Tony Hetherington is the esteemed investigator for Financial Mail on Sunday. With his sharp eye for detail, he uncovers the truth hidden behind closed doors and fights for justice on behalf of those who have been taken advantage of. If you need to reach out to him, find his contact information below.
Ms L.C. writes: Our Vueling flight from Manchester to Barcelona experienced both delay and cancellation. For over three hours, we received no support or information, and Vueling was unresponsive to our phone calls. Eventually, they transported us by coach from Manchester to Gatwick. We arrived at our destination after midnight, and with the replacement flight leaving early the next morning, we were severely sleep deprived. According to regulations, every passenger should have been compensated and provided with food vouchers due to the significant delay, but we received neither. We lost an entire day of our vacation and the hotel we had already paid for, yet Vueling refuses to acknowledge our claim.
Tony Hetherington replies: Your original flight from Manchester was scheduled for 2pm, allowing you plenty of time to arrive in Spain and settle into your hotel before the evening. However, you and your boyfriend found yourselves on a bus traveling the 225-mile journey to Gatwick, heading down the M6 and M1 instead. Vueling, owned by the Spanish company IAG which also owns British Airways, is the largest airline in Spain and the biggest user of Barcelona airport, despite being less than two decades old. Despite being a budget airline, it should not neglect its responsibility towards passengers in times of trouble.
I reached out to Vueling headquarters in Barcelona and urged them to consider your claim. Their staff promised to “review this case”. Several days later, you received an email from them containing a link to a compensation claim form. This form could have been sent immediately after your flight was cancelled. Shortly after you submitted the form, £219 was deposited into your bank account by Vueling, with no explanation as to how the amount was calculated.
When I reminded Vueling that they had the opportunity to comment on your negative experience, all they offered was a statement claiming that the compensation had already been paid to you. It seemed as though they couldn’t understand why I was still bothering them since they had finally paid up.
In response, I made it clear that we would be publishing your letter. Vueling then provided the following statement: “Due to operational reasons, the flight was cancelled, and the passengers were offered hotel accommodation and food vouchers, along with a relocation for the flight from London Gatwick. Transport from Manchester Airport to London Gatwick was also arranged. Vueling has already paid the applicable compensation to the customer and regrets any inconvenience.” This statement almost implies that you should be grateful for the impromptu road trip, regardless of whether food vouchers were actually offered.
Interestingly, Vueling did not even bother denying their failures in responding to your claim after they failed to provide a flight and instead transported you by coach.
Losing my keys ended in £155 fine
J.T. writes: My wife and I went shopping at Borehamwood Shopping Centre in Hertfordshire. When we returned to our van, we discovered that my keys had either been lost or stolen from my pocket. The security office at the centre logged the incident and assured us that the van could remain until midnight without any issue. I called a locksmith to open the van, just in case the keys were inside, but unfortunately they were not there. I then took a bus home, a journey of ten miles, retrieved my spare keys, and promptly removed the van well before midnight. However, I later received a letter from solicitors acting on behalf of Highview Parking Limited demanding £155.
Tony Hetherington replies: The staff at the shopping centre did their best to assist you. The security officer logged the loss of your keys, indicating that your van was unable to be moved. When the car park company’s solicitors sent you a penalty notice, the shopping centre manager tried to have it cancelled, but his efforts were in vain.
By the time I got involved, the original penalty demand had increased from £60 to £155, and you had already paid it to avoid further costs. Highview Parking is a subsidiary of Group Nexus. Upon contacting them, I was informed that a penalty notice had been appropriately issued before Highview became aware of the circumstances. They added that there had been a delay in addressing the correspondence, resulting in the collection agent accepting a settlement from you without taking the circumstances into account.
By the time you read this, your payment should have been refunded. It is refreshing to see a car park company displaying flexibility and common sense.
Mix-up over British Gas meter
J.O. writes: I switched utility suppliers and chose British Gas. However, they informed me that my existing smart meter was incompatible with their system. They requested monthly readings from me, but the meter is located in an underground box with the digital panel on the side. Reading the meter required lying flat on the ground, which is quite difficult for an 82-year-old. British Gas agreed to compensate me with £100 as a gesture of apology.
Tony Hetherington replies: You informed me that British Gas did send an engineer to install a new meter with a reading panel on top. Unfortunately, British Gas seemed unaware of its own engineer’s actions, rejecting all your meter readings and estimating your bills instead. They even attempted to increase your monthly payments from £102 to £199, citing uncertainty about your gas consumption.
Upon complaining, you were instructed to contact the Ombudsman. I asked British Gas to investigate the matter, and within five days, they updated their records to accept readings from your new meter. Your direct debits have been confirmed at £102 per month, not £199. Furthermore, your account has been corrected to accurately reflect your gas consumption. British Gas also agreed to issue a payment of £100 as an apology.
WE’RE WATCHING YOU
More than 60 investors, who collectively invested millions of pounds into the fraudulent art investment company, Smith & Partner Limited, have reported the matter to Action Fraud and are demanding a police investigation. This company relied on ‘Wolf of Wall Street’ style telephone sales teams to promote prints at inflated prices, making false claims about potential profits. Approximately 2,000 investors believed their money was secure due to Smith & Partner’s claim of being a member of the Fine Art Trade Guild. In reality, the company had been expelled from the Guild for unethical behavior.
Last month, I reported that the owner of Smith & Partner, Michael Conway, had decided to put the company into liquidation. However, it appears that the company is still operating, running a follow-up scheme called a ‘recovery room’ scam. In this scheme, existing victims are called and told that buyers have been found for their prints, but only if they first purchase even more prints for up to £50,000.
One investor, suspicious of the situation, refused to provide credit card details and insisted on paying via bank transfer to ensure the recipient of the funds. In response, the caller from Smith & Partner became aggressive, telling the investor, “Go f*** yourself. Good luck getting your hundred grand back, mate.”
The liquidators, Carter Clark, were alerted to this incident, as they had already warned the art company against accruing additional debts. However, they have yet to comment on the matter. The Insolvency Service, which I previously reported to be investigating Smith & Partner, also failed to provide a comment, as did Michael Conway, the company’s boss.
If you believe you have been a victim of financial wrongdoing, feel free to contact Tony Hetherington at Financial Mail. Due to the high volume of inquiries, he cannot personally respond to each one. Please include copies of any original documents, as they cannot be returned.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
