My most jaw-dropping instances and the way I received again £1M this yr… plus the rogue readers who tried to swindle me: SALLY SORTS IT

I am delighted to say that I won back a total of nearly £1.02million this year in another 100-plus cases of unfair treatment by companies and institutions exposed in the Sally Sorts It column.

That’s money back in readers’ pockets, where it belongs.

The funds reunited in 2025 included repayments sat on endlessly by businesses, compensation for dire service, wrongly-denied insurance payouts, energy bills written off, sums lost in the ether by financial institutions and reimbursements following fraud.

Energy firms billing incorrectly featured large – among them a British Gas mix-up that scared the life out of a reader when he was issued a £13,000 bill out of the blue, and who failed to get the energy provider’s chatbots to sort it out.

Then there was insurance that didn’t live up to policyholder expectations. Confusion over a policy’s start date meant a stroke victim nearly missed out on a £4,998 insurance payout when she had to cancel her river cruise, until I got involved.

In another case – my biggest win of the year – a 30-year-old man was denied a travel insurance payout for vertiginous bills following his terrifying cardiac arrest in the Grand Canyon, Arizona. The incident involved him being resuscitated, flown to hospital and undergoing emergency surgery.

The claim was denied as he had attended his GP with earache some 18 months previously and neglected to tell the insurer.

This outcome was almost as terrifying as the incident itself, as there was no way he could pay the bill himself.

At the time I covered his case, in March, the costs were estimated at $100,000 (£75,000). But recently the reader contacted me to say he had been copied into more bills, suggesting the total cost – excluding the air ambulance bill, which he has not yet seen but can often reach $50,000 or more – was heading north of $602,000 (about £450,000).

Fortunately, on my intervention, the insurer reviewed the case and agreed to pay up.

Tip: Always declare any medical issues – and double-check when cover commences.

Pet insurance also sent several readers barking mad.

One struggled to get payouts for behavioural treatment which should have been allowed under the policy, but when I stepped in, it agreed to meet the claim.

Another more disturbing case was where an owner was charged three excesses totalling more than £750 after her dog underwent biopsies for lumps under its skin. She thought this wrong, and I agreed.

However, the insurer John Lewis, whose policies are underwritten by Intact, would not budge because the lumps had different causes – three different illnesses in its eyes, and therefore three different claims.

But it was only one operation and a single set of tests.

My pleas to rethink were ignored. But the reader took the case to the Financial Ombudsman, and I am delighted to report it recently concluded this reader and I were right – and ordered the insurer to return her £555 plus interest of £124.

She was delighted to be vindicated and is donating a sum from the reimbursement to a local animal sanctuary.

Tip: Even if a claim is denied, persevere if you are sure you are in the right. If necessary, take your case to the Financial Ombudsman Service for an independent view.

Car hire is another pet hate for readers. These firms get my wooden spoon for service, as they are as stubborn as mules when it comes to customers who complain.

Avis gets the giant porridge spoon this year because it refused to reimburse an elderly couple who arrived at the rental desk, tired after a two-hour immigration queue, who were charged ¤340 (£297) for excess insurance they didn’t need. They already had a £33 stand-alone policy of their own, but Avis said it had a signed contract with them so would not budge.

My intervention made no difference, which made me pessimistic when I tried as a customer myself to get back a breakdown cover charge Avis added to my hire bill in Boston, in the US, recently.

My husband and I had queued behind 60 people and were rushed when we got to the desk. He simply asked: ‘What do we do if we break down?’ and was told: ‘Don’t worry.’ No mention of the breakdown cover that this staff member then added to our bill.

I consider myself savvy when it comes to car hire, so am particularly aggrieved at being caught out this way. And, yes, when I complained, I got the same response – that Avis had in its possession a signed contract from us. Grrrr!

Tip: However tired you are, or however rushed the situation, always read through the invoice at the hire desk to check for unwanted extras and charges.

Cases of fraud are among the most distressing and the sums lost can be life-changing.

I was delighted to be able to help one vulnerable victim who, while suffering from depression, lost £104,000 to a scammer after they conned her into transferring money to cryptocurrency accounts. On my intervention, her bank, Barclays, reimbursed half her losses.

One new development this year was how cyber attacks on Britain’s big retailers, including Marks & Spencer, provided new opportunities for scammers.

Knowing customers would be chasing orders that had gone astray in the chaos, they stepped in to pose as customer service staff when shoppers made complaints on social media.

They went on to defraud victims by telling them they would be compensated for their trouble if they gave their bank details. I helped one customer caught in this trap get back £200 lost to the scammers posing as M&S.

Tip: Following a high-profile hack, do not respond to communications from the targeted firm unless you are sure it is genuine.

Public sector bodies were not immune from readers’ gripes. I was pleased to help a man wrongly pursued for a year by the Department for Work and Pensions to clear his name over a £763 Universal Credit debt incurred by a fraudster using his details.

Tip: Anyone who ends up in such a (hopefully rare) predicament should be prepared to provide evidence. In his case, a flight boarding pass and proof he was elsewhere on days face-to-face claims were made in his name provided vital proof.

Finally, if you do only one thing in 2026, familiarise yourself with your rights.

The most important law to get to grips with is the Consumer Rights Act 2015. This says goods must be of a satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, free of defects and match the description – as well as last a reasonable length of time. If they are not, you can get a refund within 30 days of purchase.

Quoting the Act in correspondence should strengthen arguments with retailers and suppliers who try to bat away customers.

Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act is also handy. This makes a credit card provider jointly responsible with a retailer if something goes wrong with a purchase costing £100 to £30,000.

Similar protection is offered with a process called chargeback, provided on a voluntary basis by card networks. It can be used for debit card and credit card purchases that go awry and there is no minimum or maximum sum for the claim.

Unwelcome approaches

Being Money Mail’s consumer champion is a fantastic job. I enjoy helping readers who are often at the end of their tether when they get in touch.

I am humbled by the stories many tell me about their situations, whether they or their relatives are suffering serious illness, money problems, job loss, bereavement or other hardship.

Then there are those who feel excluded by the rapid progress of technology, and others who are driven to distraction because they feel they are not being listened to by an organisation which has treated them unfairly.

Many readers expressed disenchantment at the rise of the robots in customer service departments – hear, hear! Plenty of readers I deal with are just glad to be heard, and taken seriously, by a human who is on their side.

I hope more of you will get in touch next year with issues that are proving impossible to resolve alone. I can’t investigate all cases, unfortunately, but I read all your letters and emails.

Not all contact has been welcome, however. This year I have been puzzled and alarmed by a couple of approaches from people who were trying to pull the wool over my eyes, and those of the organisations involved.

I like to think I can spot these miscreants at ten paces, but even a cynical journalist can (nearly) be caught out by convincing patter – at least enough to start an investigation.

First up was a man who was desperate for my help because he had been scammed out of £10,000 from his TSB account and the bank wasn’t reimbursing him.

Now, TSB is known as the bank that likes to say ‘yes’ to returning money to fraud victims. It has a record of reimbursing more often than others. So why did it say no to this customer, I wondered?

He had a whole backstory of how his mother had been in hospital in a coma when the scam happened, and how he borrowed money from his dad on the promise that TSB was going to reimburse him. To reel me in further, he told me his other bank account had been similarly scammed at the same time and he got his money back.

I put all this to TSB, which was adamant it would not reimburse him, though would not elaborate.

With my suspicions aroused, I did an internet search on this fellow. Lo and behold, he had not long ago been convicted of making fraudulent insurance claims.

I dropped him like a brick. But a few weeks later, I received an email from him stating the following: ‘Just a quick message to say thanks for getting in touch with TSB for me. I have finally had a phone call from them last night and they have confirmed that I will now be refunded by close of business today.’ (Not true – as TSB confirmed to me).

And then, the punchline: ‘Could you please notify me of a charity of your choice as I would like to make a donation on your behalf as I would have lost this money without your help.’

I would laugh at his brass neck, but, frankly, it isn’t funny.

More recently, a man claiming to be a 92-year-old customer of National Savings & Investments (NS&I) said he was being prevented from accessing his account and withdrawing thousands of pounds worth of Premium Bonds.

NS&I was tight-lipped on this case. But he had an unusual name and with a quick search I found some information suggesting he (or certainly someone of the same name and vintage) had died seven years ago.

Had someone found certificates hidden in a drawer perhaps and thought they would try it on? Or had I had my first request for help from beyond the grave?