Episode 8 Watchdog

the 20% discount they were offering was only 8% and it was clear that

had gone up. B&Q had increased the price of some kitchen items at

exactly the same time they started the sale. The 20% discount had

applied to these new accounts and not the non-discounted prices that

are unpaid just ten days earlier. They increased the priced just for

the sale. That was not fair. isolated example? After Aaron got in

touch with this we decided to take a detailed look at a few other B&Q

deals. We obtained for data compiled by the independent price comparison

company Kitchen Compared. We then worked out how it a standard galley

kitchen would cost from B&Q at different times over 18 months. It

was quite an eye-opener. According to guidance set out by the

Department of Sisu Capital discounts should only be offered on the most

recent offers and yet we found B&Q offering discounts based on older

more expensive prices. Take this kitchen, throughout January it would

have cost �938 but then at the start of February B&Q introduced a 20% off

promotion. 20% off �938 as you would expect? No. 20% of �1080, a previous

higher price, potentially misleading according to these top consumer

lawyer. Under regulations and Government guidance, if you are not

using the previous selling price as your base price, then you have two

give clear indications of what price you are using. This is not going on

here and it could lead to a misleading action offence arising.

But B&Q alone in their confusing pricing practices? I am afraid not.

Our research is also worked out the costs of a standard eight unit daily

kitchen from Homebase's Milano range. But it was difficult because

although this was the base price, B&Q changed the sale price and

astonishing 20 times between December and June. It is an extreme

case of what is known as yo-yo pricing and that is a baffling

practice which need you little chance to decide when is the best

moment to buy. Yo-yo pricing is allowed provided the list price has

been in place for 28 consecutive days before an offer starts. But was

that the case here? No. The list price of the range had only been in

praise for 19 consecutive days. So all those 25 offers that Homebase

made on this range work potentially in breach of Government guidelines.

If you are a Homebase customer and fell for one of those offers too

getting annoyed. Wait until you hear this. One of those sales offered the

�4465 kitchen for just �2219, more than �2000. What a bargain. Until

you go all the pricing details again and you realise that just a week

before advertising that offer Homebase were selling the same

kitchen for only �1949, �271 cheaper than it was in the first so-called

sale. By using a list price that is very rarely the actual selling price

of the goods, this enables the firm to claim large price reductions when

in fact, if you look at a previous selling price, the price reductions

are minimal and in some instances, the price actually goes up. That is

during the sales promotion. Inflated prices, misleading sales, yo-yo

pricing. How can customers really decide the best time to buy?

B and Q have told us they take their price promise seriously. They say

they do change prices to ensure they are consistently offering customers

best value. They have apologised to Aaron and said they are committed to

being clear. They say it is not acceptable to them to have an

unsatisfied customer. Homebase said they work closely with Trading

Standards to make sure they stick to the law. They refute any suggestion

that the promotions are not legal. They dispute the way we have

calculated prices, saying they update prices frequently to ensure

the best deals in a complex and competitive trading environment. If

you would like to comment on that or any of tonight's stories, here is

that has left some sun lovers scratching.

Rogues from another series. Their faces on show for the whole nation

to see. When someone does make it onto our gallery, that is not always

the end of the story. Sometimes a Yes, being the presenter of the

country's leading motorcycle themed consumer show means I have had my

fair share of rogue run-ins over the years and when I pop up for a quick

how do you do, not all of them are best pleased. Here are a couple of

are you doing? But the question I get asked many

times is what happens to the rogues after we have named and shamed

them? There are those who think they can just carry on and that we, being

we end the authorities, are going to forget about it, but that is not the

case. View the music I recorded myself!

# Rogue traders, taking you back... Yes, back to 2009 and

Leicestershire, the stomping ground of rogue aerial repair man Keith

Matthews. He was trading at eight company called Arial Tech. Among his

many disgruntled customers was grand. Matthews took his money and

took off. We could not get BBC One, BBC Two or BBC Three. He said he

needed another part. He did not say he was going to depart? And never

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 74 seconds

Keith Matthews himself. But did he agree with the false diagnosis of a

broken TV and water-damaged Watch this next bit very carefully,

you won't believe what he does: didn't catch it?, no, maybe not.

didn't catch it?, no, maybe not. didn't catch it?, no, maybe not.

Let's take another look. There you go, he really did pour a can of

fizzy drink all over our carpet and socket of the. The cheeky devil, I

have seen things in this game but That wall socket and that cavity

Utter rubbish. Now the more observant of you will

have spotted that he still has a halfful can in his pocket. How does

he get rid of it. Can, meet confer. I mean who hasn't done that. With

the evidence safely disposed of, he's free to use a bit of quality

scaremongering. What we have got safety wise we have water near

electricity. You saw the water in there, we need to eliminate that.

That is by changing the aerial completely. A new aerial. You will

have to do it. This has been a total 100% scam by use of fear on

an old person, it is despicable. The upshot of this despicable scam,

Matthew sold us a replacement TV and brand-new aerial, neither of

which we needed. He charged us for roof repairs that he never carried

out. Total damage. �645.I make out to be �600 more than the job was

worth. I caught up with Matthew shortly afterwards. Wow, I'm

actually inside the TV. Broadcasting live from the shed,

armed with a can of Keith's Hello Keith, Matt BBC rogue traders.

Come on guys. Hello Keith how are you doing, BBC rogue traders?

Matt Allwright, BBC rogue traders. How can you take �645 off an old

lady for a job that didn't need doing. A job that should have cost

�40 quid, a TV secondhand at best was about �50. Out of my way.

Secondhand, �50 TV, a �50TV. out of my way. How can you do that,

the economy the way it is, how can you do that in full conscience,

knowing what you know? Seems like it gave him wings! It's rogue

traders taking you back. But the story doesn't end there. Look! So

how did Keith Matthews go from running away from me to running

away from the police. I think it is time I went to Leicester.

Well it was a long journey, but it was worth it. Because when I got

there I found out how the authorities used our investigation

as the starting point for their's, and employed a few tactics with

which you may be familiar. Find out what they were a bit later.

I have got two questions Annie that only you can answer. Right. Two

parcels, which is the bigger one? That one. OK so which one would be

cheaper to post? That one?Mmmm, you would have thought it would be

this one. You got one right. According to that. According to

Royal Mail, believe it or not. This is the bigger parcel and this one

would be the cheaper to post. Why? Earlier this year Royal Mail

changed their guidelines for parcel sizes, by their rules this one here

is the medium one costing �8.90 to send first class if it weighs up to

two kilograms. This one is classed as small, if you want to send it

first class containing the same weight it will cost �6.85, more

than �2 less. No idea how they work that out. According to Royal Mail

it is about the length of the sides of the parcels. It maintains this

is the medium because all four sides measure more than 8cms. Where

as this one can still be classified as small because one of its sides

is under 8cms. It doesn't matter that it is still bigger than the

other one. Not only bigger but significantly bigger, as our maths

boffin with tell you. This is what Royal Mail would call

a small box, 45cms, by 35cms by 8cms. So its volume, 12,600 cubic

centimeters, this is what Royal Mail would call a medium box, 17cms

by 9cms by 9cms. But its volume, 1377 cubic centimeters. If you do

the arithmetic, 12,600 divided by 1,377, it is a little bit bigger

than 9. Provided the weight limits are OK, the small box will contain

over nine-times as much material as this medium box. That's completely

nuts. That is one way of putting it, wait until you see the next example

of confusing Royal Mail rules. It is coming up with a whole set of

guidelines for posting tubes. The result, it classes this flat-sided

parcel as large and this tube down by my feet as medium. But look, I

can fit the large into the medium. Do some rabbits come out? If you

wanted to as well. What does our maths genius say about that. Let's

ask him. Provided we can fit this cross section inside the circle we

could insert this large parcel inside this medium tube. Let's

suppose this is a square, so we draw it in here and then we use

pieing that rus to say that if that is - pythagerous's theorem to say

if this is 20cms and this is over 14cms, provided this large parcel

is no bigger than 62x14x14, although it is a large parcel it

fits inside a medium tube, so can be sent as a medium parcel.

Fabulous, to be going to the Post Office we have to use pythagerous's

theorem to send a parcel. We have a fabulous response from the Post

Office who say they have been brought into line with European

directives. They have to take in to account size which has a bearing on

collection and delivery costs. They say when looking at the sizes they

looked at customers and delivery items. That items classed as small

fitted into the trolleys carrying on foot while bigger parcels needed

a van delivery. I still don't know how a small parcel can cost more

than a big one. Banks, we trust them to look after

our money, but a report now on how easy that money is to go missing,

and how hard it is to get it back. Life moves fast, but however much

we hurry it is hard to keep up with technological change. Take banking,

a transaction that used to take hours or even days can now be

completed in seconds. Just key in a few numbers and your money is on

the move. Personal banking they call it and

not only is it quick and convenient for us, it is a cheaper way for the

banks themselves to do business. But beware, make a mistake and you

are very much on your own. And making a mistake is all too

easy, as Amanda Miller discovered. She went on-line to transfer �533

from her Nationwide account to her builder's Barclays account, six

weeks later he called to say the money still hadn't arrived. That is

when I discovered the sort code was incorrect by two digits, the last

two digits were 00 when they should have been 42. I thought I will call

the bank and explain what happened and they will pull the money back

and then I will be able to pay the builder and of course it wasn't so

straight forward. The transfer system relies on two things, the

sort code and the account number. The sort code is the address of

your bank, the first two digits represent the bank firm, such as

Barclays, while the last four are the route to the actual branch.

Amanda got two of the last set of numbers wrong meaning the money was

sent to the different branch to that of her builder and to another

account holder. An easy problem for Barclays to resolve? Apparently not.

The bank repeatedly failed to respond to Amanda's letters asking

for help and it was only when Sheehy vently phoned head office

she was told they would look into it. But Barclays attempts to

contact the customer who had the money all failed. But they agreed

to pass on a letter from Amanda asking for the money back.

received no reply and no reply to the second attempt to write to that

customer appealing to them as an ordinary person, as a genuine human

being to have my money returned to me. I have never heard anything

from the customer or Barclays since. I have never had my money back.

under current regulations that's where Barclays responsibility ends.

They simply have to be seen to have done their best to retrieve the

money so people like Amanda are left on their own. Why couldn't

Barclays simply retrieve the money themselves? Answer, the law doesn't

allow them to. Under current regulations banks have no legal

right to take money out of someone's account without their

permission. If someone's received your money by mistake and decides

to keep it, your only real option is to go to the police. If you make

a simple mistake when transfering money and your cash ends up in the

wrong account it is up to you to get it back. Think you will never

make such a mistake, think again. Because we're humans and not

computers it really does happen quite a lot. Where as computer can

be very consistent and always do the same thing over and again, as a

human if we are likely to do things over again we are likely to make an

error. Why do we make more mistakes with numbers rather than words?

With letters you know the letter Q has to be followed by U, with

numbers there is no rules, any digit can go after another one,

there are infinite numbers of numbers. We can be fatigued,

distracted and if we rush we will more likely to make an error.

entire system is based on a system vulnerable to human error. Errors

banks can make just as easily as their customers. Ask Ann Mitchell,

she wanted to move the funds from her ISA, between Santander and Bank

of Scotland. The two banks agreed to process the transaction for her.

But during that process her money disappeared. All �5,398 of it. Why?

Because someone at Santander typed in the wrong number. I phoned

Santander, the person there, when I explained everything that had

happened, he said it could be that someone has hit a wrong number. It

has gone to a wrong account. And I will put a trace on it to see where

the funds have gone. But the trace and Santander's customer service

proved to be useless. Every time I phoned I was put on to different

people. Nobody got back. Even when I did get a name sometimes I phoned

and asked for that person and they weren't available. Or if I did

speak to them they were still looking into the matter. After

eight months Santander still had no idea where Ann's money had gone and

finally refunded her, offering �305 compensation for the inconvenience.

But it did little for her faith in the system. I just thought it was

appalling. You know that Left Bank of time, if it has happened to me,

goodness knows, if it has happened to anybody else.

It doesn't give you confidence really. What's the answer, a are

banks too reliant on numbers, could the system be changed to

incorporate names and letters in account numbers. Such a change

would cost. But the banks could easily and cheaply make it clearer

to customers the need to get it right. Being a bit more sympathetic

when things go wrong would be welcome too. Whether the mistake

has been made by the customer or the bank itself.

We have since spoke to Barclays about Amanda's case, they said she

made three requests to transfer fufrpbds to them but an incorrect

sort code was given in each case. They wrote a letter to the person

given the funds but they were unresponsive. Santander say they

are sorry about the handling of Ann Mitchell's transaction, they played

an error and should have reimbursed her immediately and found out what

happened, they agreed �300 compensation and gave her back the

funds plus interest. Piz Buin, a suncream brand owned by

Johnson & Johnson. It promised six hours protection. But you may need

protection from the lotion itself. The exodus is about to start,

millions of us will head for the sun and the beaches. Warnings about

skin damage have made us more cautious about sitting in the

baking heat for hours on end, as well as choosey about the

protection we use. Especially if like me your skin is sensitive and

you tend to go red rather than brown. For us, having faith in a

brand is particularly important. But we have been receiving some

worrying reports from people who have used a product from one of the

best known brands on the market. According to them Piz Buin's one-

day long suncream gave them serious skin problems. Ginine used it for

the first time in 2011, the result an allergic reaction that took two

months to calm down. It was a hot day, obviously I put the suncream

on. I went to bed that night and woke up covered in a rash.

Basically it was like really bad sunburn, so, so hot and itchy, it

was like spiders crawling over you constantly. It was just bright red.

Tiny lumps, nearly like fluid- filled lumps. Really horrible to

look at. You can see that it is actually like boils, it is burning.

It is like flueld-filled. Jeanine's doctor was unable to diagnose the

cause of the rash and prescribeed a steroid cream. As no connection was

made with the lotion she went on to use it again. I put it on my arms

and chest, went to bed that night and woke up once again with a rash.

But this time it was only on my arms and chest, I knew immediately

it was the suncream. The rash was just agony, it was. At night I had

to put ice packs on my skin and I had a fan constantly going as well.

Just to keep cool. Her rash was so severe she had to have time off

work to recover. Meanwhile others claim to have had similar reactions.

Blotches, rashes and blisters, that all formed after applying Piz

Buin's one-day long cream. But this is made by one of the country's

biggest manufacturers of suncream. And this bottle cost us �9.99.

Could it really be the problem? I came to you with a reaction like

this and told you that I just applied a new lotion, what would

you diagnose? I would be suspicious of an allergic contact determine

tight tis with the clear history of exposure and -- determine Titus,

and a clear history and reaction of that. It is when our skin comes

into contact with an allergen. kind of things cause reactions like

this? When you think of the number of things we apply to our skin and

think of all the different things in those creams, be those

moisturisers or preservatives, any of those can actually cause an

allergic reaction. So if these problems are being caused by this

Piz Buin product, it must be because of one or more of the

ingredients listed here on the side of the packet. But which ones,

after a series of clinical tests, one team of researchers think they

may have identified a cause. We saw a series of patients who developed

quite widespread allergic reactions, red, itchy rashes, over the exposed

areas where they had used sunscreens and obviously normally

when they were away on holiday. And we found that it was caused by a

particular chemical with a rather long time called C30-

38olefin/IsopropelM8. Over the last few years we published a series of

reports over contact of this chemical and said urgent

investigation should be taken to investigate the safety of this

chemical. Other sun screams use this chemical, and the parent

company put it in other products as well. Although the results were

published more than two years ago they don't apeefr to have taken any

action. Despite the reports of extreme reactions, the product's

formula is the same since 2010. Since then another ingredient, MI,

has also been identified as a possible cause of the reactions.

many people are now allergic to MI in Europe that action now, today,

is required to reduce the burden of that allergy to this particular

preservative is causing. MI is widely used in the cosmetics

industry, it is easy to see why experts are calling for its use to

be reassessed. One in ten of the patients he tests are alrpblgic to

it. When they display reactions as extreme this, shouldn't the

manufacturers take such calls seriously? Johnson & Johnson say

the lotion is safe and effective, containing only permitted

ingredients according to legal requirements. They say the majority

of people using it are satisfied with their experience. But they

have received a small number of complaints about skin irritation

and rashes. They say this equates to 0.1 of sales. But they

sympathise with those experiencing skin reactions and say customers

with complaints should contact the company directly, and all

complaints will be followed up and investigated. Just to clarify

something about the film on DIY stores, the Milano range of

kitchens is sold by HomeBase not B & Q as we wrongly said in one line

of the film. Good to yourself but not so good

for your waistline, the healthy chicken from Sainsbury's with the

more calories than normal versions. We have given awe potted reminder

of how we exposed Keith Matthews the TV repair man who invented jobs

and ripped off the elderly. So far, so rogue traders. But despite being

named and shamed on national TV Matthews continued to operate in

the way he always had. And as career moves go, that turned out to

be a pretty bad one. Guess where these pigeons are from?

Leicester, that's right, birth place of David Attenborough, Gary

Lineker and David Ike, none of whom who could be described as rogueish.

Unlike Keith Matthews, when he fled our stoodge house we hoped he

learned his lesson. But the complaints about him have just kept

coming, not just to us but also the authorities.

Faceded with a growing list of accusations, the people at

Leicestershire Trading Standards realised they would have to take

action and fast. But if they were going to prosecute they would need

to catch Keith Matthews in the act like we did back in 2009. Did they

do it. I'm going to stride purposefully in this building and

meet someone who will tell me. That someone is this lady, Caroline

North, senior Trading Standards officer at Leicestershire council.

What happened as a consequence of your programme was Keith carried on

trading but he was using a range of company names and was harder to

track down. Where we were getting complaints we couldn't prove for

certain it was Keith Matthews behind the job. We knew it, we just

couldn't prove it. The best way to get the proof is secret cameras.

knew there was only one way to catch him and that was to catch him

in the act in a property we set up ourselves. Here is the result. They

hired an actress who called Matthews out to fix an aerial with

a simple fault, here he is. What's interesting is he has the

glasses on, all the time he's keeping his back to her. Keith

really doesn't want to be seen. you think he was conscious of being

the man off the tele? Possibly. -- telly. Possibly, he was using false

addresses and false names, and going into the property minimally.

I think that had an impact. Keith was evasive until it came to the

cash. He charged Trading Standards �115 for entirely unnecessary work.

Whilst this would be bad news for usual customer, it was great news

for Caroline t gave her enough evidence for a search warrant on

his property. We did manage to recover from under the fridge his

bank books, through that we were able to then trace further victims

of his crimes. One of those victims was Glenn Spinks 89-year-old father.

My father paid Keith Matthews around about �5,000, around about

20 cheques in a seven-week period from July 2011. The cheques were

mainly for a digital aerial, a TV, some apparent work on the roof that

didn't get done and some odd jobs around the house. That is nearly

�5,000 for work Trading Standards confirmed was shoddy and worth just

�490. I feel conned myself, I feel very angry about what's happened,

the fact that he's been doing it for a number of years and continues

to do it, or has continued to do. The fact that he preys on elderly

people and vulnerable people is pretty despicable. Trading

Standards investigations also revealed that Keith Matthews was

passing himself off as a reputable local aerial installer called Barry

Bainbridge. I had a call from a company saying they had come across

a receipt with my name on it, when they looked into it, it was Keith

Matthews who had done the job. was usinging Barry's details on his

fake invoices. When I realised he was using my name on the paperwork,

my heart sank. Bad recommendations gets about. It seems to go very

fast. I could have lost the business, lost the house. Did you

get a sense of the scale of what he was doing in Leicestershire?

think so. I think we have been able to show quite a few victims that

have been paying out for work for him. I'm sure there is more out

there, and I'm sure there is a lot we don't know about b but I am tern

there will be more victims inless - - I am certain there will be more

victims who have paid money they didn't have to. Trading Standards

launched a case against Keith Matthews and he was guilty of 20

offences, he's due to be sentenced on Friday.

But the story doesn't end there, because Keith Matthews failed to

attend his own trial, he jumped bail and apparently his clothes and

his passport have now gone. So he could be anywhere? Message for you

Keith, if you are out there, stop it! It is getting really dull! But

life is about to become much more interesting for another rogue

revisited. The man who made me wet and smelly makes his return to your

telly in about ten minutes. Can't wait. Next council parking fines,

in May we reported how one driver had his fine quashed by an

independent adjudicator, after he received a ticket for parking on

this street in Aylesbury. The reason? Inadequate signing.

Buckinghamshire County Council, which initially rejected his appeal,

later admitted a sign was missing and would be soon replaced. While

it remained missing the council was still ticketing drivers for parking

in the same place. As we found out when one of our researchers left

her car there. It took 11 minutes to get a ticket. We assumed in the

light of the independent adjudication the council wouldn't

pursue her for payment. But it did. It later demanded �70 then rejected

her appeal. Last week when we told the council she was working for us,

it still insisted it was in the right. How can it be, the

independent adjudicator said the road was inadequately signed?

did and it still is. But the council says his ruling has no

bearing on subsequent cases and adds that regardless of the missing

sign, we were fined for parking on double yellow lines. Those ones,

right there. Those ones that are so faded you can hardly see them?

that's right. But Buckinghamshire County Council says the law doesn't

require lines to be in perfect condition all the time and it can't

be expected to repaint them at regular intervals. Unbelievable.

You may think that, you may think that, but does a lawyer think that.

The faded nature of yellow lines would be one I would recommend

appealing. The local authority have got a questionable case because the

lines are not clear. What is surprising is, it is not surprising,

they haven't gone back after hearing the criticism of the appeal

adjudicator, and done anything to improve the signage, to improve the

double yellow lines. It does looks a though the other side of the road

has recently been painted, where is the sense in not ensuring faded

lines are improved. It doesn't make sense to me. Transport for