensive language, threatening behaviour..."

which is misspelt,

"..and attempted physical violence towards an officer of the company

"constitutes a serious, irremediable breach of licence.

"The company terminates the license forthwith,

"and you are required to remove the vessel

"from the marina immediately."

I'm very surprised, Sue.

I mean, I've met you today, and you seem as nice as pie, but...

-SHE LAUGHS

-..to know that your physical violence,

your threatening behaviour, your offensive language...

-There's clearly a dark side to you(!)

-Yeah!

SHE LAUGHS

'Joking aside, Sue denies that she acted in this way.

'She says she is now seriously out of pocket

'and wants to claim back all the costs she's incurred in the move.

'The main elements of the claim are

'£400 for the deposit,

'£300 for the fuel to bring her boat to Barby,

'and there is also £1,496 for the storage of garden equipment

'that Sue planned to use on the bank side plot

'once she was settled in.

'In total, she's claiming £2,648 -

'well within the small claims limit.'

'Sue has already sent numerous letters

'requesting a refund from Barby Moorings, and got nowhere.'

I think the important thing is to write him a letter before action,

explaining to him what it is that you're claiming off him.

-Yeah.

-And explaining that you will go to court

if he doesn't pay up within 14 days.

'The first step on the road to getting her money back

'is to notify Barby Moorings that she means business.

'Then, set a deadline and give them every chance to pay up.

'This is something that every claimant must do.'

'Sue's letter needs to clearly explain

'why and what she is claiming,

'and how she's calculated these figures.'

'With any luck, Tony McMaster will read this

'and pay Sue Williams what she believes he has cost her.'

'I'll be back to see Sue when the deadline is up.'

Jan Koutris thought she was investing in a modelling portfolio

to start her daughter's career on the advice of Candi Models.

Only she soon discovered that

the portfolio she'd been sold by Mint Brown Studios

wasn't what any modelling agency was looking for.

Before I go to meet Jan, I need to do some research

into whether there's a link between Candi Models and Mint Brown Studios.

A good place to start is to find out if they share any directors.

Here's Candi Models, incorporated on the 20th of May, 2011,

registered at an address in Henley-on-Thames.

Next, Mint Brown Studios.

Well, surprise, surprise.

It was incorporated on the same date, registered at the same address

in Henley-on-Thames by the same director, Nicholas Wood.

So, Candi Models and Mint Brown Studios

are both run by the same person,

and operate out of the same converted North London warehouse.

I think I'd better go and see Jan.

By approaching this from a lawyer's perspective,

I may be able to help Jan prove that she was misled

and, therefore, she is entitled to get her money back.

-Hi, Jan.

-Hello.

-Gary Bell.

How many pictures have you got?

We were told we needed 200 for a portfolio.

Is that right?

So you spend all this money on these very nice photographs

of your very beautiful daughter,

but they're utterly pointless to launch her as a model.

Absolutely. Yeah.

You don't need hundreds of photographs.

You don't even need 50 photographs for a portfolio to be a model.

All I needed, really, was a few photographs taken at home.

So, in terms of launching a modelling career for Nicki,

the portfolio, the web folio, the photographs,

-and the list of modelling agencies is worthless?

-Worthless.

So these magic beans are not going to grow into a beanstalk?

Unfortunately, no.

'Jan wants a complete refund.

'That's £50 for the refundable deposit,

'£400 for the list of modelling agencies,

'and £1,350 for the portfolio,

'making a total of £1,800.

'I need to help Jan work out how she can get it.'

Right, let's have a look at the paperwork and see what caused

-you to pay £1,800 to Mint Brown Studios, London.

-OK.

There isn't really much paperwork,

but what Jan does have is quite revealing.

This is an exclusive list of modelling agencies

-that she was going to sell you for £400.

-Yeah.

It's two tatty pieces of paper.

-Exactly.

-With names and...

And this is the information that Mint Brown Studios gave you

when you booked to go up for the day, is that right?

-Yes, it was, yeah.

-Well, let's have a look at what that says, then.

-It's what they sent to us after paying the initial £50.

-Wonderful.

"Thank you for choosing Candi Models to help

"start your career in the modelling world.

But the amazing opportunity is only given

to a handful of successful candidates that have passed

their selection process.

So you thought that was an audition

to see whether or not Nicki was going to be a model?

Absolutely. 100%.

-With Candi Models?

-Yes.

The thing that sold it to me, the one thing,

all the time I was thinking, "I can't afford it, can't afford it."

And then, all of a sudden, she came up with another thing,

a sales ploy, the minimum that you can earn per casting is £1,000.

I thought, "A couple of castings, three castings,

-"I'll get my money back, and then she'll..."

-You're in profit.

Yeah, exactly. And that's what sold it to me.

You know what they say, if it sounds too good to be true...

-It probably isn't!

-It probably isn't.

-And it wasn't.

'This is the key to her claim -

'Jan thought her daughter Nicki was being auditioned

'for a lucrative job as a model,

'not just out to buy some nice pictures,

'and the paperwork has given me an insight

'into what is actually going on here.'

The £400 model agency list that you're given,

and the £1,350 that you paid for the photographs

is all paid to Mint Brown.

Who was the booking fee paid to? Do you know?

That was paid to Mint Brown.

-So, even the £50 booking fee was paid to Mint Brown?

-Yeah.

Candi Models is the trap that Mint Brown sets

to entice young girls to come with their parents

-and cough up.

-Absolutely.

I'm now convinced that Jan has a good case to ask for her refund,

because she was misled by the salesperson

and the product she bought isn't fit for purpose.

First step is for Jan to simply call

and ask one last time for her money back.

I always think it's a good idea to ask in person -

that is, if you can get through.

It's busy. User busy.

So, you've tried to call them now about ten times,

-and every time the phone's busy.

-Yes.

Can't get through.

So, what we have to do is to write to them

-what we call a letter before action.

-OK.

'Because Jan can't contact them by phone,

'her only option is a letter before action.

'It will be the first the studio know of her wanting a refund.

'She must say who she is and what she spent.

'She must also explain why she feels she was mis-sold the product,

'mentioning the promise of "£1,000 per casting".

'Lastly, she must say that she wants a refund within 14 days.

'If this goes to court, a letter giving a deadline is vital.'

Writing this letter is the first step

along the road to getting this money back,

but it may mean that you have to go to court eventually to get it.

Jan paid £1,800 for what, in effect, is a useless portfolio.

She wants Mint Brown to pay the money back, and so do I.

My name is Gary Bell, and as a QC I spend most of my working life

dealing with major court cases.

But I haven't always been a barrister.

I've known some tough times,

and now I want to use my knowledge of the law to help others.

I want to show you how you can use the courts to recover your money.

Sue Williams thought she was moving her narrow boat to Barby Moorings,

a newly built marina advertised as having the latest facilities.

Only, when she got there, it wasn't.

So far, I've helped Sue draft a letter asking for all

the costs involved in her pointless move to be paid back.

Sue told me she first read about Barby Moorings on a leaflet,

but they also have a website.

It looks great.

There's the bank-side mooring where Sue was going to create her garden.

Here's a list of facilities that were promised.

When Sue originally saw the website,

it said the facilities were there already,

so she was happy to pay her deposit.

The website has clearly changed.

Whenever a company changes its advertising,

it's worth checking to see if this is because

they've been investigated by the Advertising Standards Authority.

Here's their website.

And, yes, there's an adjudication about the facilities

advertised by Barby Moorings.

Someone, apart from Sue Williams, complained.

The ASA agreed and told Barby Moorings to amend their website

and only claim for what was actually available,

and that's exactly what they've done.

So, Barby Moorings were falsely advertising their facilities,

which will be useful to Sue in her claim -

it shows that other people have also complained about Barby Moorings.

Sue wasn't the only person taken in by their broken promises.

This is the 61-foot narrow boat Vital Spark.

And her skipper, Frank Watts.

I bought it soon after my wife died.

I got it as a bare shell and over the following years

I fitted it out completely to the state it is today.

Frank was looking for a marina in the Midlands,

and when he found Barby Moorings it was just what he wanted.

Frank moved Vital Spark up to the marina,

and that's when the trouble started.

The first surprise to me

was that the electricity was only available for 12 hours a day.

Frank was then told by the owners that he must move his boat

to another part of the marina.

I found myself in an...

I don't quite know how to describe it,

it was just a pond of water and no moor.

I couldn't get on and off of the boat easily.

When I used the length of staging that they provided

it damaged the boat. I was extremely unhappy with it.

It simply was not what I was either expecting,

what I had paid for, or where I was prepared to leave my boat

which represents a fair investment for me.

Frank left Barby Moorings and wrote to ask for a refund.

He got a response to his second letter, but not with a refund.

A further bill from him for an additional £250,

because I hadn't given my 13 weeks notice to him.

Frank has now resorted to court action to recover his money.

I'm sad because...

it was so unnecessary.

Unlike Frank, when Sue left Barby Moorings

she ended up in an argument with Tony McMaster.

But I think it's important to be dispassionate

about who said what to who, even if things did get a little heated.

When Dave Gartland and his partner, Liz, heard about Barby Moorings,

they thought they'd found just the type of mooring they were looking for.

We had explained to Tony McMaster

that we had very specific needs from the marina.

The reason being, I'm a bilateral amputee,

so I've lost both my legs, and Tony McMaster assured us

that the pontoons that he was building

were going to be wider than the average,

they would fit our requirements exactly.

This was great news for Dave.

The new marina would cater perfectly for his special needs,

but when he got there he discovered that the promises were false.

There was no pontoon that had been described to us that would be

suitable for me with my disability to get on and off the boat.

Instead, we were put on a bank-side mooring that actually was only

a very small pontoon fore and aft on the boat with nothing in the middle.

A big gap of about six foot between the boats,

so I couldn't even get access to the side doors.

When Dave e-mailed Tony McMaster,

he replied, telling him to remove his boat from the marina.

When he went back to get it, he was presented with yet another bill.

When I said, "I'm sorry, I'm not paying it,"

he became very, very aggressive.

He made an aggressive move towards my partner.

He had to be restrained with a hand across his chest by his partner.

It was just the sheer threat of violence in his voice.

Dave and his partner were clearly very upset,

and it does chime with Sue's story.

But, as a QC, I see allegations of threatening behaviour

every day in the criminal courts.

I think in the civil courts it can get in the way of the real issues.

My advice to Sue is to focus on her claim for money

and not get sidetracked.

I believe Sue has a straightforward case.

The facilities at Barby were far from what was promised

and we can show that the ASA ruled that the website was misleading.

Sue's done everything she can to reclaim her money.

She wrote to him and heard nothing,

and now the deadline she gave him to pay up has passed.

I think the only course of action left for Sue now is to go to court.

To start Sue's claim, she simply needs to fill in a form.

I've already downloaded and printed a copy for Sue,

but she could fill it in online

or get one at her local court or Citizen's Advice Bureau.

Well, Sue, this is your claim, so, if you can fill it in.

First you put your name, now, that's "Sue Williams".

See, I'm helping you every step of the way(!)

And next are the defendants.

Shall I put Barby or McMaster?

Did you have a contract with McMaster or with Barby?

-Barby.

-Barby Moorings Ltd.

Next is the claim itself.

In Sue's case, the key points are that none of the promised

facilities were available and that she was unfairly evicted.

And we make sure that we show that he breached

-the contract by unreasonably throwing you off the site.

-OK.

Once the value of the claim and all the key dates

and events are added, the form can be sent in to the court.

There is a small fee to pay, but it's added to the claim as a cost.

Right, Sue, let's get this thing posted

-and then we can get your money back.

-Okey-doke.

Once Sue's claim is received by the court,

they will notify Tony McMaster.

-So, Sue, this has been a very sad episode of your life.

-Yes, it has.

And, hopefully, in posting this, it will be the first step

-in bringing this sorry episode to an end.

-Yeah, I hope so.

There we are, Mr McMaster.

Tony McMaster promised Sue a state-of-the-art marina.

He kept promising that things were going to be done

within the next few weeks, and they never aware.

If he doesn't pay up the money that Sue's lost

as a result of believing in his promises,

the next person he's going to have to convince is a judge.

The court has received Sue's papers and she's now heard back

that Tony McMaster has not only replied, he's filed a defence.

Sue's also got a decision to make.

The court system offers the chance for mediation

rather than going straight to a hearing in front of a judge.

This is a free service where both sides can negotiate the claim,

through a third-party impartial mediator provided by the court,

hopefully finding a solution that is acceptable to both sides

without a hearing in front of a judge.

Any lawyer will tell you that court should always be the last resort.

If Sue does choose mediation,

let's hope Tony McMaster agrees to it, as well.

SHUTTER SNAPS

I'm back on the case of the mum who believes

she was ripped off by a photo studio.

She thought her daughter was being auditioned by Candi Models,

when in fact she was being sold a modelling portfolio

by Mint Brown Studios.

Jan Koutris has written to them asking for her money back.

We know Mint Brown Studios and Candi Models share the same director,

and that they use the Candi Models website to drum up custom,

but if Jan and Nicki had done a quick search online,

they'd have discovered the word "scam" in two clicks.

And it hasn't taken me long to find other people

who are very unhappy at the way Candi Models have treated them.

Lilly Krupa is a 20-year-old student from Poland.

Lilly sent her photo to Candi Models, and when they replied saying

she'd been selected for an audition, she thought she'd hit the jackpot.

On the phone, the Candi Models rep told Lilly that

if her test shoot was successful it would be free.

After the shoot at the Mint Brown Studios, Lilly was told

she'd passed, so she was very surprised

when they dropped the bombshell of the price list.

I said, "I can't afford it."

He said, "What did you think? What did you think?

"How much money have you got for today?

How much money did you bring with you?

"What did you think - it was going to be free?"

And this is when I said, "Yes, I did. That's what I was told on the phone."

This is when his attitude towards me completely changed.

He became aggressive.

But I said, "Yeah, I can pay £200 today. Is it all right?"

And he said, "No."

Lilly agreed to pay £300 now

and the rest when she received the photographs.

When she got home, she told her friend what had happened.

I googled Candi Models

and the first thing that came up was "Candi Models scam".

When I found out, I was just a mess.

Lilly has no intention of paying any more money,

so she hasn't received her portfolio from Candi Models.

She spent £350 on absolutely nothing.

As a student, £300 is a lot of money for me.

It's really not very difficult to find other people

who feel they've been duped into spending money pointlessly

with Mint Brown Studios.

When 17-year-old Candida and her mum, Jennifer,

went to the Candi Models test shoot, they were both thrilled to be

told that Candida had successfully passed the modelling audition.

I was very happy, actually.

I thought, "This is the beginning of some career for my daughter."

And I just encouraged her.

After the photo shoot, Candida was told

if she wanted to start a career she would need a portfolio.

A £3,000 portfolio.

"Oh, I don't have that much money," I told them.

"So, how much do you have in your account?" he asked.

And I told him, like, "I've got some £200 or £300. That's it."

The salesman said he'd take the entire contents of Jennifer's

bank account as a down payment, and the rest could be paid

in instalments by signing a credit agreement.

There was no way we were getting out of it. We were...

We had to buy some pictures.

Once Candida and her mother had left the studios, they realised

they'd been pressured into buying something that they didn't want.

I was made to feel very awkward and very horrible.

Despite paying £250,

they still haven't received a single photograph.

Just like Jan and her daughter,

they thought they were going to an audition at Candi Models,

but ended up paying for photos from Mint Brown Studios.

Consumer law is very clear on mis-selling.

You can't make false claims about what a product can do,

and that includes modelling portfolios.

Jan was told that the portfolio she bought for her daughter was worthless.

I'm a lawyer - I don't take anything for granted.

I need to check for myself,

so I've arranged for the portfolio to be looked at by an expert.

What we need is one of Britain's leading fashion photographers.

I'm Perou, I'm a photographer and director.

I take photographs of the most beautiful, famous,

rich, successful people, and others, around the world.

These are photos that you might see a photographer shooting

in a high street shop.

They look a little bit dated, if anything.

They're very kind of '80s in the aesthetic.

The pictures that we choose models from

when they're first starting out are generally just Polaroids.

No make-up, no hair, no fancy pictures in portfolios

or unfancy pictures in portfolios, but they're just straight snaps.

For me, it's not about the money or the quality of the photographs -

it's this false advertising, this idea that with these photographs,

and if you spend this money you will then get work as a model.

It's definitely not going to happen.

It's very, very hard and it's incredibly competitive.

I see these girls as vulnerable, in terms of they want to be models,

somebody's said to them they're pretty, they should do modelling...

To be told that if you buy a portfolio you will get

modelling work is complete lies.

It's now 14 days since Jan sent the letter before action,

and Jan tells me she's heard nothing.

So we've only got one option left.

-It's the only way you can get the money back.

-I know.

'Jan is the claimant and, as all her payments were

'to Mint Brown Studios, they will be the defendant.'

We've set the brief details of claim out here,

so that the judge can see very quickly what the case is all about.

'Jan needs to detail what she is claiming

'and why she is claiming it.'

In this case, you bought a webfolio, some photographs

and a model list, for a grand total of £1,800,

because you understood from them that almost the moment

that you paid the money

your daughter would be on £1,000 a day as a model.

'Next is a breakdown of the value of her claim.

'£50 deposit, £1,350 for photographs,

'and £400 for the two sheets of A4 paper

'with a list of modelling agencies on them.'

Now, you appreciate that if you sue them for the £400,

they are then entitled to have the exclusive list back?

SHE LAUGHS

-I'm sure I can arrange that.

-So you won't have it any more.

You won't be able to look into it, and...

Can you do without it?

-I can do without it.

-Right.

'I wonder if Mint Brown Studios will be laughing

'when they receive notification from the court.'

Right, there's the postbox.

'This is Jan's claim, so she needs to post it.'

-Let's get this thing posted.

-OK.

A very brave thing that you're doing here, Jan.

I know, but it's scary.

-I don't suppose they get that many court summonses.

-No.

But if they're not going to pay you, it's the only option we've got.

-Absolutely.

-Right, do you want to post it, then?

-Yes, please.

Everything I've discovered about this so-called modelling agency

leads me to believe they'll treat Jan's claim the same way

they deal with all complaints - they'll simply ignore it.

Let's see if they can ignore a court summons.

Meanwhile, narrow-boat owner Sue Williams is seeking

to recover the costs of moving her boat to an unfinished marina.

Sue's also asked for the court to be dealt with

by the court mediation service.

I've heard back from Sue, and Tony McMaster has agreed.

The mediation will be done over the phone.

A trained mediator will ring both parties to see if they can reach

a settlement which is agreeable to both of them.

I can't speak for Sue in this mediation,

but I can get her ready and build her confidence for that call.

So, Sue, what's been happening since I last saw you?

Oh! I don't know where to start.

I don't know how to get in there.

-The same way I have.

-I'll have a go.

'I have a feeling Sue's a little worried.

'I want to settle her nerves.'

So, Gary, what's your best advice?

Answer the questions, be honest,

-answer them all truthfully.

-Yes.

Don't ramble on. Because I know you've got the capacity

to do that a bit, Sue.

But don't be too short.

Don't be like my kids are when I ask them how they are -

"Fine."

'Mediation is all about negotiating.

'I think Sue's very capable of getting her point across.'

-You're quite happy to speak for yourself, aren't you?

-Yes, I am.

I'm just worried about having mental blocks and silly things.

Right, you mustn't be nervous about this at all, Sue.

-OK.

-It's not the Spanish Inquisition.

'Sue just needs to make sure she's properly prepared,

'by having all her paperwork organised.'

It's not that worrying.

You just go in there, you tell the truth,

you answer the questions that you're asked.

'Let's hope Sue follows my plan

'and gets Tony McMaster to see things her way.'

Sue is claiming from Tony McMaster of Barby Moorings

£400 for her deposit,

£300 for the fuel to bring her boat to Barby Moorings,

and £1,496 for the storage of garden equipment,

along with some other expenses.

'The court mediation service is designed to be impartial.

'It's also confidential, and the rules are very strict.

'After she's made the call,

'I meet up with Sue to find out how it went.'

So, tell us about the mediation process today, Sue.

The time flew, actually.

The time flew, even though you're sitting waiting for phone calls.

-Right.

-It's actually on and off. They'll talk to you,

the line cuts, and they go back to the other...

-Right, and then they come back to you?

-Yes.

You've got to listen to everything she says,

even if you want to say, "No..." You've got to listen.

-Now, mediation is confidential.

-That's right.

And you're not allowed to tell us, in fact, what offers were made,

what counter offers you made,

but how do you feel about the settlement?

I'm very happy with it.

-Are you glad it's all over?

-Yes.

That's the best thing I've ever done.

Under the rules, Sue can't tell us the exact details of the settlement,

but two things are clear -

Sue is very happy with what's been offered,

and the case is settled.

We asked Barby Moorings to explain what had happened.

They didn't reply.

There have also been some developments in our second case.

Back in Brighton, Jan Koutris wanted a full refund to cover the cost of

her daughter's modelling portfolio that she argued was worthless.

Jan's claim was £50 deposit,

£400 for a list of modelling agencies on two sheets A4 paper,

and £1,350 for the portfolio.

Jan received a letter from the court saying that the deadline

for a response from Mint Brown Studios had passed.

I was quite surprised when I phoned the court and they said

that they had actually put in a defence but it was too late,

which made me smile, because these are the type of people,

I think, that just think, "Oh, she won't take it any further."

Because Mint Brown Studios missed the deadline for defending

their claim, judgment has been entered in Jan's favour,

meaning that she's won her case.

We asked Mint Brown Studios AND Candi Models for a comment,

but neither of them bothered to reply.

If Mint Brown Studios don't pay up, Jan can start the process

of getting her money back by passing the claim on for enforcement.

I would say it's well worth following it through.

I will feel proud of myself that I've actually taken them

to court and actually stood up against them.

That is what this is all about.

Jan and Sue stood up for themselves and have both been successful

by using the power of the courts to resolve their problems.

Jan won her case,

and Sue used mediation to get a negotiated settlement

she was very happy with.

Going to court isn't easy,

and I don't think it's something that should be taken lightly,

but sometimes you have no other choice.

The courts are there for us all,

to give everyone a chance to stand up for their rights.

Sue and Jan certainly did.

Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd