:00:08. > :00:13.Audi, lying about safety standards. Sports Direct with discounts you
:00:14. > :00:18.shouldn't believe. Sky Broadband punishing you for not having their
:00:19. > :00:21.products. Plus, the B paint that left this woman allergic to her own
:00:22. > :00:43.sitting-room. We are back, it's Watchdog.
:00:44. > :00:51.Good evening and welcome to Watchdog. We are live for the next
:00:52. > :00:56.60 minutes. Tonight... Audi. They say they push the boundaries of
:00:57. > :01:01.safety, but these models, are they tested to the highest standard? No,
:01:02. > :01:08.they are not. I find that absolutely incredible, that a company of the
:01:09. > :01:16.reputation of Audi and their parent group can allow their product to be
:01:17. > :01:21.misrepresented so badly in that way. Also, Sports Direct. Are its
:01:22. > :01:25.fantastic discounts as good as they seem? And new Sky Broadband
:01:26. > :01:31.customers being charged for services they don't receive. And the B,
:01:32. > :01:36.Homebase and Crown paints causing a chemical that is causing severe skin
:01:37. > :01:39.reactions. Imagine returning from holiday to find that the company you
:01:40. > :01:43.pay to look after your car had lost it. Yes, you would be livid, but
:01:44. > :01:50.that's the kind of service you could receive from tonight's rogues. Gold
:01:51. > :01:55.Parking Ltd. When we gave them our car, they promised it would be in a
:01:56. > :01:58.secure compound. So why did it end up here on an industrial estate in
:01:59. > :02:02.Crawley? And how come I was able to sneak up to with in the middle of
:02:03. > :02:07.the night and remove the wheel trims without anyone noticing? Trying to
:02:08. > :02:12.stay like Al Pacino in the Godfather. When he just walks out of
:02:13. > :02:16.the restaurant. Walk with me whilst we experienced the least secure
:02:17. > :02:20.secure car parking firm you will ever see. Wright Audi, famous for
:02:21. > :02:24.those German ads and the promise that they are always looking for new
:02:25. > :02:29.ways to protect you and your passengers. Which is why more than 1
:02:30. > :02:33.million motorists in the UK alone, including me, have an Audi. So if
:02:34. > :02:38.they take safety so seriously, why have some of the most expensive
:02:39. > :02:44.Audis had the least stringent testing? Vorsprung durch Technik,
:02:45. > :02:49.say the ads. Progress through technology. And Audi say they pride
:02:50. > :02:52.themselves on using that technology to ensure the people travelling in
:02:53. > :02:57.their cars are in safe hands. Their safety record is one of the things
:02:58. > :03:02.that attracted Daniel Jenkins to the brand. Interested in buying an Audi
:03:03. > :03:05.R8 for his spot -- his sports car rental business, his local dealer
:03:06. > :03:12.assured him it was safety tested to the highest standards. One of the
:03:13. > :03:18.main reasons for me buying the Audi R8 over its competitors was the fact
:03:19. > :03:23.Audi advised to me it had a Euro NCAP rating of five stars. Wright
:03:24. > :03:28.the Euro NCAP is the gold standard of motor safety testing, the most
:03:29. > :03:32.stringent test industry. If your car has passed it, you know it is
:03:33. > :03:37.considered as safe as can possibly be. Whilst all cars on the road do
:03:38. > :03:41.have to go through mandatory EU testing, these requirements are much
:03:42. > :03:46.lower than the voluntary Euro NCAP tests. Popular models are either
:03:47. > :03:49.automatically selected for testing by the organisation themselves, or
:03:50. > :03:54.alternatively manufacturers can pay to have individual models put
:03:55. > :03:59.through their paces. Save in the knowledge his new R8 had passed the
:04:00. > :04:03.test, Daniel didn't give it another moment's thought. Until it became
:04:04. > :04:06.clear his Audi dealer had lied to him. A few months after the
:04:07. > :04:11.purchase, Daniel's father was driving the car when he crashed. And
:04:12. > :04:15.although all the on-board safety features did their job, it prompted
:04:16. > :04:20.Daniel to research the kind of testing Euro NCAP had put the R8
:04:21. > :04:24.through. I visited their website I became aware that the Audi R8 had
:04:25. > :04:28.never been put to any programme with Euro NCAP. To find out that it
:04:29. > :04:32.wasn't after being advised it had been, I was extremely upset and
:04:33. > :04:36.disappointed. To find out if this was a one-off mistake from a
:04:37. > :04:39.misinformed salesman, Daniel called 50 other Audi dealerships to find
:04:40. > :04:43.out if anyone else would make the same false claim about the safety
:04:44. > :04:49.testing of the R8. He couldn't believe what he heard. 48 of them
:04:50. > :04:53.told me directly that it had been put through the Euro NCAP programme,
:04:54. > :05:02.that it had been crushed tested and had a 5-star rating. -- crash
:05:03. > :05:06.tested. I was gobsmacked. But can this really be true? Can a major car
:05:07. > :05:08.manufacturer like Audi be systematically lying about the
:05:09. > :05:14.safety testing of some of their vehicles? Well, we've decided to
:05:15. > :05:22.find out for ourselves by visiting ten Audi showrooms around the
:05:23. > :05:27.country. Other Audi's 12 models, we know four haven't been tested. The
:05:28. > :05:33.R8, that Daniel owned, along with the 87, a eight and the A5. Posing
:05:34. > :05:40.as potential customers, we asked sales staff about the testing the A5
:05:41. > :05:42.had been put through. Can you tell me about the safety standards on
:05:43. > :06:06.them as well? In total, eight out of ten showroom
:06:07. > :06:10.staff lied to us, saying the A5 was Euro NCAP rated. Not only that, but
:06:11. > :06:16.six of those told us it had scored five stars, the best possible rating
:06:17. > :06:21.you can get. So what does Britain's biggest car safety charity make of
:06:22. > :06:26.our findings? I find that absolutely incredible, that a company of the
:06:27. > :06:30.reputation of Audi and their parent group, the Volkswagen group
:06:31. > :06:35.overall, can allow their product to be misrepresented so badly in that
:06:36. > :06:39.way. Nobody is saying the cars aren't safe, but if they haven't
:06:40. > :06:45.been tested, they haven't been tested. To say they have, it's
:06:46. > :06:46.outrageous. So what is going on? Perhaps we got the answer in this
:06:47. > :07:07.dealership. In other words, they can claim the
:07:08. > :07:13.A5 is Euro NCAP tested because an entirely different car, the A4, has
:07:14. > :07:18.passed the test. It doesn't hold water at all. The A4 is the A4, they
:07:19. > :07:22.can't use that safety rating for the A5, it's a different car. If they
:07:23. > :07:27.want to say the A5 has got safety stars, get it tested. This is
:07:28. > :07:32.normally the point where we would inform Audi that we've caught their
:07:33. > :07:36.salespeople lying to customers. But this is where the story gets even
:07:37. > :07:43.more shocking, because we have evidence that Audi have known about
:07:44. > :07:46.this for at least five months. After his own investigation, Daniel wrote
:07:47. > :07:50.to Audi head office with his findings. They wrote back
:07:51. > :07:55.acknowledging his accusation about Audi stuff lying and promised to
:07:56. > :08:00.investigate. So why are we still being lied to? Perhaps it is time to
:08:01. > :08:05.call head office ourselves. Surely they know the truth about which of
:08:06. > :08:15.their cars are endcap tested. -- Euro MCAT tested.
:08:16. > :08:25.Which, yet again, is a lie. Not from possibly misguided sales staff but
:08:26. > :08:29.from Audi head office themselves. A lie they repeated two out of three
:08:30. > :08:34.times we called. So now we are left with just one very simple question.
:08:35. > :08:42.Why are Audi lying about the safety testing of their cars?
:08:43. > :08:48.Let's find out first what Euro NCAP think about this. They had no idea.
:08:49. > :08:52.But they were concerned and keen to talk to us about it, so I jumped on
:08:53. > :08:56.the Eurostar to their HQ in Brussels to meet the man who manages their
:08:57. > :09:02.safety testing programme. This is what he had to say. And disappointed
:09:03. > :09:07.that the correct information is not being passed on to consumers. Most
:09:08. > :09:10.of the car companies we deal with have large marketing departments,
:09:11. > :09:14.these departments understand full well what the safety ratings mean.
:09:15. > :09:18.It's disappointing to find out that that information is not being
:09:19. > :09:24.filtered down to the point where it matters most, where people are
:09:25. > :09:29.selling cars to customers. Does having an Euro NCAP rating helps
:09:30. > :09:33.sell more cars? Guess. There's a lot of evidence that shows that one
:09:34. > :09:37.difference in star rating makes a big difference in sales. What will
:09:38. > :09:42.you be doing to prevent algae from misusing your ratings in future?
:09:43. > :09:46.There's very little we can do. We're not a regulatory body, we have no
:09:47. > :09:50.legislative powers. We can't force Audi to do anything. What we can do
:09:51. > :09:55.is speak to them at a high level and try to encourage them to make sure
:09:56. > :10:00.that dealers are better informed and trained. So Euro NCAP are powerless
:10:01. > :10:06.to stop manufacturers like Audi claiming their cars have passed
:10:07. > :10:11.tests they haven't taken. Audi UK say there was no deliberate intent
:10:12. > :10:14.to mislead customers, but they accept watchdog has uncovered a
:10:15. > :10:18.shortfall in their communication procedures on safety testing. They
:10:19. > :10:23.admit they didn't fully investigate Daniel Jenkins' complaint and
:10:24. > :10:26.apologise unreservedly. Audi say all their cars exceed international
:10:27. > :10:32.safety standards and point out six of their models do have 5-star
:10:33. > :10:36.ratings from Euro NCAP. But four don't. You'll a-macro exactly. They
:10:37. > :10:40.add, they see no problems with the safety features of Daniel's R8, but
:10:41. > :10:45.have begun a review to ensure the future accuracy of information they
:10:46. > :10:53.provide to customers. Audi invite anyone concerned to call their
:10:54. > :10:57.customer services from 8am tomorrow. OK, if you want to comment on that
:10:58. > :11:09.or have a story for us, here is how to get in touch.
:11:10. > :11:14.If you want to see a longer version of that interview with Doctor Aled
:11:15. > :11:20.Williams from Euro end cap, it's available our website.
:11:21. > :11:30.This woman was rushed to hospital after decorating her sitting room.
:11:31. > :11:34.The cause? The B paint. On Rogue Traders we are all big
:11:35. > :11:38.music fans. Don't make a mistake, though, our main focus is on rights
:11:39. > :11:42.and wrongs and showing you who done it. But if we are given the
:11:43. > :11:48.opportunity to stick some song lyrics into our show, we jumped at
:11:49. > :11:52.the chance. It's Van Halen. It could be the point assist is. Imagine the
:11:53. > :11:54.buzz in the office when we were presented with a company called...
:11:55. > :12:31.You will work it out. But your car is not indestructible.
:12:32. > :12:35.It can be mistreated, parked in odd places. And to cut a long story
:12:36. > :12:40.short, that is exactly what's happening and worse to some cars
:12:41. > :12:45.left here by holiday-makers, with an airport parking company.
:12:46. > :12:55.# So true... Gold Parking Ltd of Crawley say they
:12:56. > :12:58.run the most secure meet and greet parking company at Gatwick. They
:12:59. > :13:02.promise a chauffeur will meet you at the airport and drive your car
:13:03. > :13:06.directly to their compound. The director of the company is this man,
:13:07. > :13:12.Shaban Malik, this is his brother. Impressed with their website, Brenda
:13:13. > :13:17.Jean Jones and her husband, David, used them to look after her Audi
:13:18. > :13:22.whilst they were away on honeymoon in Cuba. It said that the car would
:13:23. > :13:27.only be driven a few minutes from Gatwick Airport and parked securely
:13:28. > :13:30.in their compound. But when their car was returned they discovered
:13:31. > :13:36.that their performance was less than sparkling. It was pretty dirty,
:13:37. > :13:40.there was a rip in the tyre, David just wanted to get in the car and
:13:41. > :13:46.drive home. But after awhile he said, look, there are 1500 miles on
:13:47. > :13:50.the clock. They've done over 1000 miles, Brenda. So it had been driven
:13:51. > :13:58.a substantial number of miles while you were on holiday. Guess. Anything
:13:59. > :14:03.else? One morning we had a parking fine come through the post. It said
:14:04. > :14:11.the vehicle was parked near a row residents block without a permit.
:14:12. > :14:14.Within two weeks of the first parking fine we had the next one. So
:14:15. > :14:17.the car clearly hadn't been parked in the secure compound promised.
:14:18. > :14:21.Brenda made several complaints but Gold Parking ignored them all.
:14:22. > :14:29.Damage, parking tickets and hundreds of miles on the clock. What on earth
:14:30. > :14:33.would Tony Hadley say? It is totally unacceptable. When you leave your
:14:34. > :14:36.car with a parking company, you expected to be returned in exactly
:14:37. > :14:41.the same condition you took it there. Plus delivery mileage, of
:14:42. > :14:46.course. These people have taken liberties with the vehicle and its
:14:47. > :14:53.owner. The Cuban vacation has aroused my indignation. Thank you,
:14:54. > :15:00.Tony. But there are worse fates that can befall your vehicle. Dipesh left
:15:01. > :15:05.his Mercedes with Gold Parking whilst it was in the Caribbean with
:15:06. > :15:08.his wife. Though they returned from their holiday, their car didn't
:15:09. > :15:12.return from its stay with Gold Parking. They took us back to their
:15:13. > :15:17.premises and said they thought one of their members of staff had stolen
:15:18. > :15:20.the vehicle. We said, how could you let this happen? What you would hope
:15:21. > :15:24.would happen next is they tell you how they are going to reimburse you
:15:25. > :15:29.or replace the car in some way with their insurance. When we looked at
:15:30. > :15:42.their insurance details, in there it says that theft is not covered. We
:15:43. > :15:44.were shocked. Punctures, chips to the windscreen, damage to the wheels
:15:45. > :15:46.and interior, theft of personal property. They refused to take
:15:47. > :15:48.responsibility for all manner of things that could happen to your car
:15:49. > :15:51.whilst it's in their care. Meaning that when police couldn't find the
:15:52. > :15:56.Mercedes or the alleged thief, he had to use his own insurance to
:15:57. > :16:00.replace it. Something is going on. We need to find out. And that means
:16:01. > :16:09.park ago car, but it has to be a car be fitting someone of my stature. A
:16:10. > :16:17.heritage brand with phenomenal build quality like a Mercedes. A CLA. We
:16:18. > :16:23.are going to need a high roller to drive this motor and that's why one
:16:24. > :16:30.of our researchers dug out his dad's shirt and done his hair differently.
:16:31. > :16:40.Grant pays ?80 and heads to Gatwick but this is no berk with a Merc, he
:16:41. > :16:47.comes rigged with secret cameras. Hi. Are you here for Gold? Yes. This
:16:48. > :16:57.is the Director of Gold who goes on to give our car a quick once over.
:16:58. > :17:03.She is brand-new. So look after her. LAUGHTER
:17:04. > :17:08.Going anywhere nice? We are off to Jamaica. There is nothing to sign.
:17:09. > :17:12.No paperwork at all. That's all done. Awesome. Shall I leave the
:17:13. > :17:19.keys with you? Yes. We are expecting our vehicle to end up in a secure
:17:20. > :17:26.compound monitored 24/7. Make sure it is a secure car park. It is all
:17:27. > :17:33.parked securely and that? Yes. Fantastic. Thanks then.
:17:34. > :17:45.Well, I found that utterly convincing, I'm reassured. Anyway,
:17:46. > :17:50.our man is off to Jafakia! So why where is his real car? Well, we have
:17:51. > :17:55.hidden a tracker inside. As soon as it leaves us, the car heads towards
:17:56. > :18:01.Crawley which is the location of the secure compound, where it goes, we
:18:02. > :18:15.shall follow! But what will our man do with our
:18:16. > :18:20.Merc while we are away on our fick tis holiday.
:18:21. > :18:24.In March a report by Ofgem concluded that rising profits and consistent
:18:25. > :18:30.increases in energy bills from the big six providers had damaged public
:18:31. > :18:34.trust. You can say that again. As a result, Ofgem passed the buck and
:18:35. > :18:38.has called for a new organisation, the competition and markets
:18:39. > :18:42.authority to investigate. Remember, Ofgem have supposedly been
:18:43. > :18:47.regulating the industry for the last 15 years. Anyway, this latest report
:18:48. > :18:52.could take up to 18 months, what happens to your energy bills between
:18:53. > :18:56.now and then, we do not know. We've asked Ofgem to come on Watchdog to
:18:57. > :19:01.explain. It is considering our offer. We'll let you know more when
:19:02. > :19:11.it is decided next week! Yes, a lot else happened since we
:19:12. > :19:17.saw you last. Here is more updates. In January, four months after we
:19:18. > :19:21.featured them, Cash4phones.co.uk filed for insolvency. The site
:19:22. > :19:25.offered money in exchange for old handsets, the price it paid out was
:19:26. > :19:29.far less than originally quoted online. Hundreds complained and when
:19:30. > :19:33.we tried it for ourselves, exactly the same thing happened. Blaming
:19:34. > :19:41.excessive wear and tear, Cash4phones dropped the price of our iPhone 4
:19:42. > :19:50.from ?105 to ?42 even though four experts clunded it was in excellent
:19:51. > :19:57.before we sent it. The Liquid daters told us that anyone owed money is
:19:58. > :20:02.likely to get it back. We will keep you posted.
:20:03. > :20:07.Roaming charges for using your phone whilst travelling in Europe are due
:20:08. > :20:12.to be scrapped next year. Our report highlighted the extreme prices
:20:13. > :20:17.consumers have to pay to use their mobiles abroad. One viewer wracked
:20:18. > :20:25.up a bill of ?2,000 after a three day trip to Ireland!
:20:26. > :20:30.European Parliament disagreed about the charges. Under reforms announced
:20:31. > :20:34.last month, the cost of making a call or downloading data will be the
:20:35. > :20:40.same in an EU country as it is at home. The ching is due to -- change
:20:41. > :20:45.is due to take effect from 2015, meaning I will be able to download
:20:46. > :20:51.the Greatest Hits of Spandau Ballet wherever I like!
:20:52. > :20:57.Success in our campaign to see MI removed from cosmetic products.
:20:58. > :20:59.We reported on the growing number of people suffering severe allergic
:21:00. > :21:06.reactions to a variety of wipes. Creams and lotions. Following our
:21:07. > :21:10.invesitgations Johnson and Johnson, Vaseline, Nivea and all these others
:21:11. > :21:13.pledged to remove the MI from what they call their leave on skin
:21:14. > :21:17.products. But others like L'Oreal and Dove said they would keep using
:21:18. > :21:25.the preservative for as long as it was legal to do so. Now Cosmetic
:21:26. > :21:33.Europe said the use of MI should stop.
:21:34. > :21:47.This preservative MI isn't just in cosmetics. There is another industry
:21:48. > :21:52.using it. I have come to meet Karen Johnson, though she looks healthy
:21:53. > :21:57.today, this is what she looked like last August. She had no idea of the
:21:58. > :22:04.cause. I woke up one morning with a rash on the lower part of my face
:22:05. > :22:09.and upper part of my chest. Which progressively got worse over a
:22:10. > :22:14.period of ten days. I couldn't breathe one night. My lips were
:22:15. > :22:19.swollen. My eyes could barely open so much so that my daughters phoned
:22:20. > :22:23.an ambulance and I ended up in A That must have been really scary? It
:22:24. > :22:29.was scary because you don't realise what's going on and you don't
:22:30. > :22:32.understand why. I couldn't think of what was happening to me.
:22:33. > :22:37.Though Karen was allowed to return home later that night, her symptoms
:22:38. > :22:44.persisted. Her dermatologist carried out a series of tests and concluded
:22:45. > :22:49.she had experience add severe allergic reaction to MI, but unlike
:22:50. > :22:53.other cases we've seen before, this time, her reaction wasn't triggered
:22:54. > :22:58.by cosmetics. The only thing I did any different
:22:59. > :23:03.was I was painting my front room and the symptoms started about two days
:23:04. > :23:08.after I started painting. Her dermatologist suspected that the
:23:09. > :23:15.MI might be included in the paint she was using Matt emulsion from B
:23:16. > :23:18.and G's Value Range. When Karen e-mailed B to check, they
:23:19. > :23:23.confirmed MI is an ingredient of that range of paint. Just like in
:23:24. > :23:26.cosmetics, it is used as a preservative to stop the product
:23:27. > :23:29.going off. And that meant Karen wasn't just
:23:30. > :23:34.reacting whilst she was painting, she continued to do so even after
:23:35. > :23:39.she had finished decorating, as the paint dried.
:23:40. > :23:45.I was quite upset because you go and you buy something that you think is
:23:46. > :23:50.an emulsion paint. All I wanted to do was freshen up a room and I've
:23:51. > :23:55.ended up suffering because of this nasty chemical.
:23:56. > :24:00.Now, she has been diagnosed as one of the rapidly increasing number of
:24:01. > :24:06.people with an MI allergy, it should be easy for Karen to aid void other
:24:07. > :24:11.paints to That contain it. She needs to check the tin, right? Wrong.
:24:12. > :24:16.These are the tins of paint which her dermatologist thinks triggered
:24:17. > :24:20.Karen's allergy and you will find no mention of MI or any other
:24:21. > :24:24.ingredients on the tIns. Why? Because whilst the law states that
:24:25. > :24:29.cosmetic products must declare all of their ingredients, there are no
:24:30. > :24:33.such rules in the paint industry. Only specific chemicals must be
:24:34. > :24:39.named and in the case of MI, that only applies when it is at levels of
:24:40. > :24:44.1,000 parts per million. According to Dr White it would never be used
:24:45. > :24:47.at that level in paint as a milder concentration would be effective as
:24:48. > :24:51.a sprervetive. -- preservative. He says smaller
:24:52. > :24:58.levels could cause an allergic reaction. The absence of labelling
:24:59. > :25:02.is detrimental to consumer safety and health protection because
:25:03. > :25:10.without full ingredients labelling, it is impossible for the sensitive
:25:11. > :25:15.individual to avoid expositionures. -- exposures. How widespread is the
:25:16. > :25:18.use of MI in household paint? To find out, Dr White and his
:25:19. > :25:26.colleagues picked paints at random from seven of the biggest selling
:25:27. > :25:32.ranges in Britain. Wicks, Homebase, Fired Earth, B, Crown, Laura
:25:33. > :25:38.Ashley and due lucks. -- Dulux. Each were sent to have
:25:39. > :25:42.their ingredients analysed at a university in Denmark. The results
:25:43. > :25:47.are in. For the first time we can reveal that at least half a dozen
:25:48. > :25:53.popular paint brands available up and down the UK do contain MI.
:25:54. > :25:57.Even though none of them make this clear on the packaging. All the
:25:58. > :26:03.samples that were tested contain levels of MI that Dr White says
:26:04. > :26:09.could cause problems. Apart from the four Dulux paints and one of Laura
:26:10. > :26:14.Ashley's two paints. There are variation in the concentrations
:26:15. > :26:22.available. Many of them contained MI at levels which are of concern and I
:26:23. > :26:26.would have the -- and would have the potential to be harmful to the
:26:27. > :26:31.individual who has allergy to MI. As many as one in ten people tested
:26:32. > :26:36.for MI are allergic. But could it simply be that paint manufacturers
:26:37. > :26:42.aren't aware of the potential risks? Well, seemingly not.
:26:43. > :26:46.We rang each of the companies posing as customers with an MI allergy and
:26:47. > :26:51.asked if it was safe to use the paints we've tested and every single
:26:52. > :26:56.one of them told us that we should avoid using their products. So if
:26:57. > :27:01.these companies know that their products contain MI, why on earth
:27:02. > :27:08.are they not putting it on the tin? There is no reason why the presence
:27:09. > :27:12.of MI in noncosmetic products including paints should not be
:27:13. > :27:18.identified on the ingredient label. It may not be required in European
:27:19. > :27:22.legislation, but that doesn't stop the individual industries, the
:27:23. > :27:28.individual companies from labelling their products. European law is due
:27:29. > :27:35.to change in 2015 and any paint with MI at more than 100 parts her
:27:36. > :27:39.million will have to name it, but Dr White says concentration levels
:27:40. > :27:42.below that could cause a reaction. So to really solve the problem, why
:27:43. > :27:47.don't the paint companies do the right thing and follow the lead of
:27:48. > :27:54.the cosmetics industry by stopping using MI altogether? There are
:27:55. > :27:58.perfectly acceptable alternatives to MI and a responsible industry should
:27:59. > :28:04.at this stage bearing in mind that so many people are now allergic to
:28:05. > :28:08.MI, start removing it completely from their products and moving on to
:28:09. > :28:12.something with a better safety profile.
:28:13. > :28:17.All the companies featured say they put the safety of customers first
:28:18. > :28:20.and will comply with current and future guidelines. Wicks told us
:28:21. > :28:28.they will be introducing clearer labelling Onazi their points as have
:28:29. > :28:37.-- on their paints as have Crown and Fired Earth and BA q says -- B
:28:38. > :28:43.were sorry and have introduced clearer labelling. It says since Mrs
:28:44. > :28:47.Johnston didn't know about her allergy labelling wouldn't have
:28:48. > :28:54.helped her. These trousers are on offer for up
:28:55. > :29:00.to 70% off the original price of ?29.99. That means they will cost
:29:01. > :29:08.you? Indeed. Are Sports Direct hoping you can't work it out?
:29:09. > :29:14.Tony Hadley from Spandau Ballet is fewer bus gold park -- furious Gold
:29:15. > :29:20.Parking has taken the name of one of his biggest hits and turned it into
:29:21. > :29:25.a company. Customers have seen their cars damaged and stolen whilst safe
:29:26. > :29:35.in their care. It is time to check out what they mean by the words
:29:36. > :29:39.parked in a secure compound. As soon as the tracker we've hidden inside
:29:40. > :29:43.tells us the car has been parked, we will head off to investigate. Of
:29:44. > :29:48.course, we may have to look at our vehicles through the chain link
:29:49. > :29:52.fence topped with razor wire, and we may face difficult and searching
:29:53. > :29:56.questions from the burly, shiny headed security guards to patrol the
:29:57. > :30:01.compound around the clock. But, then again, we might not because our
:30:02. > :30:04.Tracker reveals Gold Parking have left our car here, and a publicly
:30:05. > :30:11.accessible residential street in Crawley, near to the boss' house.
:30:12. > :30:19.It's hardly be secure car park we were promised. And this is where our
:30:20. > :30:25.car stays all week. My institution is telling me that there's something
:30:26. > :30:33.really badly wrong here. The word is instinct.
:30:34. > :30:40.After a week pretending to be in Jamaica, it's time for the
:30:41. > :30:46.researcher to get the car back. Remember, he said he was hoping to
:30:47. > :30:50.get some sun? Well, we are nothing if not thorough! Grant and his
:30:51. > :30:56.matching friend head back to Gatwick where they are met by Malik. He
:30:57. > :31:11.throws a bit of a curveball. Grant hasn't really been on holiday
:31:12. > :31:14.and has been using a fake name, so he hasn't got one. Think of a good
:31:15. > :31:29.excuse! I taught him everything he knows. It
:31:30. > :31:33.does the trick. Riz hands over the keys and then it's our turn to put
:31:34. > :31:50.him on the spot. Tell them your friend saw your car on the street.
:31:51. > :31:59.It's true. One car, one big bag of gold and lies. But let's just play
:32:00. > :32:03.devils advocate. Maybe this was a one-off because they're secure
:32:04. > :32:11.compound was full. To sure, we need to park another EHIC you'll marvel.
:32:12. > :32:16.This Ford Fiesta. We blew the budget on the Mercedes. Note the hubcaps,
:32:17. > :32:20.they are important. Gold tells new stooge, Mark, to drive to the South
:32:21. > :32:30.terminal where he is met by the operations manager, rinse. -- Riz.
:32:31. > :32:33.Again, there is no paperwork, which is surprisingly given how important
:32:34. > :32:42.he felt it was last time. But he does check to see what state the car
:32:43. > :32:50.is in before he drives it away. So where is this car going to end up?
:32:51. > :32:54.Now, you might hope that our little Ford Fiesta was securely parked, but
:32:55. > :33:00.we can see, because we are tracking it, that it's not. It's actually on
:33:01. > :33:06.a main road right now. And, of course, on a main road, anything
:33:07. > :33:14.could happen to it. Time for a spot of late-night mischief. We think the
:33:15. > :33:18.car is parked directly outside Gold Parking's office and, as the lights
:33:19. > :33:33.are on, we need to use super stealth tactics. Shall I go for it now? OK.
:33:34. > :33:49.First one... And then another of the hubcaps off. And we stroll off
:33:50. > :33:52.nonchalantly. Trying to stay like Al Pacino in the Godfather. You know
:33:53. > :34:03.when he just walks out of the restaurant. Not one but two wheel
:34:04. > :34:07.trims, not strictly speaking hubcaps, but the point is made. We
:34:08. > :34:11.could have done almost anything to those cars where they were parked by
:34:12. > :34:16.the main road. The question is, what will they do when our chap returns
:34:17. > :34:22.and finds that two out of his available four wheel trims are
:34:23. > :34:29.missing. Explanation time. Our man, Mark, is about to get the hump over
:34:30. > :34:41.his hubcaps. Malik is the one dropping the car off this time.
:34:42. > :35:07.I'm just wondering how it has happened.
:35:08. > :35:25.We know that's not true. Look at the other car, the whole thing was
:35:26. > :35:29.stolen. Mark is given a number to ring and complain. When he does,
:35:30. > :35:39.he's told that Gold Parking have checked the imaginary CCTV from
:35:40. > :35:43.their imaginary compound. That is alive. So the big question, what
:35:44. > :35:55.would Tony Hadley of Spandau Ballet... Tony has had to leave.
:35:56. > :36:02.But don't worry, there's no doubt he's probably on tour across the UK
:36:03. > :36:05.this summer. We need answers to this airport parking malarkey. Make sure
:36:06. > :36:11.you've reserved space, because we'll be taking off in about ten minutes.
:36:12. > :36:16.Let's give you an update on some of the e-mails and texts. We've had a
:36:17. > :36:20.huge response to our Audi story. Lots of people are checking if their
:36:21. > :36:27.car has been Euro NCAP tested. We know that because the website has
:36:28. > :36:30.crashed. So keep sending in your e-mails, texts and tweets, and
:36:31. > :36:37.hopefully we'll respond to all of them. We know a broadband customer
:36:38. > :36:46.who recently became a Sky Broadband customer. Listen up, will Riz is
:36:47. > :36:49.here to tell us what Sky is up to. Suppose you buy your lunch from a
:36:50. > :36:53.supermarket, you get a meal Deal discount if you buy a combination of
:36:54. > :36:59.a sand wedge, a drink and a bag of crisps. But now imagine you just buy
:37:00. > :37:04.the sum which and get charged extra for not taking the crisps and the
:37:05. > :37:10.drink. And that's what happened to these new Sky Broadband customers,
:37:11. > :37:15.because last year Sky brought the home phone and broadband business of
:37:16. > :37:19.O2 and a smaller company called BE Broadband, creating half a million
:37:20. > :37:22.new customers overnight. But when the first itemised bills from Sky
:37:23. > :37:27.arrived, some of these new customers noticed they were being charged for
:37:28. > :37:31.services which they didn't have. Exactly. This is Dave Parsons from
:37:32. > :37:36.Bromley in Kent. And this is the bill he received, with a host of
:37:37. > :37:42.extra charges for things he hadn't signed up for. As you can see, he's
:37:43. > :37:49.been charged supplements for not having Sky Talk or Sky TV. Sky are
:37:50. > :37:53.charging people for not subscribing to its subscription service. That's
:37:54. > :37:57.what it sounds like. We've heard from dozens more Sky Broadband
:37:58. > :38:01.customers, just some of whom you can see on your screen now. Sky's
:38:02. > :38:04.response, it says the vast majority of customers are still paying the
:38:05. > :38:09.same or less than they did with O2 Broadband or BE Broadband, and that
:38:10. > :38:12.anyone with Sky Broadband on its own without its subscription services is
:38:13. > :38:22.not being financially penalised. Instead, they are simply not getting
:38:23. > :38:25.the discounts they would if they had multiple product. That makes no
:38:26. > :38:27.sense to me. Why is it called a supplement on the bill, Sky won't
:38:28. > :38:30.say. But it has contacted Dave Parsons to explain how his bill is
:38:31. > :38:33.calculate it, and will be very happy to do the same for any other
:38:34. > :38:40.customers needing clarification, which could be quite a few. Please
:38:41. > :38:45.pester and annoy Sky's customer services department and let us know
:38:46. > :38:53.how you get on. Next, time for a bit of a kick about. With the World Cup
:38:54. > :39:00.just four weeks away, the whole world is going football crazy, which
:39:01. > :39:05.means it's likely to be boomtime for Sports Direct, the UK's largest
:39:06. > :39:11.sporting retailer, and its owner, Mike Ashley, Britain's 23rd richest
:39:12. > :39:20.person. But beware, some of their offers aren't necessarily what they
:39:21. > :39:25.seem. Whether its trainers, tennis rackets or tracksuit bottoms you are
:39:26. > :39:30.after, Sports Direct has them all. With around 400 branches nationwide,
:39:31. > :39:34.more people shop with them than any other sports store. And best of all,
:39:35. > :39:39.there are almost always special deals on offer with discounts
:39:40. > :39:44.galore. What's not to like? Quite a lot, as it happens, because as
:39:45. > :39:49.customer Kris Allen discovered, the discounts on offer don't always add
:39:50. > :39:53.up. On each and every item I noticed in the store, there were
:39:54. > :39:58.multicoloured banners which were bearing levels of discount. On
:39:59. > :40:03.closer examination, you could see there was a very small up to in the
:40:04. > :40:07.corner of each of the price tickets. I noticed on a quick calculation
:40:08. > :40:11.that the amounts of discount weren't adding up. Where it said 70% there
:40:12. > :40:17.was a much less discount on the item of just over 50%. Win over 40 years
:40:18. > :40:22.working as a trading standards officer, Chris never saw a sale
:40:23. > :40:27.promoting discounts in this way. The benefit to Sports Direct in this is
:40:28. > :40:36.they are using what, in my view, are misleading price indications to draw
:40:37. > :40:38.consumers into the shop. Saw just how widespread is this practice? We
:40:39. > :40:43.decided to investigate, starting with the Sports Direct website.
:40:44. > :40:49.Men's tracksuit bottoms, ?24.99. It says it's reduced up to 80%. But
:40:50. > :40:54.when you look at the price it is ?9.99. That's only a reduction of
:40:55. > :41:00.60%. And this, the children's tracksuit bottoms used to be
:41:01. > :41:07.?21.99, again reduced by up to 80%. But take a look at the price and its
:41:08. > :41:19.?17.99. That's a reduction of just 18%, not 80. Of over 1400 sale items
:41:20. > :41:20.we looked at online, more than half failed to meet the up to discount
:41:21. > :41:23.that Sports Direct advertised. So is it the same inside the stores? Our
:41:24. > :41:28.secret shoppers visited ten different stores around the UK and
:41:29. > :41:33.picked out ten different items offering up to 30%, 70% or 80% off.
:41:34. > :41:38.They then worked out how much money off you are actually getting. In our
:41:39. > :41:42.first store in England we found these trousers advertised as having
:41:43. > :41:47.up to 70% off. But it isn't hard to work out its really only a 50%
:41:48. > :41:52.discount. In Scotland, this ladies swimming costume is advertised as
:41:53. > :41:57.having up to 30% of, when actually you only get a reduction of just
:41:58. > :42:02.under 20. In Northern Ireland it was the same story. This foodie
:42:03. > :42:07.advertised as up to 70% off. The real discount was 57%. Of the 100
:42:08. > :42:13.items we picked up in ten different stores, hardly any met the up to
:42:14. > :42:17.discount offered. Surely this is misleading. Consumer marketing
:42:18. > :42:20.Professor Vince Mitchell agrees. The current legislation prohibits
:42:21. > :42:26.retailers from giving any misleading information. Price information needs
:42:27. > :42:32.to be valid and accurate. It would appear that these claims do breach
:42:33. > :42:35.those guidelines. So Sports Direct are potentially breaching
:42:36. > :42:38.regulations online and in shops all over the country. What are their
:42:39. > :42:42.staff saying about what they are doing? The recommended retailers
:42:43. > :43:39.?15.99, so it's nearly 30%. So are Sports Direct attempting to
:43:40. > :43:43.get away with something or is this just a series of mistakes with their
:43:44. > :43:48.calculations? Because there is one up to offer they don't get wrong
:43:49. > :43:53.very often. And that's when items are all sale at up to 50% off. Of
:43:54. > :43:59.the 100 such offers we checked, 80 of them met or exceeded half price.
:44:00. > :44:03.Yet only three out of 100 met or exceeded the claims on the other,
:44:04. > :44:09.less simple discounts. So why use one discount usually correct and the
:44:10. > :44:15.others not? It couldn't be because 50% off is the easiest discount for
:44:16. > :44:20.a customer to work out, could it? The fact that most 50% price
:44:21. > :44:24.discounts were accurate and most 30 and 70% price discounts were not
:44:25. > :44:29.accurate is suspicious. It suggests they are using consumers and their
:44:30. > :44:34.inability or unwillingness to make price calculation is to their own
:44:35. > :44:39.advantage. So what have we learned? These offers are confusing. Even the
:44:40. > :44:42.staff think so. They are misleading and potentially they are in breach
:44:43. > :44:49.of consumer regulations. For a company spelling -- selling sporting
:44:50. > :44:53.goods, that's not exactly what I'd call playing fair. Sports Direct
:44:54. > :44:56.says it takes any allegation of breaching consumer protection
:44:57. > :45:00.regulation very seriously. It claims, we didn't provide enough
:45:01. > :45:04.product information for them to investigate properly. And we only
:45:05. > :45:07.selected a tiny minority of the millions of products they discount.
:45:08. > :45:11.They add that up to reductions is a tried and tested way of alerting
:45:12. > :45:15.customers to the best discounts. However, it says it will use our
:45:16. > :45:21.investigation to continue to monitor promotions. Unless you are a top
:45:22. > :45:24.mathematician working out percentages, it can be a bit tricky.
:45:25. > :45:27.Getting your sums wrong whilst out shopping is no laughing matter. We
:45:28. > :45:29.can give you some tips to get your sums right. We have a stand-up
:45:30. > :45:40.mathematician. What's that? I work as a stand-up
:45:41. > :45:46.and as a mathematician. That adds up. Give us three tips on how to do
:45:47. > :45:52.our maths whilst out shopping. If you are faced with something like
:45:53. > :45:58.let's sa 13. .50 and you have got to find 10%, you don't have to do any
:45:59. > :46:03.calculations, it is the same numbers, move the decimal point over
:46:04. > :46:14.one spot. If it is 20%, you double that and get 2.# # .70. That's
:46:15. > :46:24.simple. Swap the price in percentage. This is when you are
:46:25. > :46:34.faced with, you want to get 16% off ?25. You can swap them. That's the
:46:35. > :46:38.same calculation as 25% of ?16. They both equal four. That's really
:46:39. > :46:44.clever. Close enough is good enough, is that a guess? It is when you need
:46:45. > :46:50.something quickly. Let's say you have got 33% of something like ?68.
:46:51. > :46:55.Yes. What you do is you round them both to the nearest ten and take a
:46:56. > :47:02.single digit and that will be 30 so we'll have a three and that will be
:47:03. > :47:09.# 0, 70 and three times seven and you get ?21 swi not bad. The exact
:47:10. > :47:14.is ?22.40. We're going to have our own Watchdog
:47:15. > :47:21.sale and we have got number one shopper there. Yes, that's me. Have
:47:22. > :47:26.you done a bit of shopping. A great bit of shopping. Have you ever been
:47:27. > :47:37.to a sale? I don't like sales. Has he got a degree? A maths degree. It
:47:38. > :47:42.is from Australia. It doesn't count. First up a Chris Hollins Strictly
:47:43. > :47:56.Come Dancing shirt. ?41 and we are going to have 30% off, what's the
:47:57. > :48:05.deduction? ?12.30. ?41 goings becomes 4. .10. Up next the Matt
:48:06. > :48:14.Allwright joke book. A tad dusty of the it is ?25 and 36% off. I would
:48:15. > :48:22.say about ?9. Well, let's use swap the price and percentage theory. It
:48:23. > :48:41.is ?25, 36%, let's take it ?36 and 25%. ?9. Spot on. ?9. Not too bad.
:48:42. > :48:51.Last, but not least, this Dior et. ?88, 22% off. ?18, ?19. It is good
:48:52. > :49:00.enough. I'm going to make 88 in into a nine. Nine times two around ?18.
:49:01. > :49:06.That's a good guess. It is ?19.36. My way is best. The old-fashioned
:49:07. > :49:12.way. Imagine my surprise, your way is always best! Matt, help!
:49:13. > :49:17.The meet certificate running out though for gold park limited of
:49:18. > :49:22.Crawley not to be confused with companies or hit songs which may
:49:23. > :49:25.have the same or similar names! They have lied about where they have
:49:26. > :49:30.left two of our cars, leaving them vulnerable to both theft and damage.
:49:31. > :49:34.We have had enough of this behaviour. It is time for the
:49:35. > :49:40.clampdown. Yes, I want to have a word with the
:49:41. > :49:43.head of Gold, but to get them out, we need to put another car in.
:49:44. > :49:47.However, this time, the guy who comes to pick it up is someone we
:49:48. > :49:52.have never seen before. He takes our cash and then drives off. Our
:49:53. > :49:57.tracker tells us he dumps it in a public car park just over eight
:49:58. > :50:03.miles from the airport. And five days later, that's where we go to
:50:04. > :50:13.put our plan into action. So, this is where this car ended up. It's
:50:14. > :50:17.next to a disused toilet. Next to a community centre somewhere in
:50:18. > :50:26.wildest Crawley. It's not secure. However, it is
:50:27. > :50:32.about to be. Because that's where these guys come in, nice clampers!
:50:33. > :50:41.We need to create a situation that will draw Riz and his brother out.
:50:42. > :50:46.We want to see what they do when our person returns from a holiday
:50:47. > :50:55.earlier than expected. Our girl in Gatwick makes the call. We are call
:50:56. > :50:59.it Operation Mini Haha. Is that Gold Parking? Ten minutes. OK. We lie in
:51:00. > :51:02.wait in the car park to see what will happen when they arrive and
:51:03. > :51:08.realise they can't move the car. A few minutes later, two went we don't
:51:09. > :51:11.recognise pull up. The driver spots the clamp and the notice we have
:51:12. > :51:16.left with a number to phone if they want it released. His friend in the
:51:17. > :51:19.passenger seat makes the call, but what he doesn't know is that the
:51:20. > :51:32.clamper he is about to speak to is me!
:51:33. > :51:41.Hello. Can you tell me the location? Can I ask your name, sir?
:51:42. > :51:45.Well, he has had a severe haircut. We'll get someone down there
:51:46. > :51:50.straightaway and there might abfee to pay. There will be a price to
:51:51. > :51:57.pay, certainly. We decide it is our time to make a
:51:58. > :52:02.move. Hello there, Shaban, how are you today?
:52:03. > :52:07.The man who called himself Shaban is having an identity crisis. Did you
:52:08. > :52:12.identify yourself as Shaban? Because that's what you said you were in the
:52:13. > :52:18.car and you are running Gold Parking, Gold Parking... If he is
:52:19. > :52:21.Shaban, he is not as chatty as he was on phone a moment ago. He hides
:52:22. > :52:25.his face and he is clearly desperate to get away from me and the cameras!
:52:26. > :52:30.You are a bit trapped in here at the moment, mate. You are a bit trapped
:52:31. > :52:44.i So you might need to let this lady back up a second. This is Gold
:52:45. > :52:49.Parking is how they drive their car. There we are. Gold Parking of
:52:50. > :52:54.Gatwick. Not keen to talk about how their so-called secure parking ends
:52:55. > :53:03.up being clamped outside a public toilet by a community centre! Well,
:53:04. > :53:09.that was eliminating, I don't know about you, but that left me wanting
:53:10. > :53:15.more, was that man Shaban. When the white car fails to turn up, I decide
:53:16. > :53:20.to ring the man calling himself Shaban back. This time, someone else
:53:21. > :53:27.different picks up. Hello. Hello there. Who am I speaking to?
:53:28. > :53:34.You are speaking to Riz. Somehow, I have got through to Shaban's
:53:35. > :53:43.brother. Surely he knows who I met in the car park. We had a guy in the
:53:44. > :53:52.car today calling himself as Shaban, who was he? No one described himself
:53:53. > :53:58.as Shaban. Why is it that cars that have been left in your trust have
:53:59. > :54:01.been just left on the street, in car parks, in lots of places that aren't
:54:02. > :54:09.secure? Which is what you per port to offer
:54:10. > :54:14.and told us we were getting. I'm not really obliged to answer any of
:54:15. > :54:17.those questions at the moment. It kind of goes with the territory of
:54:18. > :54:20.taking money off people that you don't lie to them. We would love to
:54:21. > :54:24.hear why you are taking money off people and their cars have been
:54:25. > :54:29.insecurely parked sometimes with results like them being ticketed,
:54:30. > :54:37.damaged or on one occasion, lost? That was stolen from our secure
:54:38. > :54:43.compound. You've no absolutely no information to say it was parked on
:54:44. > :54:47.the street. You had no insurance to cover it. We are not obliged to
:54:48. > :54:52.cover a stolen vehicle. This is what we can take away, if you park with
:54:53. > :55:01.Gold Parking and your car is stolen then you take no responsibility for
:55:02. > :55:10.it whatsoever? Are any of the vehicles that you parked damaged?
:55:11. > :55:14.You said it came into the compound with the wheel trims missing. We
:55:15. > :55:20.would never check in the first place. We only check the bodywork of
:55:21. > :55:24.a vehicle. This is a phenomenal service that you are offering. No
:55:25. > :55:28.sight afcompound. No razor wire. No security guards. How is that secure?
:55:29. > :55:42.Riz? With that, my work is done! During the course that phone call,
:55:43. > :55:45.Riz Malik insisted that Gold Parking does have access to a secure
:55:46. > :55:51.compound which they share with other companies. He said Dipesh's Mercedes
:55:52. > :55:54.was stolen from this car park and they co-operated with the police
:55:55. > :55:58.investigation and he continued to insist the man who I encountered wa
:55:59. > :56:03.wasn't his brother, but another employee. The Mallic brothers have
:56:04. > :56:11.now booked their spaces as the first faces on this series Rogues Gallery!
:56:12. > :56:15.Following our story about the preservative MI in paints causing
:56:16. > :56:24.allergic reactions some people saying they had an allergic
:56:25. > :56:32.reaction. Get tested at your GP. 65% of ?25 is the same as 25% of 16. A
:56:33. > :56:36.Sky Broadband customer, charge add supplementary fee even though she
:56:37. > :56:39.lives in a listed building and is not allowed to have services like
:56:40. > :56:49.Sky TV. Where does that fee come from? We don't know. Keep sending us
:56:50. > :56:58.your stories and your tip-offs. Click on the boxes which says, "Send
:56:59. > :57:03.us your stories." Coming up next week, the risks you take buying gig
:57:04. > :57:08.and sports tickets on the second-hand market. FIFA 14 on the
:57:09. > :57:12.Xbox and PlayStation, why is it so easy for children to wrack up
:57:13. > :57:18.thousands of thousands on their parents credit cards?
:57:19. > :57:22.The luxury, Disneyland Paris Hotel that failed to warn holiday-makers
:57:23. > :57:27.that their dream destination looks like this! That's all on Watchdog
:57:28. > :57:33.next Wednesday at 8pm. Until then from all of us, good night.