:00:29. > :00:33.Hello, and welcome to a brand new series - Watchdog Daily. We're with
:00:33. > :00:36.you live every morning for the next four weeks. We'll be taking on the
:00:36. > :00:40.companies whose service, value and promises don't measure up. Fighting
:00:40. > :00:45.your corner and getting you a better deal. This morning Admiral,
:00:45. > :00:50.Aviva and Halifax. Insure your car with any of them? Better check
:00:50. > :00:54.before you renew. HSBC, Barclays and Natwest. Giving wrong advice -
:00:54. > :00:58.are they on the wrong side of the law? And the truth about low-cost
:00:58. > :01:08.airlines. How Easyjet and Ryanair could cost you more than travelling
:01:08. > :01:09.
:01:09. > :01:17.with BA. Also on today's programme: A quick question, you have a the
:01:17. > :01:25.money in the house. On the trail of a scammer, we join the Consumer
:01:25. > :01:32.cops as they try to un mask a conman, determined to trick a coup
:01:32. > :01:38.out of thousands of pounds. First, insurance companies.
:01:38. > :01:42.Peoplups for new customers have gone to an 18 - month low, but for
:01:42. > :01:48.the new customers it could abdifferent story. Some drivers
:01:48. > :01:52.have seen payments rocket. As Rani Price reports, this is just
:01:52. > :01:58.one problem that they could face. Rolling on a policy from one year
:01:58. > :02:02.to the next is meant to make your life easier. Giving a company your
:02:02. > :02:08.loyalty should ensure you get the best service and the best price,
:02:08. > :02:14.but not cording to these drivers. I've been with the Halifax for a
:02:14. > :02:20.year. The premium was �79. The following year it came up to over
:02:20. > :02:26.�3,000. If I had let it go through with automatic renewal, I would
:02:26. > :02:33.have been out of pocket by �340 a month. A five-time increase to what
:02:33. > :02:38.I was paying previously. .For Daniel Woolley, the increase
:02:38. > :02:44.was higher. Renewing his car insurance with Aviva would have
:02:44. > :02:50.caused his premium to soar to a whopping �7,329.
:02:50. > :02:55.. What shocked me is that the insurance would have gone up on
:02:56. > :02:57.moopbl basis to over �600 a month - - monthly it would have gone
:02:58. > :03:03.automatically without me doing anything.
:03:03. > :03:10.Luckily, he did do something. When he called Aviva to complain, they
:03:10. > :03:17.reduced it to just �2,099. I could not understand how they
:03:17. > :03:21.could just drop it by �5,000. If it was so easy to drop it, why not
:03:21. > :03:27.send me the lower figure in the first place? Mark Croucher had a
:03:27. > :03:34.similar experience with add add. The premium last year was �709.
:03:35. > :03:38.This year the renewal quote came in at �1022. That is too much to pay
:03:38. > :03:45.for car insurance. I started to shop around.
:03:45. > :03:49.Mark Croucher found he got the cover cheaper, at just �168 for a
:03:49. > :03:54.whole year's insurance, that name of that company? Admiral, but he
:03:54. > :03:59.had to sign up as a new customer to qualify.
:03:59. > :04:05.After being a loyal customer for Admiral for a couple of years, I
:04:05. > :04:10.expect the policy to be better. If I let the policy renew itself it
:04:10. > :04:13.would have been I would have been out of pocket. Loyalty does not
:04:13. > :04:17.mean anything. So is it clear, staying loyal to
:04:18. > :04:23.the same insurance company year in, year out, does not always pay, but
:04:23. > :04:28.if you ditch the auto renewal policy and switch provider, check
:04:28. > :04:33.the small print. Frank Elswood was with Admiral when they offered him
:04:33. > :04:37.a higher renewal premium. He decided to go elsewhere.
:04:37. > :04:42.Admiral had taken the money from my bank account and sent an insurance
:04:42. > :04:47.policy through that meant that I had insured the car twice. Frank
:04:47. > :04:53.was caught out by a law, that allowed Admiral to continue taking
:04:53. > :04:59.from his account until he contacted them. Frank was still left with �47
:04:59. > :05:03.out of pocket. So when his daughter wanted to switch from Admiral he
:05:03. > :05:09.was determined no to the repeat it We sent an e-mail. We are getting
:05:09. > :05:13.wise to what they do now. The e- mail stateed that we were not
:05:13. > :05:16.renewing insurance with Admiral, but despite that, Admiral carried
:05:16. > :05:21.on with their attempts to take his money.
:05:21. > :05:25.I have had four letters so far, the last one telling us they were about
:05:25. > :05:31.to put it with the collection agency it is so frustrating. When
:05:31. > :05:35.you are getting debt collection letters it is the time, the effort,
:05:35. > :05:39.the stress that goes with it to sort this out when I don't feel I
:05:39. > :05:44.have done anything wrong. Renewal premium increases to make
:05:44. > :05:50.your eyes water. You think that your insurance is
:05:50. > :05:54.renewed, then it is not. For these drivers car insurance renewals have
:05:54. > :06:00.been nothing but trouble. So, unhappy customers. So what have
:06:00. > :06:04.the companies said about it? They have all apologised to the various
:06:04. > :06:07.customers featured. Admiral say that Mark Croucher's quote was high
:06:07. > :06:12.then reduced as they assess new and old customers independently, but
:06:12. > :06:18.they are working on changing the system to stop this happening. They
:06:18. > :06:22.say they would have refunded the fees associated with Frank
:06:22. > :06:25.Elswood's policy if they had been provided with details, but they are
:06:25. > :06:31.waiving the �127.76 on his daughter's policy and say they
:06:31. > :06:35.would have done so see er, had he sent them more information.
:06:35. > :06:41.They send renewal quotes in advance so, customers are given the
:06:41. > :06:47.opportunity to cancel. Aviva blame the processor -- processing error
:06:47. > :06:52.in Daniel Woolley's payment. They immediately paid it back when he
:06:53. > :06:57.called them. They say they still give quality car insurance at a
:06:57. > :07:00.competitive price. Later on I'm speaking with the head
:07:00. > :07:03.of the Association of British Insurers. They represent the
:07:03. > :07:08.companies talked about in this field if you wish to comment or
:07:08. > :07:18.report on any of the day's other stories please get in touch.
:07:18. > :07:27.
:07:27. > :07:32.Now, throughout the series we are following the UK's so-called
:07:32. > :07:37.Consumer Cops. Society of Motor Manufacturers & Traders officers
:07:37. > :07:42.who operate in all areas of the country frfplt investigating car-
:07:42. > :07:47.clocking garages, to prosecuting loan sharks. Their work is varied
:07:47. > :07:51.and immense. This week, Shefalia Oza joins the team with one of the
:07:51. > :07:55.heaviest work loads. Welcome to the West Midlands it borders
:07:55. > :08:00.Warwickshire to the east, Worcestershire to the south and
:08:00. > :08:04.Staffordshire to the north and the west. It is also home to the second
:08:04. > :08:08.UK city, Birmingham. So no wonder that the so-called Consumer Cops
:08:08. > :08:12.are busy. All this week I'll be showing you
:08:12. > :08:16.just how busy. Pull over here now! Following
:08:16. > :08:21.officers as they crack down on counterfeit crime. We are with them
:08:22. > :08:27.as they hunt for illicit alcohol. Can we have the truth now? You said
:08:27. > :08:31.there was no more vodka in here. We also discovered the shocking
:08:31. > :08:36.truth about the illegal jewellery trade. Seen them confront the
:08:36. > :08:44.travel agents who they believe are breaking the law.
:08:44. > :08:47.What about this USB. It is going back! And you can see what the
:08:47. > :08:53.Society of Motor Manufacturers & Traders officers, to do to keep at
:08:53. > :08:58.the sharp end of things. For a region of 5.5 million people, the
:08:58. > :09:03.main area of consumer protection, the prevention of so-called
:09:03. > :09:08.doorstep crime. Sandwell, north-west of Birmingham,
:09:08. > :09:16.has had its share from dodgy roofers to shady double-glazing
:09:16. > :09:21.salesmen. Today the team are out with Sandwell's resident PC pl Mr
:09:21. > :09:25.Drew on a neighbourhood inspection. The reason to do the neighbourhood
:09:25. > :09:30.patrols is one if is reassurance for the community, that someone is
:09:30. > :09:36.out there looking out for the rogues, protecting the interests of
:09:36. > :09:41.the consumers. Two, if we it is better for to us catch them in the
:09:41. > :09:51.act! This neighbourhood is a known doorstep crime hot spot.
:09:51. > :10:05.
:10:05. > :10:10.Anyone seen working here can expect I don't know if you are aware that
:10:11. > :10:15.this is a no-trader zone. So we do regular inspections. So anyone
:10:15. > :10:17.working on the property we stop and have a word with them. I work for a
:10:17. > :10:22.company. The officers are satisfied that
:10:22. > :10:32.this man is legitimate, but it turns out that the client has past
:10:32. > :10:34.
:10:34. > :10:38.experience of rogue traders. Someone ripped her off �500.
:10:38. > :10:43.Victims of rogue trade remembers targeted repeatedly. The criminals
:10:43. > :10:46.have ways of letting each other know which houses are vulnerable to
:10:47. > :10:52.scams. They would put markers on the house,
:10:52. > :10:57.such as chalking a symbol by the house that would absign to other
:10:57. > :11:02.rogues to show it is an easy target. Now it is known that they will sell
:11:02. > :11:07.on details of the houses to other rogues.
:11:07. > :11:13.That is called a sucker list. A lot of the time, once they have been
:11:13. > :11:16.targeted again it may not be by the same person, but a vast array of
:11:16. > :11:21.different people. Back in the neighbourhood, Mark
:11:21. > :11:27.catches up with a lady who had dealings with a serious rogue. She
:11:27. > :11:32.was nearly conned into paying this man, Mr O'Brien, �3,000 for roofing
:11:32. > :11:37.work. I felt I was foolish. I was annoyed
:11:37. > :11:42.as I had been taken in like that. I am not usually so gullible, but
:11:42. > :11:46.just at that time I was vulnerable. I had lost my husband. I didn't
:11:46. > :11:51.have anyone to do the work. So I didn't know quite where to turn.
:11:51. > :11:58.Oh, dear. Luckily, Mrs Simpson did not hand
:11:58. > :12:05.over money, but many did. Including a victim who payed a whops �90,000
:12:05. > :12:10.for a job worth just �1,9 hundreds. Following a lengthy investigation,
:12:10. > :12:15.O'Brien and his gang were jailed for a total of 15 years.
:12:15. > :12:20.I am not usually vindictive, but I was pleased about that. They had
:12:20. > :12:23.defrauded so many people. Today we have seen no other such
:12:23. > :12:31.criminals at work in the neighbourhood, but only constant
:12:31. > :12:35.vigilance will keep it that way. I'm so, in some ways disappointed
:12:35. > :12:41.we have not caught anyone in the act, but on the other side it is
:12:41. > :12:44.good. Maybe the rogue trader zones and the routine neighbourhood
:12:44. > :12:47.inspections are putting them off from coming to Sandwell. We can
:12:47. > :12:54.only hope. Sadly, the chances of keeping all
:12:54. > :13:02.rogues off the streets are slim. We discovered this when covering a
:13:02. > :13:07.neighbourhood team tracking down a conartist, trying to concouple from
:13:07. > :13:12.�3,500. First more from Rani Price. Lots of you have been in touch
:13:12. > :13:19.about our story on car insurance and auto renewal quotes. Andrew
:13:19. > :13:24.told us his monthly premiums went up to �535 a month when his
:13:24. > :13:29.insurance was renewed. He called the provider, it was reduced to
:13:29. > :13:31.just �380. Others missed the renewal and were stung with
:13:31. > :13:36.cancellation charges. You can contact us throughout the programme
:13:36. > :13:44.about any of the subjects that we are covering. The details of how to
:13:44. > :13:53.do so are on the screens now. Have you bought a gym membership, a
:13:53. > :13:57.magazine subscription or loan and given credit card details? The
:13:57. > :14:05.arrangement may seem convenient, but it can be difficult to get out
:14:05. > :14:15.By law, should the banks cancel if they request it? Not according to
:14:15. > :14:22.
:14:22. > :14:28.Telephone banking, online accounts and mobile phone app, s. We can
:14:28. > :14:33.check balances and make payments 24 hours a day, seven day as week.
:14:33. > :14:37.Giving us time to plan and control the money in our accounts, but
:14:37. > :14:42.people are struggling with continuous payment authority. Or
:14:42. > :14:48.CPA. Mr Finn banks with the Co-op. I was checking the bank account. I
:14:48. > :14:53.found a couple of transactions that I did not recognise. I rang the
:14:53. > :14:57.bank to find out who they were and what the transactions were, what
:14:57. > :15:02.they involved. Then the bank told me that they were continuous
:15:02. > :15:07.authority transactions from a company that I had subscribed to.
:15:07. > :15:11.These are deals that you agree to on the phone or online. Sometimes
:15:11. > :15:15.face-to-face. Basically, you are agreeing to them taking a future
:15:15. > :15:20.payment from your credit or debit card. It is not to pay for
:15:20. > :15:25.something now, but to pay for it in the future. Like a magazine
:15:25. > :15:31.subscription or next year's car insurance or a pay day loan.
:15:31. > :15:34.are setting up permission to take money from your account
:15:34. > :15:38.indefinitely. It is crucial to have the power to stop them.
:15:38. > :15:43.David tried to do that. I had never heard of the companies.
:15:43. > :15:50.I did not know how to contact them, but the bank said it was up to me
:15:50. > :15:57.to cancel them. I -- they didn't have the authority to do so.
:15:57. > :16:00.But EU directives say that the co Co-op and all other banks can halt
:16:00. > :16:05.the payments. All you have to do is to tell the
:16:05. > :16:10.bank or card provider to stop.it under the law it must do that the
:16:10. > :16:15.law is absolutely clear. It has been clear since November, 2009.
:16:15. > :16:20.David did I manage to track down the company, the CPA was cancelled,
:16:20. > :16:25.but other views complained that their banks refused to stop the
:16:25. > :16:31.continuous payments going out. So who is not playing by the rules?
:16:31. > :16:35.Who is playing by the rules? Over the course of a day, Mystery
:16:35. > :16:43.Shoppers made three kales to nine UK retail banking providers. The
:16:43. > :16:47.ske asked was this: I have a continuous payment authority? It is
:16:47. > :16:51.a regular instalment coming from the card. I was wondering if the
:16:51. > :16:56.bank could cancel that? The correct answer is "yes", but what advice
:16:56. > :17:00.were the banks giving? First Lloyds? You cancel it through the
:17:00. > :17:03.company. Any debit card payments, you have to cancel it with the
:17:03. > :17:10.company. .No! The bank can and should cancel
:17:10. > :17:13.it straight away. In fact, on two out of three calls made to Lloyds,
:17:13. > :17:17.the advice given to the Mystery Shoppers was incorrect. Next up,
:17:17. > :17:22.Halifax. The same question, three different answers. This adviser got
:17:22. > :17:26.it right. You can just ring us. Go online if
:17:26. > :17:31.you use the online banking or do it in the branch.
:17:31. > :17:34.But as for the other two... block transactions to certain
:17:34. > :17:37.companies, but there would abreason for that.
:17:37. > :17:45.Not true! You don't have to give a reason at all.
:17:45. > :17:50.That's the thing. You can only cancel it via the company.
:17:50. > :17:53.Wrong again it can be cancelled through the bank. As for NatWest,
:17:53. > :17:58.Barclays and Santander... Cancel it with the company first of all.
:17:58. > :18:01.the card details they authorise it as a transactions, we could not
:18:01. > :18:06.stop.that you have authorised them to take the payments from the
:18:06. > :18:12.account. I think that you have to ring them to cancel it with them.
:18:12. > :18:17.Each gave incorrect advice on one out of three owe cations, but the
:18:17. > :18:21.worst performer on the test was HSBC. All three advisers on all
:18:21. > :18:25.three calls gave wrong information. What I suggest you do is get in
:18:25. > :18:30.contact with the company first of all. That is something you have to
:18:30. > :18:34.speak to the company about. It is a recurring transaction it would be
:18:34. > :18:41.difficult to cancel it you have to do it with them.
:18:41. > :18:46.In total we were given wrong advice in 11 out of the 27 calls. One
:18:46. > :18:51.adviser at RBS could not help. We would not say over the telephone,
:18:51. > :18:57.but a branch could look at it to see what they can do for you.
:18:57. > :19:04.Two nat West and Santander had advisers who did not know what a
:19:04. > :19:09.CPA was... Well, what I have heard, yeah, it is one of those they keep
:19:09. > :19:14.taking out, you cannot cancel it. would not know how to do that.
:19:14. > :19:18.Really? Some banks clearly need to acquaint themselves with the rules.
:19:19. > :19:24.If the bank does not stop the payments coming out it has to
:19:24. > :19:29.refund you with any future payments and any charges that may be incured
:19:29. > :19:34.if one sends you overdrawn. The charges must be refunded. The law
:19:34. > :19:44.is absolutely clear about that. So rather worrying results there.
:19:44. > :19:45.
:19:45. > :19:49.What did the banks say about it all? Well, RBS, Barclays, nat West,
:19:49. > :19:53.Halifax all apologised and reminded staff of proper procedure. As have
:19:53. > :19:59.Santander who have taken action to ensure that they give customers the
:19:59. > :20:03.right information. HSBC are working to improve the processes. They add
:20:03. > :20:07.that customers can cancel continuous payments and say they
:20:07. > :20:13.will refund payments taken after the cancellation date.
:20:13. > :20:21.The Co-op apologised to Mr Finn for the inconvenience kased and will be
:20:21. > :20:25.addressing the issues -- caused. And most banks advised customers to
:20:25. > :20:31.inform the merchant that the payment has been cancelled.
:20:31. > :20:37.Earlier we saw Sandwell trading -- Society of Motor Manufacturers &
:20:37. > :20:43.Traders officers in an attempt to catch con membership in the act. We
:20:43. > :20:47.joined people in Dudley, when they attempted to intervene a couple
:20:47. > :20:52.trying to give away thousands to a conman.
:20:52. > :20:59.The investigation teams work is wide and varied.
:20:59. > :21:05.What are you doing? Dropping off the leaflets.
:21:05. > :21:10.While on patrol they will talk to anyone that they see canvassing in
:21:10. > :21:14.the area. We have stopped you because you are
:21:14. > :21:17.leafletting. They examine the leaflets and the fliers to ensure
:21:17. > :21:23.that the contact details are genuine.
:21:23. > :21:28.It has a unit address. Traders don't use this. There is no
:21:28. > :21:32.postcode on the address either. For the officers here, this work is
:21:33. > :21:37.routine, but before returning to the office they receive a report of
:21:37. > :21:43.a rapid response call. There has been a skaul with regards
:21:43. > :21:50.to a vulnerable -- a call with regards to a vulnerable consumer
:21:50. > :21:54.with regards to winning a lottery. This is a trademark of a scammer.
:21:54. > :21:59.The officers have to get all of the details of this.
:21:59. > :22:09.You received a phone call? Yes, the first man to give me a name was a
:22:09. > :22:10.
:22:10. > :22:15.Mr James Blake from New York City. From Madison Avenue. I was told I
:22:15. > :22:22.had won �200,000, on filling in the back of a chocolate wrapper.
:22:22. > :22:29.I don't remember it. About a year ago. We went to or were contacted
:22:29. > :22:33.by a Mr James Baker. Who, I am led to believe, was in Heathrow. He was
:22:33. > :22:39.a customs officer. But, as is the case, there was a
:22:39. > :22:47.catch to receiving this �200,000. Did you have to send them a cheque?
:22:47. > :22:52.Yes, I did. I sent a cheque for �900. It was
:22:52. > :22:58.something to do with transporting a lot of money into the country you
:22:58. > :23:02.have to pay some sort of legal tax. I didn't catch it or understand it
:23:02. > :23:08.properly. So, have you sent the cheque off?
:23:08. > :23:14.Yes. The couple had handed over �900 and
:23:14. > :23:19.were now asked to pay a further amount in order to get their
:23:19. > :23:25.winnings. They have asked for �2,600. That is why I was to the
:23:25. > :23:32.bank to find out how to get it done. For the team this begins to sound
:23:32. > :23:37.like a serious scam. Dudley's principal Trading Standards officer
:23:37. > :23:41.arrives to break the news to the couple. Is there a problem?
:23:41. > :23:47.think you are being robbed, to be blunt. You have not won a prize at
:23:47. > :23:52.all. Somebody is telling you lies to send the money.
:23:52. > :23:55.He is coming here to deliver the winnings and then he pace you?
:23:55. > :24:01.is right. I could have gotten the bank to pay
:24:01. > :24:10.the money, but I started to get nervous it was �2,600.
:24:10. > :24:17.You are right to be nervous, I think that they are robbing you.
:24:17. > :24:23.for get the winnings? Yes, forget the holiday! It would keep going on,
:24:23. > :24:32.until you had no money left. That is what they do. Roger wanted to
:24:32. > :24:39.forget it in the start. I thought, I if -- if I have won something, I
:24:39. > :24:46.want it. I was sceptical. Everything that he has told you
:24:46. > :24:50.there is false it is fiction.. more I listened to what he said,
:24:51. > :24:56.the mother I was suspicious. It has upset me to think that I was
:24:56. > :25:01.foolish enough to fall for it. We are certain that this is a
:25:01. > :25:05.criminal scam. I think that everyone who has attended the
:25:05. > :25:10.property has been affected by what they have seen it is a very sad
:25:10. > :25:15.situation. Older people grew up in times when the scams were not as
:25:15. > :25:22.prolific as they are now. They are trusting. They take things on face
:25:22. > :25:26.value. They can be easy targets for criminal scammers. Scammers who
:25:26. > :25:33.have absolutely no morals. They are the lowest of the low. They will
:25:33. > :25:38.keep coming and keep coming until they take all of their money.
:25:38. > :25:42.a sad story. There is more to come. After meeting that couple, the
:25:42. > :25:46.officers persuaded them to take part in an operation to catch those
:25:46. > :25:50.responsible. That led to remarkable phone calls, as you will see later
:25:50. > :25:58.on. Now, though, we are returning to the car insurance. We have seen
:25:58. > :26:02.how some of the biggest companies are penalising loyal customers for
:26:02. > :26:07.drivers who let them renew insurance automatically, but then
:26:07. > :26:13.offering lower rates if they leave and come bass as -- back as new
:26:13. > :26:16.customers. How do they justify it? So, I am joined by Malcolm Tarling
:26:16. > :26:20.from the Association of British Insurers. Why is this happening?
:26:20. > :26:25.The insurers don't do this as a ruse to sneak high premiums in the
:26:25. > :26:30.back door. They are doing it to ensure that the customers are
:26:30. > :26:35.insured when the policy comes up for renewal. If they don't, then
:26:35. > :26:42.you could have me here sitting on the seat trying to justify a
:26:42. > :26:49.process where they are not insured. True, but Mark Croucher, his
:26:49. > :26:54.premium went up so much, then he goes back as a new customer, he has
:26:54. > :27:00.his insurance offered as a -- at a lower rate. It does not make sense?
:27:00. > :27:03.They do not want to penalise good customers, but they have to attract
:27:03. > :27:08.new customers. That is what they are there for.
:27:08. > :27:12.But there is penalising and chen charging old customers a huge
:27:12. > :27:17.amount more? Absolutely. You have to check that a cheaper premium
:27:17. > :27:23.reflects the cover. So a cheaper premium could come at a price in
:27:23. > :27:27.that there is a higher excess. You may find also that the existing
:27:27. > :27:32.cover provides benefits for legal expenses that a new policy, coming
:27:32. > :27:36.in at a cheaper price does not do. Some people will think that the
:27:36. > :27:41.companies are just thinking that perhaps the customers will not
:27:41. > :27:46.notice? Automatic renewals are made clear on the renewal notice that
:27:46. > :27:50.the customers receives, two to three weeks before the policy is up
:27:50. > :27:55.for renewal. Insurers have to make it clear. You have to read that to
:27:55. > :28:00.notice and check. If it is automatically renewed you have
:28:00. > :28:03.three weeks to shop around. Make a decision, vote with your feet.
:28:03. > :28:05.Motorinsurance is competitive. Take advantage of that
:28:06. > :28:10.Malcolm Tarling, thank you very much.
:28:10. > :28:15.Lots more of you have been in touch about the story and are unhappy
:28:15. > :28:22.with the treatment you are receiving at the hands of insurers.
:28:22. > :28:28.Dawn said: I phoned to cancel my ins. I -- insurance, I made a
:28:28. > :28:33.complaint. Heather said: It took six phone
:28:33. > :28:39.calls to cancel my insurance. Now, booking a holiday. Who do you
:28:39. > :28:44.book with? I would say budget airlines. You expect them to be
:28:44. > :28:49.lower than the normal airlines budget airline speaks for itself.
:28:49. > :28:59.Maybe, but does budget mean cheaper? Well, Doctor John Haigh
:28:59. > :29:00.
:29:00. > :29:05.has been investigating for you. He is our inhouse expert.
:29:05. > :29:14.Which kind of airline is cheapest for a family of four going on
:29:14. > :29:20.holiday? Will it be budget like easyJet? Or Ryanair? Or will it be
:29:20. > :29:24.non-budget like British Airways? Often.the budget airlines do work
:29:24. > :29:28.out cheaper. Especially if you are travelling alone with no luggage,
:29:28. > :29:33.but what about a family of four? Obviously with kids it is likely
:29:33. > :29:38.that each of you will have 20 kilograms of baggage that must be
:29:38. > :29:45.checked in and you will want to sit together so you have to reserve the
:29:45. > :29:49.seats it is also nice to have a meal on the flight as well.
:29:49. > :29:53.Well, miniature sandwiches would be ridiculous! Let's dot maths! We
:29:53. > :29:58.looked at a return flight from London to Malaga at the end of
:29:58. > :30:08.November, staying for a week. Paying with a debit card, the fare
:30:08. > :30:22.
:30:22. > :30:32.for four people including taxes and Simple enough? The budgets were
:30:32. > :30:39.
:30:40. > :30:49.cheaper, but then add in the Ryanair is edging ahead. What about
:30:50. > :31:04.
:31:04. > :31:14.And finally, a bite to eat? British Airways supply a free inflight meal.
:31:14. > :31:22.
:31:22. > :31:32.All much these extra costs mean that the total cost of flying with
:31:32. > :31:33.
:31:33. > :31:40.Ryanair is a sky-high � 614.72. EasyJet, �554.92. On British
:31:40. > :31:46.Airways, well, that is a grounded � 540.646789 the budgets are not so
:31:46. > :31:52.budget friendly now! Of course, it is not going to be cheaper with BA
:31:52. > :31:58.all of the time. We checked eight return flights from London to
:31:58. > :32:02.Malaga over an eight-week period. BA was cheaper than easyJet on one
:32:02. > :32:06.occasion, but they were cheaper than Ryanair on six out of the
:32:06. > :32:10.eight occasions. It just goes to show it is always worth doing the
:32:10. > :32:18.maths. Before you go, we have found that
:32:18. > :32:24.even if you don't book a seat, take any bags or have a meal, easyJet
:32:24. > :32:28.can be more xexive than BA for the flights.
:32:28. > :32:38.-- expensive. Take this flight from London to
:32:38. > :32:40.
:32:40. > :32:50.Amsterdam. Paying with a debit card, the flight with BA is � 384.
:32:50. > :32:50.
:32:50. > :32:55.But with easy -- easyJet � 460.92. So easyJet was �apmore. Before you
:32:55. > :33:02.have even started. Not how I define the word budget.
:33:02. > :33:07.So, what has been the response from budget airlines? Ryanair were keen
:33:07. > :33:11.to point out that their fares were the cheapest. EasyJet say that the
:33:11. > :33:17.Amsterdam example was not representative. That the average
:33:17. > :33:23.fare was �50 and 99.99% are cheaper than �200. They say that they offer
:33:23. > :33:27.fantastic value and this month are introducing allocated seating on
:33:27. > :33:30.all flights. So families sit together most of the time. BA say
:33:30. > :33:35.that they strive to provide the best value for money for the
:33:35. > :33:40.customers. For more information on the story or brush up on your maths,
:33:40. > :33:45.find out more on the website: Now, back to the unfolding
:33:45. > :33:51.financial scam in the West Midlands. Earlier we heard how a couple have
:33:51. > :33:56.received a call, saying that they won over �200,000, but had to pay a
:33:56. > :34:02.�900 fee for the winnings to be imported from abroad. After that,
:34:02. > :34:06.they were told they had to pay a further �2,600 in taxes before
:34:06. > :34:12.collecting the money. Shefalia Oza takes up the story now.
:34:12. > :34:16.Well, after that second demand for payment, the couple became
:34:16. > :34:20.suspicious and called in the Trading Standards Officers to
:34:20. > :34:24.investigate. They confirmed it was a scam, but they managed to
:34:24. > :34:27.persuade the coup toll play along in order to find out more about the
:34:27. > :34:37.thieves' identities. Here is what happened next.
:34:37. > :34:40.It is 9.toam at Sandwell Trading Standards. PC Drew sets off to the
:34:40. > :34:46.couple's home. Theres with a phone call at 10.00am.
:34:46. > :34:54.We are seeing if a cheque is to be delivered. To see if it happens. We
:34:54. > :34:57.are then in a position to react to So, we are here on time? Yes.
:34:57. > :35:05.It looks or sounds too good to be true, then it is.
:35:06. > :35:11.So, the wait begins. Then 45 minutes later. The voice of a
:35:11. > :35:15.fraudster... Hello! This is Mr Baker calling on
:35:15. > :35:25.contacting you on behalf of the customs in London. Obviously today
:35:25. > :35:46.
:35:46. > :35:50.is the day of your delivery for the I shall be here.
:35:50. > :35:55.The first call is over. It is time for a debrief.
:35:55. > :35:59.He does believe that I have the cheque here for �2,600. That is
:36:00. > :36:04.what he is interested in. He wants the money. He wants to get his
:36:04. > :36:08.hands on that. You have to say that when you give
:36:08. > :36:11.the curer your money, that you get your cheque. He will probably say
:36:12. > :36:21.that they need the cheque to clear before they can release the cheque
:36:22. > :36:22.
:36:22. > :37:14.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 52 seconds
:37:14. > :37:19.It turns out that PC Drew was right. The conman is saying before the
:37:19. > :37:26.couple receive the so-called winnings, they have to send off the
:37:26. > :37:36.cheque for �2,600, but there are no winnings.
:37:36. > :37:39.
:37:39. > :37:49.Hello? Another call. This time the mysterious James Baker employs a
:37:49. > :38:00.
:38:00. > :38:06.classic fraudster's tactic. He has good reason for wanting his
:38:06. > :38:16.would-be victim to keep quiet. Telling anyone he is handing over
:38:16. > :38:41.
:38:41. > :38:45.cash, could alert them to the scam. Thank you very much.
:38:45. > :38:50.Goodbye. If you had won money there would be
:38:50. > :38:56.no reason to pay up-front at all. They are asking for this money now
:38:56. > :39:01.in an envelope in cash. If it were a genuine company, there would be
:39:01. > :39:06.none of this. We want to call a halt to this now it will not go
:39:06. > :39:09.further in relation to you. It is wrong for him to pester you in the
:39:09. > :39:14.way that they are. The officers have heard enough to
:39:14. > :39:19.be convinced that this is part of a large-scale fraud. They are now to
:39:19. > :39:25.lies with the police in the area, to -- liaise with the police in the
:39:25. > :39:35.area to work out who the criminals are and where they are op.rating
:39:35. > :39:53.
:39:53. > :40:03.from. Meanwhile, it is time for this victim to say enough is enough.
:40:03. > :40:06.
:40:06. > :40:11.Do not ring me again. Is there a chance of getting my �900, please?
:40:11. > :40:16.The fraudster appears taken aback by the victim's response, but he
:40:16. > :40:26.quickly composes himself and has a last attempt at persuading him to
:40:26. > :40:44.
:40:44. > :40:50.part with another �2,of00. I'm going to ring off. I do not
:40:50. > :40:55.want you to ring me again, please. Thank you very much.
:40:55. > :40:59.He said he feels sorry for me! is finished now, as far as I'm
:41:00. > :41:05.concerned. So, the matter for this couple is finally put to bed.
:41:05. > :41:13.They've been conned out of �900, but it could have been so much more.
:41:14. > :41:19.It is a shame that people feel that they can prey on people in their
:41:19. > :41:24.pngs abl age and fleece them from money -- pension abl age. Fleece
:41:24. > :41:31.them of this money. There are lines of inquiry to follow up.
:41:31. > :41:36.Well, Chris King from the Dudley Trading Standards joins me now. We
:41:36. > :41:41.saw you protecting that couple. Have you any updates on this
:41:41. > :41:45.scammer? We have been unable to find the scammer in this case. The
:41:45. > :41:50.police have followed a trail of several victims across the country.
:41:50. > :41:55.As we fear at thetime, the scammer has given false details. He is not
:41:55. > :41:59.resident in the UK. It make it is difficult for us to follow the
:41:59. > :42:03.trail further. We have to stress that the names
:42:03. > :42:07.given out in the call, that they were fake. That the man had no
:42:08. > :42:12.connection to the HMRC or the American Government, but we could
:42:12. > :42:16.hear how convincing the scam was. How easy is it for people to be
:42:16. > :42:20.taken in by this? It is very easy. The people are plausible. Very good
:42:20. > :42:25.at what they do. They are looking for older people, vulnerable people
:42:25. > :42:32.to target in their scams. How much can people lose? I came
:42:32. > :42:36.across someone who lost �9,000, but we have already heard of people
:42:36. > :42:38.losing over half a million pounds to the scammers.
:42:38. > :42:42.My goodness. Thank you very much.
:42:42. > :42:45.An awful story there, Shefalia Oza. Thank you very much to everyone who
:42:45. > :42:48.has been in touch with us today. That is all that we have time for
:42:48. > :42:51.this morning. The deliveries that don't arrive
:42:51. > :42:57.and the ones that do but like this. We investigate Yodel. Plus, foreign
:42:57. > :43:00.currency. Does getting the best exchange deal depend on your post
:43:00. > :43:06.code? And on patrol with the Consumer Cops as they bring down a