:00:08. > :00:15.Ryanair, the cards that cost you. Tesco, the ad that misled you.
:00:15. > :00:19.Haven Holidays, the cleaning manual that will shock you. L'Oreal,
:00:20. > :00:23.Stella Artois and the companies that want to fight the banks on
:00:23. > :00:33.your behalf - beware. This is Watchdog, the programme you can't
:00:33. > :00:45.
:00:45. > :00:49.Yes, hello, and good evening. Welcome to Watchdog. We are live
:00:49. > :00:54.from Television Centre. Tonight: Barclays, Lloyds, RBS, they mis-
:00:54. > :00:59.sold millions of Payment Protection Plans. If you are battling to get
:00:59. > :01:03.your money back, don't get fleeced again. It does make me angry that
:01:03. > :01:07.these customers, many of whom have already suffered from the mis-
:01:07. > :01:12.selling of Payment Protection Insurance, are being mis-sold.
:01:12. > :01:22.Ryanair - if you want to avoid their booking fees, they are making
:01:22. > :01:26.you jump through another hoop. Lancome, Maybelline, who else is
:01:26. > :01:28.making false claims? Can you clean a caravan in 18
:01:28. > :01:32.minutes? How about garages from hell? We are
:01:32. > :01:42.booking our car into one tonight. It is a big job, a very complex job,
:01:42. > :01:52.
:01:52. > :01:58.a job that calls for someone who Definitely not someone like him. It
:01:58. > :02:02.was the one we got! The results? We will show you later. NatWest, RBS,
:02:02. > :02:06.Barclaycard - a few of the banks and credit card companies who mis-
:02:06. > :02:09.sold Payment Protection Insurance. They added it to loans to cover
:02:09. > :02:14.repayments in case you had an accident, became ill or unemployed.
:02:14. > :02:17.But for most people, it was useless. Now, after a High Court ruling,
:02:17. > :02:22.those people are entitled to their money back. Billions of pounds are
:02:22. > :02:29.up for grabs. If you are about to claim, beware. You could be fleeced
:02:29. > :02:34.a second time. Watch daytime TV? You will be
:02:34. > :02:39.familiar with ads like these. Claiming is easy. Claims management
:02:39. > :02:43.companies offering to get your PPI refunds for you. All you have to do
:02:43. > :02:49.is sit back and wait for the cheque to arrive. You do know we get a
:02:49. > :02:54.cheque to people in eight weeks on average. Yes, sometimes it only
:02:54. > :02:59.takes ten days. No wonder there are so many ads like these around. Some
:02:59. > :03:03.two million of us were mis-sold PPI by banks and credit companies and
:03:03. > :03:08.there is now an estimated �4.5 billion waiting to be reclaimed.
:03:08. > :03:13.That is a lot of money and claims management companies want a cut. In
:03:13. > :03:18.return, they say they will do the work for us. But do all of them
:03:18. > :03:21.deliver what they promise? I paid �50 to Gladstone Brookes. After a
:03:21. > :03:26.couple of weeks, they came back to me and said they couldn't do
:03:26. > :03:31.anything with my claim. I told them this was a no win, no fee, so I
:03:31. > :03:38.should be getting the money back. They refused. Many phone calls
:03:38. > :03:46.later, they finally, after a couple of months, gave me the money back.
:03:46. > :03:49.They said I would get over �6,500 back. I have not received a penny.
:03:50. > :03:54.Lengthy waits, complicated processes, unhappy customers. But
:03:55. > :03:58.should they have even used a claims management company at all? If you
:03:58. > :04:04.want to make a complaint, it is straightforward. It is something
:04:04. > :04:06.that I would advise you can do yourself. There was a period before
:04:06. > :04:10.the judicial review where some banks were not dealing with
:04:10. > :04:14.complaints fairly. That is now in the past. So customers can be
:04:14. > :04:19.confident they will get a fair deal from the banks. All you have to do
:04:19. > :04:22.is get in touch with the bank, say you want to make a complaint about
:04:22. > :04:27.your Payment Protection Insurance policy. The only thing a claims
:04:27. > :04:30.management company can do is act as a middleman. Contacting your bank
:04:30. > :04:35.or the Financial Ombudsman on your behalf. That is it, they can't
:04:35. > :04:38.promise to get you anything that you couldn't get if you claimed on
:04:38. > :04:41.your own. The Ministry of Justice, which regulates the claims industry,
:04:41. > :04:46.forbids companies from telling customers they will get a more
:04:46. > :04:49.favourable outcome if they use a claims company rather than the
:04:49. > :04:54.Financial Ombudsman Service. But have all the companies been
:04:55. > :04:59.sticking to the rules? No. As Watchdog has found out. Our
:04:59. > :05:04.researchers made three calls to 12 claims companies, each time posing
:05:04. > :05:09.as consumers who thought they had been mis-sold PPI. Hello. I have a
:05:09. > :05:14.loan... First, one of the calls we made to Gladstone Brookes Limited.
:05:14. > :05:24.They advertise on TV and say they have a 92% success rate in making
:05:24. > :05:29.
:05:30. > :05:35.PPI claims. What is the benefit of This is untrue. Banks don't pay out
:05:35. > :05:40.less to those who make their claim independently and if people are
:05:40. > :05:42.unhappy, they can still appeal to the Financial Ombudsman free of
:05:42. > :05:52.charge. Other companies made similar false statements in some of
:05:52. > :05:56.
:05:57. > :06:01.the calls to them. They included Ismart. And Belmont Thornton:
:06:01. > :06:09.People end up losing out by going on their own. As well as the
:06:09. > :06:17.company promoted by professional boxing champ Joe Calzaghe.
:06:17. > :06:21.success rate is over 90% of claims that we take up. Only a 10% chance?
:06:21. > :06:28.Nice claim, pity it is wrong. One company told us we couldn't claim
:06:28. > :06:33.on our own unless we had a Ministry of Justice licence. Your Ministry
:06:33. > :06:39.of Justice licence, we can obtain you evidence. Do I need that to get
:06:39. > :06:44.it back? Exactly! That is untrue. It does make me angry to be frank
:06:44. > :06:47.that these customers, many of whom have already suffered from the mis-
:06:47. > :06:51.selling of Payment Protection Insurance, are now being often mis-
:06:51. > :06:54.sold claims management services as well. Out of the 12 companies we
:06:54. > :06:58.called, six broke Ministry of Justice rules on two out of three
:06:58. > :07:01.calls by telling our researchers they would get more money or get it
:07:01. > :07:06.more quickly if they used the claims company rather than claiming
:07:06. > :07:11.on their own. But what about the money they themselves stand to
:07:11. > :07:16.make? All of the companies we contacted offer a no win, no fee
:07:16. > :07:23.service and charge up to 30% of whatever refund we received. But,
:07:23. > :07:27.we fight any claim also wanted some of their fees upfront. The cost for
:07:27. > :07:32.us to review your claim will be �24 5. I thought this was no win, no
:07:32. > :07:41.fee. The way it works, if you claim would ever be unsuccessful, it is
:07:41. > :07:46.refunded to you. Thanks for the offer, but we will pass. Tucan
:07:47. > :07:53.Claims Limited also asked for fees up front. Helen Elrick paid them.
:07:53. > :07:57.They said it will be about 12 weeks to process, maybe a bit more. We
:07:57. > :08:05.thought great. September 09, by Christmas it will be lovely.
:08:05. > :08:08.fact, it took them a year to process it. When the �1,548 cheque
:08:08. > :08:15.arrived, Tucan Claims didn't send it to Helen, they sent her a bill
:08:16. > :08:21.for their 10% fee on top of the �250 she had already paid.
:08:21. > :08:24.husband and I said we have got this money, we will send them the cheque,
:08:24. > :08:28.which we did. No cheque has arrived. We are still waiting for this
:08:28. > :08:33.cheque. I feel as if I have been the one that has been ripped off
:08:33. > :08:38.here T there are times when it's got to me. It's been constant.
:08:38. > :08:42.far this year alone, the banks have paid out �215 million to people who
:08:42. > :08:46.were mis-sold PPI. And all the banks have jointly put aside
:08:46. > :08:50.several billion pounds to refund their customers. Some have promised
:08:50. > :08:53.to repay eligible customers with no questions asked. Claims management
:08:53. > :08:57.companies may want a share but if you are one of those planning to
:08:58. > :09:01.get your money back, the words of the Financial Ombudsman couldn't be
:09:01. > :09:08.clearer. My advice, if you want to get the compensation you are due,
:09:08. > :09:10.is to try and do it yourself. response, the Ministry of Justice
:09:11. > :09:16.says it takes a "zero tolerance" approach and companies that break
:09:16. > :09:20.the rules should be in no doubt they will be closed down.
:09:20. > :09:23.The companies themselves - Gladstone Brookes say based solely
:09:23. > :09:26.on the extracts of the calls we have told them about, they have
:09:26. > :09:29.potentially breached the regulations. They don't agree they
:09:29. > :09:32.mis-sell their services. They say our calls are not representative of
:09:32. > :09:37.the service they give to the vast majority of clients. They do admit
:09:37. > :09:41.taking two months to refund Richard Abbot, but they say they have
:09:41. > :09:46.stopped charging upfront fees in March. Tucan Claims says one
:09:46. > :09:51.employee did fall short of industry standards. He's been removed from
:09:51. > :10:01.his normal role, disciplined and is undergoing retraining. The case of
:10:01. > :10:02.
:10:02. > :10:12.Helen Elrick has now been settled. We Fight Any Claim are fighting
:10:12. > :10:16.
:10:16. > :10:21.hard to resolve Mary Munro's claims. To comment on that, or any of
:10:21. > :10:25.tonight's stories, e-mail us at watchdog@bbc.co.uk. Or you can text.
:10:25. > :10:35.Start your message with WD. If you want to follow us on Twitter, the
:10:35. > :10:35.
:10:35. > :10:45.address is on your screen. Coming up: Ryanair trying to point
:10:45. > :10:46.
:10:46. > :10:52.their booking charges. The truth about those cosmetics ads.
:10:52. > :10:57.Plum is so 2010. She's had a lot of work done! Clearly a fake. Of
:10:57. > :11:01.course, I only read these for the gossip. I need to keep up with
:11:01. > :11:11.celeb culture, who is hot, who is not, who is in, who is out. Most
:11:11. > :11:25.
:11:25. > :11:35.Yes, celebrity couples. The Mags and tabloids love them. They give
:11:35. > :11:40.them pet names, too. It is a good job Sting is too old for Pink. If
:11:40. > :11:50.they got together they would be Ping! That is one permutation!
:11:50. > :11:51.
:11:51. > :11:58.if we were a couple, we would be... If we were a couple! Which we
:11:58. > :12:06.aren't! We are both happily married with two kids. OK, darling -
:12:06. > :12:12.Darlington, let's go to Darlington! A bit awkward! Yes, it is.
:12:12. > :12:17.Darlington is near the home of our rogues tonight, another couple,
:12:17. > :12:21.Christopher Wyatt and his wife Catherine Hardwick. They are famous
:12:21. > :12:25.for selling reconditioned engines or, according to customers,
:12:25. > :12:29.infamous. He bought one of their reconditioned engines but once
:12:29. > :12:35.fitted, his cab still wasn't running properly. There is only one
:12:35. > :12:39.thing for it. I decided I would ring Christopher Wyatt up and
:12:39. > :12:44.suggested he picks the engine up and takes it back and gives us
:12:44. > :12:49.another engine. So he promised me a new engine within four days. Four
:12:49. > :12:53.days arrived, no engine. A week- and-a-half, no engine. Fourth week,
:12:54. > :12:57.I think it was roughly, I said what's happened to this engine? It
:12:57. > :13:02.was sent out and it got lost! William never did get his engine.
:13:02. > :13:05.He had been dealing with the couple's former company, Head
:13:05. > :13:12.Exchange Limited based in North Yorkshire. He took the company to
:13:12. > :13:15.court and won. When he tried to get his money back he was told it had
:13:15. > :13:20.folded. I am probably never going to see my money back. It would be
:13:20. > :13:25.nice to see him stopped. Well, strong words, but he has lost his
:13:25. > :13:31.engine and his money. Dan, though, is less convinced. This could cause
:13:31. > :13:38.a domestic. One firm, one engine, it is a snapshot. You want the
:13:38. > :13:47.bigger picture? OK, let's hear from someone in Lancashire. Me and my
:13:47. > :13:52.big mouth! Yeah, that will teach him to argue. 250 miles away,
:13:52. > :13:56.Nicola Oaten has been dealing with Complete Engine Solutions Ltd. She
:13:56. > :14:00.sent them her broken VW Golf engine to be exchanged for a reconditioned
:14:00. > :14:04.one, but when her local garage tried to fit it... It was
:14:04. > :14:10.discovered the engine didn't work, it had to come back out and be
:14:10. > :14:15.taken to pieces and then they found that it was my original engine.
:14:15. > :14:19.They had spray-painted parts of it to look new and filled my oil pump
:14:19. > :14:25.full of Vaseline so it would never work. Complete Engine Solutions,
:14:25. > :14:29.which has customers all over the UK, lists a Christopher Chilton as its
:14:29. > :14:35.director, but it is based half a mile away from Head Exchange
:14:35. > :14:41.Limited. And the man who says he is in charge is Christopher Wyatt, yes
:14:41. > :14:45.the male half of our celebrity couple! OK, I get the bigger
:14:45. > :14:55.picture. You sure? I have other cases. We have Wigan,
:14:55. > :15:26.
:15:26. > :15:32.Cambridgeshire... Point taken. Everything OK? Yeah. Yeah. He sends
:15:32. > :15:39.his love. Is that it? They come up with the
:15:39. > :15:45.goods. A 1.4VW Golf, sweet runner, mint condition. Once we have
:15:45. > :15:53.finished with it, though, it will need a re-conditioned engine. Don't
:15:53. > :15:57.know what that involves? Have no fear. Our car expert is here.
:15:57. > :16:03.A re-conditioned engine, what does it mean? It needs to be stripped
:16:03. > :16:07.out, cleaned, every item checked to see if the item is servicable. A
:16:07. > :16:14.typical job is the cylinder bore. You take the cylinder block,
:16:14. > :16:19.examine the bores, if they are scored, worn out, then it would be
:16:19. > :16:23.re-bored to a larger diameter, it would be honed and new pist ons
:16:23. > :16:29.fitted. Pist ons and another pist on.
:16:29. > :16:32.Obviously with rings as well. Piston rings! That would be very,
:16:32. > :16:38.very nice. That's the way it should be done.
:16:38. > :16:43.That is part of the job? That is fairly essential and basic in any
:16:44. > :16:49.reconditioning job. Got it? It can be worth it. Don
:16:49. > :16:54.properly your engine can be as good as new. Any way, for our Golf to
:16:54. > :17:00.knead a re-conditioned engine, we need to do serious damage to it.
:17:00. > :17:05.John is our man. He drains the life blood from our car, without oil it
:17:05. > :17:12.seizes up and dies. A few revs and it is broken. Now we need to pour
:17:12. > :17:19.the oil back, so it does not look like we have sabotaged the car.
:17:19. > :17:23.Goodbye my engine, what have I done? We then book it in to
:17:24. > :17:29.Complete Engine Solutions where we meet Christopher Wyatt and
:17:29. > :17:32.Katherine Hardwick. Lisa says she is looking for a re-
:17:32. > :17:39.conditioned engine. Is it really what they do? We are about to find
:17:39. > :17:43.out. 7 And how are we going to do that? Well, we might have taken the
:17:43. > :17:48.engine oil out, but we put something else in.
:17:48. > :17:52.A camera is hidden under the bonnet. It will be beaming back pictures a
:17:52. > :17:58.little layer. Rain air, buying tickets with a
:17:58. > :18:03.credit card or debit card, it charges �6. So for a family of four
:18:03. > :18:08.on return flights to Spain they pay an extra �48.
:18:08. > :18:15.Ryanair allowed you to avoid the charges if you paid with a visa
:18:15. > :18:19.electron card, then they changed the rules and said you needed a
:18:19. > :18:24.pre-paid MasterCard. Now another hoop, Martin Lewis is to explain
:18:24. > :18:28.what they are up to. What are they up to? You have to admire the
:18:28. > :18:32.hutzpah of what they are doing. Coming October, they are to launch
:18:32. > :18:38.their own Ryanair branded pre-paid MasterCard. Then in November,
:18:38. > :18:44.unless you pay with their own pre- paid MasterCard, you are charged
:18:45. > :18:50.the �12 per person return. So pay with a card that is not theirs, an
:18:51. > :18:56.electron or debit card, it is �12 return. Had they done this and
:18:56. > :18:59.allowed the old pre-paid MasterCard to be free, I would say it is an
:18:59. > :19:04.improvement, but without Ryanair's name on the door, you have to pay
:19:04. > :19:07.to come in. So, if you have been a Ryanair
:19:07. > :19:12.customer, you have been through two credit cards or you could be
:19:12. > :19:16.booking to go next week, you will not get the card in time?
:19:16. > :19:20.system has not started yet. It is starting in October, but you have
:19:21. > :19:28.to get another card. This could be the third different card.
:19:28. > :19:32.Why are they doing this? What is in it for them? But, we assume that
:19:32. > :19:37.one is presuming that tkpwhet money back for their own card.
:19:37. > :19:42.You have said it yourself, �48 per family, it takes ten people not to
:19:42. > :19:45.do that, that is �480, it is a huge amount of money. It cuts
:19:45. > :19:50.competition, the choice of getting other cards.
:19:50. > :19:55.What about the card for other uses? Well, these cards are generally
:19:55. > :19:59.used for those who cannot get other forms of plastic or foreign
:19:59. > :20:05.exchange transactions as they are cheap. This card is not out. I have
:20:05. > :20:08.not seen the full terms, I cannot tell you if it is cheap to use or
:20:08. > :20:14.not. You should say that there are no
:20:14. > :20:18.booking charges? Well, if pri in charge, but what I have said, I
:20:18. > :20:24.have been supporting a Which? Superclaint. It has been said that
:20:24. > :20:28.the charges must be transparent. It has said that the debit card price
:20:28. > :20:32.is the price advertised, but it does not have the power to make
:20:32. > :20:38.that happen. The Government must do so, but they are not doing anything.
:20:38. > :20:41.So, to levy the �12skharpblgs that should be in the main -- the �12
:20:41. > :20:48.charges, that should anybody the main price.
:20:48. > :20:55.Can we hope that they change it? hope that they have tweaked the
:20:55. > :20:58.nipples of consumers a little too far. For those watching in
:20:58. > :21:03.Westminster, foreheaven's sake, do something.
:21:03. > :21:07.Now, Ryanair have told us that they have moved from the visa electron
:21:07. > :21:11.and master pre-paid following criticism that the cards were hard
:21:11. > :21:17.to get hold of. The new one will be available through the website. So
:21:17. > :21:21.everyone can use it as soon as they are registered. The one-off charge,
:21:21. > :21:28.will be refunded with a Ryanair voucher. They insist that the cost
:21:28. > :21:32.is not a booking fee, but an admin charge! Next, Lancome and
:21:32. > :21:39.Maybelline, in July, the Advertising Standards Authority
:21:39. > :21:44.banned two of their adds, saying that the models, Julia Roberts had
:21:44. > :21:51.been airbrushed, but cosmetic companies continue to use images
:21:51. > :21:54.altered, touched up or enhanced. How-do they get away with it? Jo
:21:54. > :22:00.Swinson has a personal report for watchdog.
:22:00. > :22:06.We all know the story by now, this becomes this... These become this...
:22:06. > :22:12.This is made longer... This fuller... That thinner... And those,
:22:12. > :22:16.well, those disappear all together. Flawless models, glossy-haired
:22:16. > :22:20.celebrities, even politicians, are not immune.
:22:20. > :22:26.Mr Speaker, I think that I should start by saying that he looks very
:22:26. > :22:30.different from the poster that we see out there! Three years ago, my
:22:30. > :22:35.party asked me to chair a working group to find out what matters to
:22:35. > :22:38.British women today. One of the things I was surprised that came up
:22:39. > :22:43.was body confidence or the lack of it. It concerned everyone, men as
:22:43. > :22:49.well as women. Unattainable images of perfection were part of the
:22:49. > :22:55.problem. My team and I started to take a closer look.
:22:55. > :23:02.The first add that was complained about that got 700 complaints was
:23:02. > :23:07.this Twiggy advert for anti-wrinkle cream. The Advertising Standardz
:23:07. > :23:13.Authority upheld the complaint, after finding out that this add was
:23:13. > :23:19.made with retouching. Since then, the cosmetic companies have found
:23:19. > :23:29.that they can get around the rules by using disclaimers.
:23:29. > :23:30.
:23:30. > :23:37.We have this one, Eva Longora, with these ridiculous lashes, they look
:23:38. > :23:43.like fur on the ends of her eyelashes, it is not realistic.
:23:43. > :23:49.And at the bottom, enhanced production. Pick up any woman's
:23:49. > :23:55.magazine and you see the similar disclaimers. Here, her hair colour
:23:55. > :23:59.looks great, but how was it achieved? By using the product on
:23:59. > :24:06.her alright lightened hair and extensions.
:24:06. > :24:13.Then, want lashes like Beale, well, look underneath, enhanced in post
:24:13. > :24:18.pro duk. New guidelines from the Committee for Advertising Practise
:24:18. > :24:22.permit the use of fake hair extensions as long as tus does not
:24:22. > :24:26.misrepresent what the product does, so they can use the enhancement
:24:26. > :24:32.techniques, but it depends on how far that they go.
:24:32. > :24:38.These are the beforehand images. Looking lovely.
:24:38. > :24:40.If I move the image on top a cross, you see the rehad touched image of
:24:40. > :24:46.her. You can see for yourself.
:24:46. > :24:51.Yes, it looks quite scary actually. What I noticed initially, is that
:24:51. > :24:55.you have done things around the eyes, but I had not noticed you
:24:55. > :25:00.made the mouth bigger. I wonder how much people are aware at that those
:25:00. > :25:05.changes are going on. How routine is that? This retouching has been
:25:05. > :25:09.around as long as photograph has been. It has been since the advent
:25:09. > :25:12.of computers that it is more acceptible, more affordable and
:25:13. > :25:17.quicker. Retouching is easier and common
:25:17. > :25:20.place, but remember, the companies still have to show what the product
:25:20. > :25:25.does. I am not sure that is always the case.
:25:25. > :25:31.This one caught my eye because even if you had a lot of lights on this
:25:31. > :25:36.picture, I wonder if they have gone in with the White House and the
:25:36. > :25:39.graphic suite and added shine to her hair? It does not seem like
:25:39. > :25:44.normal hair. If we make a complaint, the company
:25:44. > :25:50.can come forward, if they have the original undoctored image to show
:25:50. > :25:57.how it looked then fair enough. But I don't have to pursue the
:25:57. > :26:01.complaint. When watchdog contacted Wella about the add, they admitted
:26:01. > :26:06.post production enhancement. They said it was produced before the new
:26:06. > :26:14.guidelines, prok tor and gamble have decided not to use it in the
:26:14. > :26:18.future. Meanwhile, other enhanced and unrealistic adds abound.
:26:18. > :26:22.I believe that sthre a negative effect on our body image, but some
:26:22. > :26:26.disagree. I think that the British public are
:26:26. > :26:33.not sucked into airbrushing. Everyone knows that mascara will
:26:33. > :26:35.not make your lashes grow by a few inches, but I think that we want to
:26:36. > :26:41.look at pictures that make us look good.
:26:41. > :26:44.Some of the images are putting pressure on people. I think that is
:26:44. > :26:47.something that the advertising agencies are playing on people. I'm
:26:47. > :26:51.not sure it is a healthy thing in society.
:26:51. > :26:55.True, but it is a business, they are to use anything that they can
:26:55. > :26:59.to sell their products, a new angle, something to break through the
:26:59. > :27:04.thousands and the millions of products that are out there to grab
:27:04. > :27:11.the consumers attention. What does the average consumer
:27:11. > :27:17.think? Boots have done away with airbrushed models, do the people
:27:17. > :27:21.prefer their images to the enhanced ones. Time for some testing. There
:27:21. > :27:28.are two mascara products, which do you prefer and would you be more
:27:28. > :27:36.likely to buy and why? Probably this one it is more natural. That
:27:36. > :27:40.one is too fake. Unrealistic. Probably the No7 one. To me it
:27:40. > :27:45.looks like, I don't know, she looks more natural. That is obviously
:27:45. > :27:50.fake. That would be the better one. Boots are not alone when it comes
:27:50. > :27:55.to using natural images in their advertising campaigns. Debenhams
:27:55. > :28:00.have done it too, but I want to see all companies moving away from the
:28:00. > :28:04.impossible images of beauty that they currently rely on to sell
:28:04. > :28:09.their products. With one in four people feeling depressed about
:28:09. > :28:12.their body, is it not time to stop the distortions and is it not time
:28:12. > :28:16.that the advertising authorities came down on them harder? Well,
:28:17. > :28:24.with me is Lynsay Taffe from the Advertising Standardz Authority.
:28:24. > :28:28.You are there -- you are in charge. You have to clear up the confusion.
:28:28. > :28:34.If I saw something that Julia Roberts was advertising, I would
:28:34. > :28:40.not think that I would look like Julia Roberts, but if I saw an add
:28:40. > :28:47.on mascara with all of those lashes, I would think that I would look
:28:47. > :28:51.like that picture. That is why there are new guidance measures. As
:28:51. > :28:56.we have said when there was a problem with the Julia Roberts add,
:28:56. > :29:03.they know that they can't look like Julia Roberts but they want Julia
:29:03. > :29:07.Roberts to look like Julia Roberts. But looking at the small print,
:29:08. > :29:13.eyes styled with insets, and enhanced prost production, so they
:29:13. > :29:21.are not all of her eyelashes, and in your guidelines, you say that
:29:21. > :29:28.the false eyelashes cannot be more than replacing the damage s --
:29:28. > :29:34.damaged ones of Eva Longoria? have contacted the advertiser to
:29:34. > :29:38.have that add removed so adds like that shall not be appearing and
:29:38. > :29:45.disclaimers that contradict the add cannot be used.
:29:45. > :29:48.So, that add is out now? Yes. How about Gw yen? This preference
:29:49. > :29:54.that changes the colour of your hair, in the small print it says
:29:54. > :29:57.that the colour was achieved after she had had her hair lightened and
:29:57. > :30:03.extensions? What I cannot do, I have not seen that add, what I
:30:03. > :30:06.cannot do is a trial by TV, but we will look into it if the add is
:30:06. > :30:12.still running. Advertise eers cannot mislead about the capability
:30:12. > :30:18.of the product. It must be an effect we can achieve at home.
:30:18. > :30:22.Would you, for example, what do you think, would that pass, that she
:30:22. > :30:27.has had colour in her hair before she put on the product? We have
:30:27. > :30:32.lots of rulings with we have shown where an advertiser has presented a
:30:32. > :30:37.product that is misleading either by using false eyelashes or
:30:37. > :30:40.extensions the same you would do you with a -- do with a floor
:30:40. > :30:45.cleaner. But are the companies pushing the
:30:45. > :30:49.boundaries? They are showing the product in the best possible light.
:30:49. > :30:59.When they go too far and mislead about it, we are here to step in.
:30:59. > :31:03.
:31:03. > :31:11.L'Oreal told us all their current ads meet the guidelines.
:31:11. > :31:15.They add Cheryl Cole was not required to wear hair extensions in
:31:15. > :31:21.their Elvive ad. They also told us they reject the notion that images
:31:21. > :31:25.in beauty advertising contribute to low self-esteem and Revlon, whose
:31:25. > :31:28.ad featuring Jessica Beale, they say they are always complying with
:31:28. > :31:34.advertising codes, laws and regulations and will continue to do
:31:34. > :31:39.so, the same with Rimmel. Coming up: Haven, 18 minutes to
:31:39. > :31:46.clean a caravan kitchen. Can it be done? Tesco - this ad shows pigs
:31:46. > :31:52.free to roam. Bit of a porky? Back to Complete Engine Solutions
:31:52. > :32:00.now. They confused one of our viewers. They promised her a
:32:00. > :32:04.reconditioned engine. They gave her the old one back instead, botched
:32:04. > :32:07.and painted to look new. What will happen when we give them our car?
:32:07. > :32:14.Before putting it in, we had to sabotage it, running the engine
:32:14. > :32:20.without oil led to a total engine seizure. It also caused a few tears
:32:20. > :32:27.among the production team who had grown very fond of it. Cheer up, it
:32:27. > :32:32.is in good hands, Complete Engine Solutions Limited. They probably
:32:32. > :32:42.feel the same way about VW Golf's with 1.4 litre petrol engines.
:32:42. > :32:43.
:32:43. > :32:50.Or maybe they don't. Sorry about the picture quality, by the way.
:32:50. > :33:00.You are watching the BBC, that's Blurry Bonnet Camera! They have had
:33:00. > :33:18.
:33:18. > :33:22.a poke around so it is time to call I think probably for safety go for
:33:22. > :33:32.the engine to be honest. How much would that cost to get a
:33:32. > :33:33.
:33:33. > :33:38.That's to get reconditioned engine put in and installed. OK. That
:33:38. > :33:41.couldn't be clearer. We have asked for a reconditioned engine, they
:33:41. > :33:46.have charged us accordingly, they also say they have one in stock
:33:46. > :33:52.ready to be fitted. All we need now is the mechanic. He is bound to be
:33:52. > :34:02.good. I mean, reconditioned engines good. I mean, reconditioned engines
:34:02. > :34:17.
:34:17. > :34:22.it may help explain why getting the car back takes rather longer than
:34:22. > :34:32.we first thought. I wanted to check whether it's available to be picked
:34:32. > :34:46.
:34:46. > :34:54.up tomorrow. Would we be able to Finally, 13 days after we put the
:34:54. > :34:59.car in... Fantastic! Yes, it will be fantastic, if they had done what
:34:59. > :35:03.they have been paid for, supplying our Golf with a replacement
:35:03. > :35:10.reconditioned engine. The early signs are promising. They give us a
:35:10. > :35:14.guarantee, the engine is good for 50,000 miles. What's this? Sounds
:35:14. > :35:19.like it isn't a replacement, reconditioned engine. They have
:35:19. > :35:23.given us our old one back. Which would be OK, if they had done
:35:23. > :35:33.everything necessary to recondition it, so have they? Over to you, John,
:35:33. > :35:39.
:35:39. > :35:44.who is going all CSI on us. Yes, he is a car scam investigator. Of
:35:44. > :35:47.course, this isn't CSI: Miami. If it was, John would be taking his
:35:47. > :35:51.shades off, putting them back on again, taking them off, then
:35:51. > :36:01.putting them back on again. Taking them off, putting them back on
:36:01. > :36:09.
:36:09. > :36:19.again. And taking them off... OK, what's the evidence? Here he comes.
:36:19. > :36:41.
:36:41. > :36:48.dragging a bit. Yeah. Hi, John. Take us through them, one by one.
:36:48. > :36:54.What did they do This had seized. What they have done is they have
:36:54. > :36:59.had a go at cleaning it up. These lobes here, which are damaged,
:36:59. > :37:07.nothing's happened to those. This camshaft should have been replaced
:37:07. > :37:10.with a good, serviceable one. Piston! Yeah. They have reused it.
:37:10. > :37:17.It is a very borderline case, not particularly good. They have
:37:17. > :37:22.cleaned out the grooves, they have put new piston rings in. It it
:37:22. > :37:27.would have just about done. What is the point? The cylinder bores were
:37:27. > :37:32.scored. The sin Lin der block needed to be bored out and new --
:37:32. > :37:36.cylinder block needed to be bored out and new pistons put in? Yeah.
:37:36. > :37:41.That was the basic minimum. John shows us another of the pistons.
:37:41. > :37:46.This one's been taken from a different car. It's gouged around
:37:46. > :37:55.the edges and not serviceable. Then there is the camshaft carrier. They
:37:55. > :38:00.have just cleaned it. I will go on in a moment! We have paid for a
:38:00. > :38:03.reconditioned engine, John. What have we got? What you have got fell
:38:03. > :38:08.far short of a reconditioned engine. The engine was cobbled-together to
:38:08. > :38:15.get it going again, nothing more than that. Right. Moment over. What
:38:15. > :38:20.did we get after paying �1,698 for a reconditioned engine? Well, old
:38:20. > :38:28.spark plugs, should have been replaced, camshaft carrier, should
:38:28. > :38:35.have been scrapped, damaged camshaft, cylinder not rebored,
:38:35. > :38:42.damaged battery, battered piston, mystery metal, wrong bolts, no
:38:42. > :38:46.coolant and they didn't clean up after themselves. A massive bodged
:38:46. > :38:55.job and a car that won't get anywhere near the 50,000 miles
:38:55. > :39:00.promised. The pistons is wonky, I'm wearing my Dimbleby pants! It is
:39:00. > :39:04.Question Time! Yes, it is a special edition tonight. Instead of five
:39:04. > :39:08.guests, just the one, Christopher Wyatt. Anyanswers from him? Find
:39:08. > :39:17.Wyatt. Anyanswers from him? Find out in ten minutes. A quick update
:39:17. > :39:23.on your texts and e-mails. A few of you getting in touch about claim
:39:23. > :39:32.management companies. Some of you are getting calls with pre-recorded
:39:32. > :39:37.announcements. "Like us we have had a better chance of a refund if we
:39:37. > :39:41.go through a company" which is of course untrue. We are still getting
:39:41. > :39:45.e-mails about rising energy bills. Last week we said E.ON was
:39:45. > :39:49.frontloading its gas bills, that is charging more for the first set of
:39:49. > :39:52.units used so those consuming the least were being hit with a bigger
:39:52. > :39:57.percentage increase. In fact, it is only a small number of customers,
:39:57. > :40:02.those on the Go Green tariff who are affected. The majority, on
:40:02. > :40:06.E.ON's standard tariffs, are not. Next Haven, no stranger to Watchdog.
:40:06. > :40:10.Last year our undercover researchers looked at caravans in
:40:10. > :40:20.three of their parks. Sorry if you are eating. It is covered in
:40:20. > :40:22.
:40:22. > :40:27.staining. Oh! That is disgusting. Not nice. Haven promised to clean
:40:27. > :40:34.up their act. Have they? Time to find out. How Clean Is Your Haven
:40:34. > :40:38.Caravan? Well, if this year's ads are anything to go by, Haven's
:40:38. > :40:41.camps look like great places to stay. More than two million of you
:40:41. > :40:50.are choosing to holiday with them. Are the cleaning staff struggling
:40:50. > :40:56.to keep up? You see, we are still getting reports from unhappy
:40:56. > :41:04.campers at Haven. Take the Hunt family from Bolton who sent us
:41:04. > :41:08.these snaps of scummy taps and grit in the shower. All this in a so-
:41:08. > :41:17.called deluxe caravan. We have also had these photos in from familys
:41:17. > :41:20.who stayed at Haven's Devon Cliffs Camp. Despite the promise to clean
:41:20. > :41:24.up, it looks like there may still be a problem. Is it any wonder when
:41:24. > :41:29.according to a cleaning supervisor at one of Haven's parks the staff
:41:30. > :41:35.are simply not given enough time to do their jobs properly. She agreed
:41:35. > :41:39.to speak to us anonymously. We have a very tight schedule. We are given
:41:39. > :41:43.from 10.00 to 4.00 to do our jobs. In these six hours, we have to
:41:43. > :41:49.clean five caravans sometimes. We all cut corners. We have to do to
:41:49. > :41:52.get the caravans ready for the time they are required. The handbook
:41:52. > :41:57.Haven gave to her lists the procedures all cleaning staff must
:41:57. > :42:03.follow, along with guide times for each section of the accommodation.
:42:03. > :42:08.Ten minutes to make five beds. 18 minutes to clean the kitchen from
:42:08. > :42:12.top to bottom. A lot of the pots get left. Don't clean the cupboards
:42:12. > :42:18.out. Don't clean anything properly in all honesty because there isn't
:42:18. > :42:22.enough time. In all, the staff are given 64 minutes to clean each
:42:22. > :42:26.caravan thoroughly. Doesn't sound possible to me. But then again I am
:42:26. > :42:30.no expert. So... If we are going to put the Haven time limits to the
:42:30. > :42:34.test, we are going to need an expert. We are going to need
:42:34. > :42:44.someone who could tackle the filthyest caravan, a champion grime
:42:44. > :42:49.Buster, any thoughts? Hello, luvvies. Of course. We snuck her
:42:49. > :42:52.into one of the parks our researchers visited last year.
:42:52. > :42:58.First impressions? You don't walk in and think fresh and clean, you
:42:58. > :43:03.think a mop was dragged over the place. This is a typical eight-
:43:03. > :43:08.berth caravan that Haven cleaners are expected to have spick-and-span
:43:08. > :43:15.in 64 minutes. You see, it is a smell of unclean. These are the
:43:15. > :43:21.exact same cleaning products y used by Haven staff. -- used by haiv hey
:43:21. > :43:25.staff. Our crew get to work with a spot of untidying. It is only fair
:43:25. > :43:35.that Kim has to tackle the same level of grime as your average
:43:35. > :43:41.Haven cleaner. Right. On with the gloves. Let's see how long this
:43:41. > :43:46.will take me. Start the clock! Kim's got 64 minutes to clean the
:43:46. > :43:51.whole caravan. First up, the pre- clean. She's got to turn down the
:43:51. > :43:55.fridge and leave it to air, open all the windows, spray de-greaser
:43:55. > :44:00.on the grill pan, bleach the toilet, spray the bathroom walls and put
:44:00. > :44:07.the stain remover on any conspicuous stains. All this in one
:44:07. > :44:12.minute. She better get moving! Next, the kitchen. 18 minutes to scrub it
:44:12. > :44:17.from top to bottom. In that time, I have to clean the cupboards, the
:44:17. > :44:23.toaster, the kettle, the fridge freezer - I better get going!
:44:23. > :44:29.Ridiculous! 35 minutes in, and Kim hasn't started on the bathroom. Or
:44:29. > :44:39.don't know what the heck I'm doing. The handbook allows seven minutes
:44:39. > :44:42.
:44:42. > :44:46.to tackle the lounge. And don't forget the vacuuming. We want max!
:44:46. > :44:49.Time's up. I have cleaned for 64 minutes. I haven't got to make the
:44:49. > :44:55.beds up yet. Things I half did because I wouldn't have had the
:44:55. > :45:02.time. I worked so hard. I'm hear to tell you that to get this place
:45:02. > :45:06.spotless, as people who pay for it should find it spotless, 64 minutes
:45:06. > :45:11.is a farce! As well as cleaning against the clock, staff are
:45:11. > :45:16.expected to complete a set of health and safety checks, in just
:45:16. > :45:20.60 seconds. Not possible, says our whistleblower. What about Kim?
:45:20. > :45:24.have one minute to do my health and safety. You read how many things I
:45:24. > :45:28.have got to do. No, here we are. This should take one minute. I mean,
:45:28. > :45:32.one minute for all of them! checks include testing the smoke
:45:32. > :45:37.alarms, switching off the fires, and sanitising the door handles and
:45:37. > :45:41.light switches. You are not able to do all the health and safety in one
:45:41. > :45:49.minute. It's so ridiculous, I don't know what to say. I'm never stuck
:45:49. > :45:55.for words! Madness! Delia did have a few words to say when we showed
:45:55. > :45:58.her the handbook. In an ideal world, where families are leaving these
:45:58. > :46:08.caravans spotless, the timings as given would be OK. They are lean,
:46:08. > :46:10.
:46:10. > :46:13.but they are OK. We don't live in The pre-clean is supposed to be
:46:13. > :46:19.done in one minute. That is not possible. My opinion is that it
:46:20. > :46:25.would be at least ten minutes. 18 minutes for a hygienic clean of
:46:25. > :46:31.a kitchen is really not sufficient. The health and safety checks after
:46:31. > :46:35.the completion of the clean are crucial, therefore a minute is not
:46:35. > :46:39.sufficient time. I would be liking at a minimum of six minutes for
:46:39. > :46:43.that to be done. So, the cleaning procedures for
:46:43. > :46:50.Haven's caravans are looking good on paper, but in reality, well,
:46:50. > :46:56.Kim? If a caravan were like this, you, Haven can clean in 64 minutes,
:46:56. > :47:00.I will show my bare bum outside of Buckingham Palace! That is all I
:47:00. > :47:03.can say. Well, that is exciting. No, sir
:47:03. > :47:09.perhaps as exciting as your pink shorts, the ones that we saw last
:47:09. > :47:12.week? Yes, again, I have only one pair. They did match Kim's gloves.
:47:12. > :47:16.We will have a whip around. Thank you very much.
:47:16. > :47:22.Do you always have pink with flowers on? Yes.
:47:22. > :47:29.Back to Haven? They have spent over �27 million on new caravans this
:47:29. > :47:35.year. Plus, a further �2 million transforming cleaning services and
:47:35. > :47:38.upgrading caravans. There has been a 10.6% improvement and 10% more
:47:38. > :47:44.holiday-makers would recommend them to family and friends.
:47:44. > :47:49.OK. The 64 minutes to clean a caravan? That is mist leading. It
:47:49. > :47:53.is an optimum time and it is flexible. They arrived at the
:47:53. > :47:58.figure after an independent time and motion study using different
:47:58. > :48:03.caravans with their own trained and experienced clearance. Their own
:48:03. > :48:08.training video shows one caravan being cleaned in 64 minutes.
:48:08. > :48:14.Great. Thank you to all who has been in touch with the story. Here
:48:14. > :48:18.are a few more. Pork sausages, tasty, the add for Tesco's
:48:18. > :48:22.Butcher's Choice range is mist leading.Ed Avertising Standards
:48:23. > :48:25.Authority banned it, after it said that these animals were reared in
:48:25. > :48:30.an unrestricted environment. They do look it.
:48:30. > :48:34.But, as Pinky may have said to Perky, life is not like that not
:48:34. > :48:39.for these, any way it turns out that some of the pigs are reared
:48:39. > :48:46.outside, but then kept inside once they are weaned at just 28 days old.
:48:46. > :48:53.26ow says it is baffled by the ruling. That its pigs enjoy world-
:48:53. > :48:58.class standards of welfare, before being turned into sausages, that is.
:48:58. > :49:04.Bought any botles of the new cider from Stella Artois? Trouble could
:49:04. > :49:09.be brewing inside your fridge. More than a quarter of a million "Cee-
:49:09. > :49:14.dre" bottles are being recalled after customers reported theirs
:49:14. > :49:22.exploded without a warning. It has been said that only a small number
:49:22. > :49:27.6 bottles are afecked. Their all in a small size and sold individually
:49:27. > :49:33.or in packs of 12. Drinkers have been warned not to consume the
:49:33. > :49:37.bottles and urged to wear gloves and goggles before handling them.
:49:37. > :49:42.Stella Artois, "Cee-dre", it certainly has a kick in it.
:49:42. > :49:46.Check out your holiday in advance? Don't take the online reviews too
:49:46. > :49:52.seriously. TripAdvisor has been accused of publishing fake,
:49:52. > :49:56.critical comments about hotels and resorts. In a move it claims is un-
:49:56. > :50:00.related it has changed the slowing an on its hotel pages from "Reviews
:50:00. > :50:06.you can Trust" to "Reviews from our Community". Meanwhile, Low Cost
:50:06. > :50:10.Holidays is asking customers to write nice comments about them on
:50:10. > :50:14.the Review Centre website, there is even �25 in it for you. Low Cost
:50:14. > :50:18.Holidays say that the money is a thank you for booking with them and
:50:18. > :50:25.sharing 306 reviews with others. Meanwhile, of course, we will keep
:50:25. > :50:30.an eye out for negative reviews about them.
:50:30. > :50:34.Time for a final visit to Complete Engine Solutions. The North
:50:34. > :50:38.Yorkshire-based company, taking payment for re-conditioned car
:50:38. > :50:48.engines, but who then give them back without doing the proper work.
:50:48. > :50:49.
:50:49. > :50:54.They have botched the engine on our car too, and it took them 13 days,.
:50:54. > :50:59.-- unluck you for us, even unlucker for them.
:50:59. > :51:02.We are back to see Complete Engine Solutions.
:51:02. > :51:06.Christopher Wyatt is used to compliants from unhappy customers,
:51:06. > :51:10.so this visit should not worry him, but what he does not know is that
:51:10. > :51:20.we have an extra resource that most customers don't have at their
:51:20. > :51:28.
:51:28. > :51:38.He's also in for another surprise... Because unlike most customers, Lisa
:51:38. > :51:38.
:51:38. > :52:27.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 48 seconds
:52:27. > :52:31.knows everything there is to know Yeah, whatever. We used to have an
:52:32. > :52:41.operator to take calls like this, but in the tough economic times, it
:52:42. > :52:43.
:52:43. > :52:48.is all about multi-tasking. Do you want the Portuguese one or
:52:48. > :52:55.the chinless one? Not the Portuguese one! I will get the
:52:55. > :52:59.other one for are you. He will be with you in a short moment.
:52:59. > :53:04.An extremely short moment, as it happens, I am parked outside, that
:53:04. > :53:10.comes as a shock to Christopher Wyatt.
:53:10. > :53:15.Hi, Chris, the thing is, of course, you are likely to get unhappy
:53:15. > :53:19.customers like this if you esend out wonky engines that you claim
:53:19. > :53:22.are reconditioned but when they are just our engines that you have done
:53:23. > :53:28.the bare minimum work on and you have put back in our car with a
:53:28. > :53:33.piston that is used, and does not really suit the car it is non-
:53:33. > :53:38.servicable. If you are doing that, it is no wonder that there are
:53:38. > :53:40.unhappy customers coming out of the woodwork. They were not typical
:53:40. > :53:47.customers, they are part of our team.
:53:47. > :53:51.What do you allege that we have done to the engine, it is engine
:53:51. > :53:56.yearingly perfect. No, it is not. What you promised us
:53:56. > :54:02.and what we paid for is a reconditioned engine. You said you
:54:02. > :54:08.had 13 up on the rack. You took our engine out, you got it to a level
:54:08. > :54:16.where there was the bare minimum of work to be done. You fitted a pist
:54:16. > :54:21.on and a couple of little things but charged us as if it were a
:54:21. > :54:23.reconditioned engine. We have given you 50,000 miles on
:54:24. > :54:28.the engine. Do you know what happens with this situation? You
:54:28. > :54:31.fob them off. We have so many customers that are saying that has
:54:31. > :54:36.happened. At the end of the day, quality and
:54:37. > :54:43.price. At the end of the day you can pay �6,000 for an engine or pay
:54:43. > :54:49.�2,000. You cannot expect both engines to do the same job.
:54:49. > :54:52.People expect an engine that is reconditioned or you have
:54:52. > :54:55.reconditioned it. That is not what has happened. You have said one
:54:55. > :54:59.thing and done another. It is not about the price.
:54:59. > :55:03.At the end of the day the vehicle came not working. We got it back
:55:03. > :55:09.working. As far as I'm concerned we have done what we agreed with them
:55:09. > :55:12.what we were going to do. No you did not. You agreed to fit a
:55:12. > :55:16.reconditioned engine. That must be to a certain specification. The
:55:16. > :55:20.ones you are sending out on the evidence we have seen does not fit
:55:20. > :55:25.the bill. I disagree.
:55:25. > :55:28.He disagrees with all of our allegations and continued to deny
:55:28. > :55:31.wrongdoing. OK. I respect the show, I respect
:55:31. > :55:37.what you do, but you have picked the wrong man.
:55:37. > :55:42.No, Chris, we have the right man. We have some happy customers.
:55:42. > :55:47.We have a lot of happy customers. We have the engine, we have seen
:55:47. > :55:53.what you do. You say one thing, promise one thing, charge for it,
:55:53. > :55:59.and doing something else, that is a Rogue Traders, that is what you are.
:55:59. > :56:02.I disagree entirely. Can you leave. Yes, no problem. Just in case he is
:56:03. > :56:12.thinking of re-branding here, you know, coming up with a different
:56:13. > :56:25.
:56:25. > :56:30.name, we have a suggestion. High winds in Darlington! Yeah, it
:56:30. > :56:33.kind of worked. We have received a statement from the company, they
:56:33. > :56:37.say that Haed Exchange Limited was dissolved some time ago, it has
:56:37. > :56:41.nothing to do with Complete Engine Solutions, it should not be
:56:41. > :56:47.confused with any company of a similar name. They did not comment
:56:47. > :56:51.on the majority of our allegations but offered Nicola a replacement
:56:51. > :56:55.reconditioned engine. They is a that our conduct and the tenor of
:56:55. > :57:00.our letter was designed to make good television. Thank you.
:57:00. > :57:04.Meanwhile, Christopher Wyatt you become the latest face on our
:57:04. > :57:08.Rogues' Gallery. OK. Just a few more texts and e-
:57:08. > :57:15.mails before we go. Here is one about the airbrushed
:57:15. > :57:18.models in the cosmetic adds. Kelsey says that enhanced images in
:57:18. > :57:23.magazines are to blame for young girls have a negative body image.
:57:23. > :57:28.It is so wrong, they do not realise that the images are fake.
:57:28. > :57:32.It appears I have started something. Chris, finally, some viewers
:57:32. > :57:37.including Ross and Gareth say that they are wearing their Dimbleby
:57:37. > :57:43.pants. I don't even know what Dimbleby pants are? Paxman pants, I
:57:43. > :57:52.know what they are! Keep sending your stories and tip-office.
:57:52. > :57:57.Go to the website: Or write to us: -- tip-office.
:57:57. > :58:02.Coming up next week: Rocketing energy bills, if you are tempted to
:58:02. > :58:07.swap to solar panel, be careful. Travelodge, look what some of the