Episode 6 Watchdog

but we checked several times, and it is not here. There should also be

one at this location in south-east London, but we could only find units

on an industrial estate. And there is no sign of any fried chicken

place at this Manchester address. Because it is a field! It is all

very old. It begs a couple of obvious questions. Firstly, if these

phantom restaurants are not at the addresses which are listed, , can we

still order food from them? We went through the seven phantom

restaurants, made our choices and put in our orders on Just Eat, then

waited for delivery. Sure enough, after a short while, the food

arrives, bringing the curries from the largely residential street in

Glasgow, another curry from the London industrial estate, and a

fried chicken family meal apparently from that field in Manchester. In

fact, all seven phantom restaurants deliver meals exactly as ordered

through Just Eat. So, we can get food courtesy of the restaurants

which are not at the addresses listed on the website, which begs a

second obvious question. Where exactly is this food coming from? As

all of our takeaway receipts came with phone numbers, we decided to

call them up, posing as local customers. But guess what, they are

not too keen to discuss their location. I wonder if it is possible

to come by in the car and pick up food from you guys? You could not

give me an address or anything? of the restaurants fails to pick up

the telephone at all. Another one tells us they are based at a

completely different restaurant, also serving Indian food. But in

each of the other five cases, the people we spoke to refused to tell

us where our food came from. As it turns out, they might have a very

good reason for not wanting to tell us, because we have since discovered

that not one of them is registered with the local environmental health

office. No member of the public should be buying food from premises

which are not registered with the local council, or premises which do

not meet health and hygiene standards. It is a very, very

serious risk to public health. not only a risk to public health,

but also, and it does not end with those seven restaurants with false

addresses, because we have since discovered that eight of the

restaurants we did manage to find have also failed to register with

their local authorities. Unregistered and Mrs could be

prosecuted and closed down. Just Eat are responsible for those businesses

they are advertising online. They should make sure that all businesses

are registered with their local what they've DONE. They say that as

a result of Watchdog's investigation, they have suspended

all the restaurants with fake addresses. And they say that they

have tightened their registration processes to prevent other

restaurants using false addresses in future. They have told us they

welcome a wider debate with the relevant bodies on tackling the

industry-wide issue of unlicensed trading. All very well. We'd welcome

an explanation. If some of the restaurant addresses are fake,

where's the food coming from? can't answer in every instance -

again, they say they're carrying out a complete audit. But they say that

in many cases, the restaurant businesses involved have simply

duplicated their menus from other branches - and they've done that in

order to appear more local to a particular catchment area. But the

bottom line is - if you order a meal from somewhere with a ficticious

address, you really have no idea where it was made, or in what

conditions. No, you don't. And what's just as worrying is that even

when a restaurant on the Just Eat website DOES give a real address,

that doesn't guarantee it meets the proper standards. And here is why we

are able to say that. Since we went on our road trip, we have checked

the official food hygiene ratings of all of the restaurants we managed to

locate, and here are the results. Of the rated restaurants in Scotland,

80% have been judged as requiring improvement. And in England and

Wales, out of a possible rating of five, 40% of the rated restaurants

listed on the site scored just two, one, or even zero. A no hygiene

rating would normally indicate that poor standards were found at the

last routine inspection, perhaps things like penniless cleaning,

perhaps a mouse infestation, it could be things like raw meat juices

cooking on -- dripping onto cooked food. Hygiene ratings are available

to everyone on the food but Just Eat, like other online takeaway

businesses, chooses not to publish this information. So, if you are

ordering food from this website, it is not immediately via SWAT standard

each kitchen been rated at, another reason why you might want to do some

research beforehand. So, what can we conclude from our takeaway tracked

down trip? That some of the restaurants listed on Just Eat do

not exist, some had poor hygiene, and some are operating illegally. As

for the Just Eat advertisements... Maybe they are not so persuasive

after all. Just Eat has since told us that hygiene ratings are governed

by the Food Standards Agency and local councils - and if they've

allowed a restaurant to trade, it seems fair that it should be allowed

to do so on the website. However, it has been engaging with the

authorities to drive up standards. It says it gives customers MORE

information about the restaurants on its site than they would get over

the phone, from directories or leaflets through the door. It also

has nearly two million customer reviews on everything from food

quality to speed of delivery, which it says helps people make informed

choices about where to order their takeaway. And if you'd like to

comment on that or any of tonight's stories, here's a reminder of how to

do so... For e-mails, [email protected] is the address.

For texts, dial 88822 and start your message with the letters WD. And if

you want to get involved in the Twitter discussion, our address and

hashtag are on your screens now. Coming up... Kellogg's. - the new

Special K recipe, that's not to had a car showroom, a horse dealer,

a bridal wear store, a company flogging mobility products AND a

string of TV repair businesses. We've had a few laughs at their

expense. And as for their names? They've also given us a bit of a

fun with names. Keeps me happy, anyway. And it gives me an excuse to

muck about sometimes, like with Jazz, the plumber. Nice! And,

looking back, there have been times when I have had a bit of fun with

the music, like with Mike the mechanic. That worked, sort of!

Tonight 's company also fixes cars, but their name presents more of a

challenge on the humour front. Step forward Cleckheaton Gearbox and

Clutch Centre. There is absolutely nothing funny about Cleckheaton

Gearbox and Clutch Centre. Where are the laughs going to come from? There

is only one thing for it. Hello, Cheggers here. As you know, things

have been so busy since my appearance on your programme. I have

been everywhere. Please feel free to leave a message after the town.

However, if you like, don't bother. Rejected, by Cheggers! No, not

amusing at all, and neither are the stories about the aforesaid

Cleckheaton Gearbox and Clutch Centre, or its boss, Paul Frost.

Hold on, maybe it would be funny if we drew a comedy moustache and then

put a hat on him! No, that is not what we are here to do.

The company quoted Mark �18 hundred and said the car would be ready in

two weeks, but it wasn't. It was horrendous, they never once called

me, I was calling them. Chasing them up, finding out what was going on,

and to get hold of Paul was impossible, I was speaking to other

people all the time. And they were fobbing me off. At four weeks of on

stand chasing, Mark was told his car was finally ready. Take it he was

total. It drives like a dream. Did it drive like a dream? I put my foot

down on the clutch, it was heavy and I could hear it squeaking, which is

what it did beforehand. I put a phone call in and said are you sure

everything is all right with the clutch. It is still squeaking, they

said it was because it was a brand-new clutch. But it was still

squeaking a few hundred miles later. He found out why later, the clutch

hadn't been replaced. The fly wheel, it was the same original part that

was in the car when I dropped it off and the gearbox was a second-hand

gearbox, it wasn't a reconditioned one. So it wasn't what you paid for

No. Mark did get his car fixed and some of his �1800 back. But the

company's got a lot of form for this kind of behaviour. Cleckheaton

Gearbox and Clutch Centre have 19 County Court judgments against them,

totalling �50,000. Of which, 15 are still unsatisfied. They haven't paid

a penny toward them. We asked an expert. Transmission tech nicks

Chris. He can drive a car using all the gear, and we are splashing out

on a car too. Not any old Porsche, no, we have a genuine 2002 Ford

Focus. The clutch in this vehicle is

serviceable, it is in a good condition, it gives smooth

operation, there is no need to change it.

We are going to introduce a fault. Steve will remove the hydraulic

hose, and that will hopefully introduce a fluid leak which will

result in the clutch pedal going to the floor and there will be no

clutch operation. So we have not touched the clutch unit at all. We

have caused the hydraulic fluid to drain out so the pedal doesn't work.

In theory you could rectify the fault on this car just by replacing

this seal. That is all it needs. little seal, done.

I knew I would be able to squeeze some music in somewhere! Fixing the

Ford Focus should cost �70 plus 40 in towing charges. That is what

Cleckheaton Gearbox and Clutch Centre should charge. I think things

could get crazy. Yes and that prediction is about to

come true, because not only do they overcharge to fix a small fault,

they hit us with a huge bill to repair a non-existent one. Our car

is ready for collection, in about ten minutes.

Thanks, getting an update on emails. Lots of you getting in touch about

Just Eat. Will says he and his partner have been ordering from a

local take away but they thought they would give it a visit. It

wasn't there. Pauline said she wanted to gore a take away, waited

for a grabg for 90 minute, not surprisingly if the food is coming

from a restaurant that isn't local. Thank you. Nick Cleggs changing the

recipe of Special K, for the first time in 30 year, they are adding

barley to the list of ingredients and baking some of the sugar on the

outside, to give the cereal extra crunch.

Apparently. The result, outraged comments from customers. The cereal

is too sweet. The flakes are too hard. So what is the verdict on the

street? Time for a simple cereal survey here on wash dog. With have

the old recipe in the green bowl. We have the new recipe in the blue

bowl. I know that, you know that, but the public don't.

-- Watchdog. I like how serious you are with

this? Leave some in there. Are you hungry? Take it from me. That one.

That is synthetic sweet in there. refer that one. You like the new

recipe. I like that one better. is a bit less flavour. So we have a

difference of opinion here. Why is that one? Not sure.You're

not sure but you prefer that one. Thank you. That is the speed test.

And a chef's opinion. That is number one. I bow down to your superior

knowledge. Thank you. You prefer that one? Yes.Why is

that? That is sickly sweet.So you like this one. This is the original

recipe. This is the new one. A lot of people have been saying it is

sweet. I like that one.That is the new recipe. I think your nationwide

survey was inconclusive. Yes, and no, because although the

verdict was split, there was an interesting break down, the majority

of those who preferred the new recipe weren't regular Special K

eater, most of those who disliked it were people who bought it regularly.

So Kellogg?s might have found themselves new customers but they

have annoyed existing ones. And they say what? When their made their last

recipe change they received complaints but Special K went on to

become their biggest eselling cereal in the UK. They say they didn't make

the change lightly. Who writes or who gets in touch with a cereal

company and say, I want it up-to-date and up-to-date cereal?

They said bang up-to-date. And they expected that this is Kellogg, they

expected this sort of food back but saw it is relatively low. They have

said they have received many positive responses. Next insurance

and problems getting pay outs. According to the Financial

Ombudsman, there has been a big increase in the number of claims

being rejected. And Watchdog can reveal the aggressive tactics that

some companies use to avoid paying up. Riz Lateef reports.

From taking a flight, to simply crossing the road. We are

continually running risks. But by taking out insurance, we are at

least protected if something goes wrong. That is the theory, at least,

but what is the reality? Across the industry, be it travel, contents or

life insurance, companies seem to be doing everything they can to ensure

they don't pay out unless they really have to.

Richard Moss and his girlfriend lost �4,000 worth of goods in a burglary

at their Cheltenham home last year. Claiming on their Tesco contents

insurance proved to be a lengthy obstacle course. We had to provide

all sorts of thing, phone records, it was forensic what they were

asking for. When the loss adjustors came round they were aggressive with

my girlfriend and searching, and it was more of an interrogation than a

fact-finding mission. But it was what happened nine months after the

burglary that really made Richard question how Tesco operates. They

sent us a letter asking why I treated about music playing on my

iPod, when it was supposely stolen, and that was because I was listening

to the iPod on my iPhone which hadn't been stolen and they had gone

to the lengths of checking through everything on my Twitter feed to see

if there was any evidence they could get against us. Tesco did actually

agree to meet most of the claim, but still refused to pay out on a number

of items, including the iPod. After a year of being

cross-examined, Richard couldn't face taking his case any further.

You assume that you know, you are innocent until proven guilty. In

this case we were guilty until proven innocent. Richard's

experience is increasingly common. Which? Says it has heard from

hundreds of policy holders complaining of harassment. Insurance

claims. And over the last 12 month, the Financial Ombudsman has seen a

20% increase in. . Plaints about claims that have been rejected.

an increasing number of case, we are seeing insurance companies not

following the well established guidelines that we would have

expected them to follow. And in the dispute we are up holding in favour

of consumer, we are increasingly seeing insurance companies who have

made decisions on claims, which were not only tough bun fair.

Twins Jake and Summer know all about unfair. They lost their father last

October. For much of his last year he was fighting cancer and his

insurers Friend's Life. Even though he was dying they were refusing to

pay out on his critical illness life insurance policy. When you are in

the middle of the worst year of your life, and you know your husband is

going to die soon, and Nick was in the middle of chemo, he was really

ill, I was working in London, trying to hold everything together. It was

absolutely, it was like a body blow. I remember opening the letter and

feeling sick and not believing that this could be happening.

Friend's Life rejected the claim, because Nick hadn't declared certain

health information, in particular whether he had ever suffered from

pins and needles. However he had declared ulcerative colitis, a bowel

condition that includes those symptoms. So Nick, five months into

diagnosis, probably not much life left, decided he was going to fight:

He was determined. He said there was no way we are going to take this

lying down. We pulled together all the information, a number of

consultants said Nicks's colitis and the pins and needles were nothing do

with why he had died. Gall bladder cancer is very rare. But Friend's

Life still refused to budge. And time was running out. I thought you

are totally destroying the last few months of my life with my husband,

and, obviously I kept thinking, but I mustn't let that happen, because

these last few months are so precious.

He knew that he was going to die, and he fell not only with we were

going to be losing him but we wouldn't have financial security.

Following Nick's death his widow continued the battle, aware that

without the pay out, they could be forced to leave the family home. She

collected �64 -- 64,000 signatures for an on online petition. Friend's

Life were unmoved. But Susie had one last place to

turn. The Financial Ombudsman service. If it rules in your favour,

an insurance company can be forced to pay out on any claim up to �100

thousand. The family waited three months and the verdict arrived.

was an amazing moment. I was checking my E mails, I had put the

kids to bed. There was an email. It dawned on me they had were going to

support, support me and the outcome was we should receive the money. I

just couldn't believe it. The victory meant a pay out of

�100,000, which means Summer and Jake can remain in the family home.

But why did the family have to fight their insurers so hard, and for so

long? I can see nothing there of compassion or humanity or anything,

it was like a big faceless corporation who were determined just

to trample us, but, I think what gives me, what makes me smile, we

didn't let them. They were not going do that. We fought all the way, we

got the outcome we deserved. OK. With me now Malcolm Tarring. He

represents the association of Association of British Insurers.

Thank you. I imagine you don't want to comment on the specific case, but

as a human being, what is your reaction to that? I can't obviously

comment on specific case, but it would be impossible not to sit here

and empathise whether the stress that family has gone through.

Insurers are aware, when people come to claim, they are doing so in a

stressful and difficult time. That is why insurers are fully 100%

committed to dealing with claims, all genuine claims as quickly and

efficiently as possible. How can it sit happily on your shoulders, you

know, a family, the last few weeks of the children's father's life, and

their mother has to spend precious time begging, appealing and being

bullied by an insurance company. I can't be right? No insurance wants

to and no insurer will bully a customer. They are paying out �2

million every week. That may be no consolation to the couple you

featured but insurers do everything they can, at a stressful time for

customers, to make sure they get the compensation ir, they get the money

they believe they are entitled to. tell you what must be puzzling

viewer, certainly puzzles me, that you can have the expert opinion of

two specialist consultants, and the insurance company disagree. Well,

the insurance company are going to look at all the medical evidence

that is available. Don't youed think the consultant has? Some times the

medical evidence is not necessarily clear. I am not medical expert,

insurers will look at the available medical evidence and they will look

to pay claim, that is the first priority, not looking at reasons for

declining. Can you tell me, if, the companies you represent want

insurers, how do they, how do they guard against the possibility of

being in this dreadful situation, innocent, consultants agreeing, with

the insurer, the person who is taken out the insurance, the insurance

company disagree, and finally the ombudsman. No insurance company

wants to see a disputed claim and they will move heaven an earth to

make sure a genuine claim is paid as quickly as possible. They will look

at the medical evidence, they will talk to the customer, we are in the

business of paying claim, don't forget the claims process is the

shop window on which insurance companies are judged, so if they get

it wrong, then they have a lot of reputational damage to clear up.

Thank you, I have to stop you there. We have also spoken to Friends Life

who initially refused to pay out to the family. They say they continue

to have concerns about some of the details of the case, relating to

nondisclosure, that they say they are subverted to the family and

believe it would be wrong to prolong it further. They have decided to

meet the claim in full, plus interest, which was in addition to

an earlier ex-gratia payment which they made to the family. They told

us they paid out �122 million in critical illness lanes in 2012.

Meanwhile, Tesco Bank say they pay out claims quickly and fairly. They

had to wait for a report, they say, on Richard Moss 's burglary, after

which, they agreed to pay him more than �3000, they say. Still to come

- are these passengers entitled to compensation? Back to Cleckheaton

Gearbox and Clutch Centre now. Not to be confused with other clutch and

gearbox company is of a similar name. We have heard how they charged

one driver 1800 pounds for repairing the clutch, when they did not

actually replace it at all. Mind you, he did have a Porsche. They

would not overcharge us on our little old Ford Focus, would they,

especially when all that needed fixing was the little old

hydraulics? In order to fix those hydraulics, all they needed to do

was to replace this tiny rubber seal. Why? Well, here is a quick

lesson. There maybe some of you out there that do not really understand

how clutch works. It is very simple... This microphone is

really... I will explain it, there are two plates, when pushed

together, supplying power from the engine to the gearbox. However, when

you push down the pedal, the plates, part and no longer supply

power to the wheels. Now, there maybe some of you out there who do

not really understand how a clutch works. Wright, the car has been in

for five days, and we have been told it is fixed. Our stooge goes in to

collect, and who do we find behind the counter? It is only the boss.

Old on, �320? All it needed was a new seal. Did it need a new clutch,

then? Golly gosh indeed, because there was nothing wrong with our

clutch. Once outside, we asked Paul to go into more diagnostic detail.

Yes, worn out, it is a technical leaves, but not before asking Paul

to return the original clutch he has taken out. And you know what? He

does. That was not a smart move, was it? Giving us back our perfectly

healthy clutch to compare with the one they have just put in. OK, two

blokes together. Who has got the best one? OK, Chris, so, I have got

a clutch, you have got a clutch - what am I looking at? That is the

original plate removed from the Ford focus. There are some signs of wear,

but very minimal. There was no need to change that clutch. This is the

replacement, which was fitted. It is of inferior quality. We describe

them as chocolate clutches, and that is because they melt. They do not

last five minutes. Uncle and this one, still good for a fuel miles

yet? I would imagine for another 30,000-40,000 miles at least.

the same clutch that Paul said was... But you know what? He is

misdiagnosis could be a 1-off, so let's give him a second chance with

a second car. You know, Ford Focus is fine, but it is a bit

run-of-the-mill. Would we need is a status symbol car, the kind of motor

which has been bought by someone who has written to leak into a bit of

good fortune. Hello! Yes, no, I am in Los Angeles that weekend, but I

am keeping it free for the Oscars. How about coming round on Sunday, a

whole host of celebrities are coming? Ring the profiteroles! Yes,

we have got a Porsche Boxster! It is silver, it has got a wheel on each

corner! It is not supposed to do that, is it? Usually, at this

stage, on Rogue Traders, I would be telling you about the fault that we

have created with this car. But there is no fault with this car. In

fact, the only problem with it is the person driving it. Yes, it is a

woman. Now, come on now, I am only mucking about. Annabelle is an

excellent driver, as well as the perfect stooge. She calls

Cleckheaton Gearbox and Clutch Centre, claiming she is having

trouble putting her car into gear. We'll Paul see that there is nothing

wrong with it and she is simply not pressing down hard enough on the

pedal? It is time for a test drive, and some heavy pedalling. OK, this

car does have quite a heavy pedal, and a new clutch would make it

lighter, but it certainly does not need one. What about her other, you

know, problem? So, why can't she get it into gear, Paul? You cannot

repeat the fault, can you, because there isn't one of in March! That is

not revenge Paul from persuading us to leave the car with him for

inspection. He says he will call back within 24 hours, but we do not

hear anything. Instead, four days later, we have to call him up to

arrange for and about to drop by and hear his diagnosis. Chris and I

listen in. The extra gear linkage is absolutely spot on, perfect.

certainly was, along with the clutch. But according to Paul, that

is about to conquer out, too. You were probably a couple of miles from

your clutch conking out anyway, so you would have lost your drive

anyway. You would have lost your drive. This is a car which is not

got long left in his world, the way he is describing it. There is no way

you can say that clutch is going to fail in 2000 miles. Let's add it all

unnecessary total of... Nearly �2000. There was nothing wrong with

the gear cables, there is nothing wrong with the flywheel, and there

is nothing wrong with the clutch. You could argue it might make the

pedal a bit softer by replacing the clutch, but that is all you can say.

After considering, Annabelle decides against housing the work done. That

Paul still has a way of her. Yes, take her car apart, identify

imaginary faults, but it together, and that will be 400 quid.

quid, no car. We pay it, but then we pay back. And that payback will be

coming up very shortly, when we will surprise the boss, and the people of

Cleckheaton Gearbox and Clutch Centre. Now, how do you follow

something as exciting as Daphne? I know, with a tiny little chopper. It

is just an ordinary day in the Watchdog studio, a horse one week,

and now, a helicopter! That is blowing on my hair! What is the

point of this? I will come to that in a minute, but I just want you to

enjoy it. Go a bit closer to any, come on. It is just a boys toy,

getaway! 5-1 it is a remote control model, being operated by Perry

Lambert over there, a display pilot from Essex. As you can see, it can

do lots of great things. I could play this all day. It is very

impressive, obviously, but only when it is working. You see, we have got

another model enthusiast, called Edward Kerr, from Suffolk. He bought

one very similar to this, from a private seller on eBay. There was no

evidence of it being in anything other than perfect condition. But

when it arrived, it was far from that. The helicopter in my view

would have been dangerous to fly. Clearly if had been crashed, the

tale was not as it should have been, I do not think the rotor blade

had the correct control, so the helicopter had trouble attempting to

fly. As a result of that, I decided that the safest thing to do was to

put it back into the box. Edward contacted the seller and told him he

would be returning the broken helicopter, and wanted a full

refund. When the seller refused, Edwards took the dispute to e-bay,

confident they would find in his favour. I have spent �100 on the

postage. To me, it is absolutely crystal clear - the item is not as

described, it is not fit for the purpose that I bought it for. And I

should have had a full refund. But E-bay disagreed, and refused to

sanction that refund. So I was left at with a helicopter which I did not

think was safe to fly, which I did not think was fit for purpose, and a

seller who would not accept refund. That's disappointing, a nonworking

helicopter. Yes, very disappointing, and what's worse, there is very

little Edward could do about it. Normally, if you buy goods over the

Internet you can get a full refund if you return them within seven

days, except if you bought them from a private seller, as opposed to a

merchant, or if you bought them in an online auction. In those

circumstances, the so-called distance selling regulations do not

apply. So I am afraid that in this case, both the seller and E-bay are

right. But you know exactly what I'm going to say to you next. Yes let's

have a look at something which was caused covered by those regulations!

Executive. -- exactly. And here is this week 's consumer champion,

Internet shopper Nigel Cox, an architect from Milton Keynes. His

complaint? An online purchase. His consumer weapon bash the distance

selling regulations. Befall all of this happened, I was completely in

the dark about the power and the size of the distance selling

regulations. His opponent, Acer, who sold him a computer over the

Internet. When it arrived, he was not -- it was not working properly.

When he tried to send it back, they said there was nothing wrong with

it. But they had picked the wrong employment opponent. I am solvent

for it, I work from home, everything I do I produce on a computer. If I

am not working, I am not earning. Nigel bought the new computer when

his old one broke down. The good news was that it arrived within 24

hours. The bad news was that it just did not work properly. Part of my

difficulty was being able to access the Internet. I was getting

frustrated. No matter how hard I tried, I just could not get the

computer to spark up, come to life. When Nigel contacted Acer direct

with a list of problems, they agreed to pick up the computer for testing,

but then came their response. told me that they could not find any

fault. It is like you are being told that you are lying, or you are an

idiot, something like that. Acer did offer a refund under their local

double return policy, but that would be minus a collection fee, and a 10%

deduction for damage which they claimed was caused by Nigel.

Alternatively, he could have the computer back, but Nigel refused.

Instead he began researching his rights under the distance selling

regulations. They were brought in in 2000 primarily because of a European

law which was intended to strengthen consumer rights, because many more

transactions were happening over the Internet. The laws are very

powerful, and they give you two main rights, the first of which is the

right to receive certain information about the seller and the goods. And

then, you have the cancellation right itself. Within a certain time

period, you can cancel your distance contract for no reason whatsoever.

If you are using your rights you don't need any reason. You can

change your mind, do it on a whim, decide the good are not for you. You

don't have to have a reason. Nigel wrote to the company references the

distance selling regulation, telling them that the computer was faulty.

He copied in the Managing Director and after two weeks he finally got

the response he had been waiting for.

Acer said they would refund him in full. The reason, they checked the

computer again, and found a fault. The very same fault he told them

about in the first place. Full value of that refund? �688.92.

Without the distance selling regulation, I could be stuck with a

computer that doesn't work, and a situation which would have left a

very bad taste in my mouth, with Acer Direct, but fortunately, the

power of the regulations helped me power of the regulations helped me

out. OK, we did ask Acer for a comment on

that case but they haven't responded. We have put together a

guide to the distance selling regulations 2000, which spells out

your rights in detail. You can find it on the website. There is the

address. Thank to everyone who has been in

touch about thatted story. Here is a few more.

Football, you know, isn't it? Football shirt sponsorship con tro

controversial. Bolt has announced it is pulling out after deal with Quick

Quid, the pay day lender that charges an APR of more than 17100%.

It follows an online petition along with protest meetings. The

Championship club says it underestimated the adverse reaction,

after discussions with supporters and politicians, the deal is off.

Instead the shirts will now be sponsored ambitious Tainable energy

company Fibrelec. Cheap holiday. It Thomas Cook's post

Christmas ad campaign in which it claimed to offer 10% off certain

holidays misled certain customers. It investigated following complaints

two holidays in Italy and Egypt didn't get cheaper and one of the

sample holidays was more expensive than before the promotion. Thomas

Cook said this was a result of so-called fluid pricing, the

industry practise of adjusting costs to meet fluctuating levels of

demand. That pricing would be explained to customers when they

bought a holiday. The ASA said the pro-Megs was likely to confuse e

customers and they said the discount hadn't been applied in line with

their expectation, so we won't be seeing this ad again. British

Airways, remember that emergency landing at Heathrow on bank holiday

weekend? 190 flights can said -- cancelled. 22 planes diverted, an

estimated 250,000 passengers grounded, more delayed and all

because engine panels were not closed properly during maintenance.

And remember EU rules entitle any passenger whose flight is delayed

for more than three hours to compensation up to �5 hundred.

Unless the airline can show it was the result of extraordinary

circumstances, beyond its control, which you have guessed is what BA

claimed was the case here, has there been a change of heart? When wash

dog contacted BA yesterday, it withdrew the earlier statement about

extraordinary circumstances, it said it provided a duty of care to

passenger, including refreshments and hotel rooms while they waited,

but -- added it will assess every claim o on its merits and meet its

legal obligations. Watch this pace. -- space.

OK. The slickly named Cleckheaton Gearbox and Clutch Centre have done

us over. Twice. They have missed diagnosed fault, they invented

fault, they have overcharged us and they have hit us with a �4 hundred

bill for putting back together our car after inspecting it. You know

what? They haven't even done that right.

And how do we know? Well, because once we got it back, we gave it to a

Porsche specialist for forensic testing. They sent their report to

our expert, Chris. Not only have you been charged �400

for unnecessary work. The drive shaft bolts have been incorrectly

Torquayed up. Both could have caused a problem. The car has come back in

a worse state than we gave it to them? That is right.What about that

clutch, which boss Paul Frost told us could go in 2000 miles.

report states they would expect the clutch to last 20,000 miles at

least. 20,000 not 2 thousand. That is a Biggs difference This garage is

exaggerating work that is required on cars. It has quoted for work

which isn't necessary and in my opinion are taking advantage of

motorists with minutical technical knowledge. So we are not looking at

ineptitude, we are looking at also dishonesty? Yes, first class.

That will do for me. I am back off to Yorkshire, no Porsches this time.

I am going to pour myself into a vintage white van. I want to tell

the locals about our investigation and a company in their very midst.

Hello Cleckheaton. Let us play Car Park Clutch Phrase. Would you like

to join me for a game? What is your name? Let us play Clutch Phrase. Say

what you see? Lifting. Lifting prices. Lift Lifting or?Pushing.

She has got it pushing up the price, give her a round of applause.

What can you see here? What does that say? Yob. -- job.What is he

doing? He is stretching the job.She has got it everyone.

Come play Sir. Here we go. Hello. That is very good. That one was in

fact talking cow mud. Right. Brian, you have been a faant stick

contestant. You get the handshake any way. -- fantastic. The bells are

tolls, which means it could be time to leave. Thank you Cleckheaton, and

good night. So now for the encore. We are not

leaving town without paying Paul Frost a visit. We turn up at the

garage, but no-one seems to be round.

Until we go inside, where the work force aren't too pleased to see us.

(BLEEP) That is clutch phrase. OK, time to catch up with Paul in the

next door office, warning it might get shouty.

Hi, Paul. Matt Allwright. We just wanted to ask you first of all about

the two cars that we brought to you, the Ford Focus which you fitted with

a clutch which it didn't need put a new clutch on. We erect fibbed

the leak. Read those jobs of satisfied customers. We have

hundreds. The instances we have got... How many you got have you got

final. We brought you two...You brought a Ford Focus in for a new

clutch. It had a new clutch. .With when that... It had one millimetre

wear. That is a matter of opinion. It did not need replacing, you

didn't mention the original problem, that was the hydraulic leak. That

was the problem, �75 instead of �300. We took the gearbox tout

change it. You fitted a clutch which didn't need replacing, those are two

vehicles. Yes, yes...Both of those needed almost nothing. One had a

hydraulic leak, one needed nothing doing at all That is your opinion.

You told us on the Porsche it had 2,000 miles left. It had 20,000

miles. We took it to a Porsche specialist, we have people who

understand what they are doing and the way they are looking at that car

is scientific. What do we stand when we bring you a car, with which there

is nothing wrong and you try and take it four two grand on that

Everything that Porsche needed it did. It didn't. We paid...If you

paid �2,000 the gears would have been perfect and the clutch would

have been perfect. The work you do on the cars is poor. It isn't.When

people find out about it. What about these customers here? You are not

interested... In both cases you created work where that wasn't there

With the greatest respect we are human, we make mistake, we are not

computers. When people make mistakes they put it right I would like you

the leave the premises. I suppose we are not getting anywhere so it is

best we do leave. Thank you.Well, the shutters are down, here at

Cleckheaton Gearbox and Clutch Centre. Paul made strong arguments,

but it doesn't change the matter, that if it was my Porsche coming in,

I would avoid their clutches. I haven't got a Porsche. We have had

a written response from Paul Frost, in which he says his is a local

company, with 20 years experience. He is proud of its reputation, its

significant client base and its referrals from high quality garages

across the UK. He says he is sorry if people are disappointed with the

service. With regard of our filming he says he disagrees with the

expert's opinion and claims we have presented an unrealistic image of

his business. If you want a realistic image have a look at this

one. It is Paul Frost. The latest face on our Rogue's Gallery. We are

getting loads of emails tonight, about the Just Eat website. Ashley

says some of the restaurants on the site have more than one menu,

sometimes as many as five, but with all the food coming from the same

place. Paul from London says he won't be using the service again, it

is too worrying if some of the places haven't been properly

inspected. I like this one. "I discovered a Chinese take away Reg

esteres in the flats where I live." Trying to get on the Food Standards

Agency website to check out restaurant, there is some trouble

but it should be up soon. Keep sending the stories and tip-offs. Go

to our website [email protected]. The address should be on the screens

right now. Coming up next week. Changing your holiday money, how the

Post Office decides what rate you will get, depending where you live.

BMW, the engine fault they know about, pity they are not telling you