Rogue flushes out dodgy plumbers
Should your sink clog up, your pipes burst or your drain block, you will almost certainly need to get a plumber or drainage expert out in a hurry, but who would you call? The phone books are full of plumbers promising a rapid response to such problems, but choosing the wrong one could be costly.
We received complaints about one such firm, JPL Plumbing Ltd, and decided to investigate. There are several businesses sharing a similar name so let's be clear - the firm we investigated is called JPL Plumbing Ltd, their company number is 05946294, their registered address is 156 BLACKFRIARS ROAD, SOUTHWARK, LONDON, SE1 8EN and the company's director is from Dorset. They also call themselves JPL Drains, Southampton Plumbers and Bournemouth Plumbers.
Excessive Charges
Chito Salarza from South London called out JPL Plumbing Ltd in May 2009 after the drain in his cellar blocked. JPL Plumbing Ltd sent out engineer Lee Wakelin, who explained that the job would cost £47.50 per half hour, but more if additional equipment was required. After examining the problem, Lee explained that he would need to use a jetting machine, which would cost an additional £675.50 per half hour. Chito agreed to this, believing the job would only take an hour or so.
As soon as Chito realised the work was taking longer than he expected, and the cost rising every half hour, he asked Lee Wakelin if they could agree on a fixed price. Lee told him that he could fix the price at £5980. With his cellar still flooded, Chito reluctantly agreed to this, but now realises that was a mistake.
All the experts we've spoken to are shocked by the amount JPL plumbing Ltd charged Chito. They say that the drain could have been dug up and replaced for £5980.
JPL Plumbing Ltd charge extra for any additional equipment they use, even if they carry it with them on a daily basis. Other firms do the same, although the Association of Plumbing and Heating Contractors questions the principle. Clive Dickin, the trade body's Chief Executive says, "It is not best practice to charge for the use of tools or equipment that would be used regularly for a number of different customers. However, a plumbing and heating contractor should charge if s/he has to hire a very specialist piece of equipment not on the common list of equipment a contractor would carry on the van."
Rogue Traders Sting
We wanted to see how JPL Plumbing Ltd would respond to a relatively simple blockage that could be cleared without the need for any specialist equipment. We rigged a house in Epsom, Surrey with secret cameras, and blocked the kitchen sink by stuffing solidified fat and food in the u-bend pipe. The blockage could have been cleared in 30 minutes, cost little more than a hundred pounds and require no specialist equipment. However, when JPL Plumbing Ltd engineer Lee Wakelin turned up, the charges soon escalated.
Lee wrongly told us that the blockage was beyond the u-bend and within the pipes leading to the drain. Because of this, he said he would have to use specialist equipment and a special chemical to clear it. He then dismantled the u-bend and cleared the blockage but continued to use his unnecessary specialist equipment.
Before putting together the bill, Lee Wakelin began taking an interest in the cleaning items in our cupboards. He stole dishwasher salt, and two bottles of kitchen cleaning spray, hiding them up his jumper before retreating to his van!
For a job that should have cost £100 and could have been completed in an hour, Lee Wakelin charged a massive £646.25.
Clive Dickin, from the Association of Plumbing and Heating Contractors says Lee Wakelin's actions were unjustifiable. "They bring the entire industry into disrepute. APHC would estimate that the typical cost of the job featured in the film would be around one tenth of what JPL Plumbing actually charged. We would advise consumers always to get three written quotes, ideally from a member of a respected trade association like APHC, which has a customer charter that members must adhere to, and which helps prevent incidents like this. If it is an emergency call-out, ask for a price over the phone and get it in writing when the contractor arrives. In all cases, we would advise consumers to ask the contractor to diagnose the exact fault, where possible, before starting work on any job estimated to take more than an hour to complete."
Lee Wakelin refused to comment when Rogue Traders confronted him, but JPL Plumbing Ltd sent a statement.
"JPL undertake drainage work all over the London area and have hundreds of satisfied customers.
"We provide a rapid response for our customers and charge a premium price for this level of service. Our strict company policy to all our customers is that we will always obtain their signed approval to any quoted price before any work is undertaken; all customers are free to obtain alternative quotes should they wish to do so.
"From time to time during busy periods, we out-source work to sub-contractors as was the case in this instance. We are very concerned by any complaints received and we are grateful for the information you have brought to our attention and shall be reviewing our list of suitable sub-contractors in the future."
Lee Wakelin didn't obtain our signed approval before work commenced, and we have seen evidence to suggest that he has worked for JPL plumbing for more than five years.
Download Watchdog's factsheet on how to find a reliable plumber.
Comment number 1.
At 27th May 2010, andy wrote:HI,
Can someone explain to me how the Rogue Traders plumber can justify charging £80 for unblocking a sink. This is totally unjustified and is also a rip-off?!!!!!!!!!!!! Plumbers earn more than surgeons.
Every plumber should feature on Rogue Traders.
Watchdog should make a comment on that!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 27th May 2010, drainareus wrote:the company he works for know what he is doing as he would have to put his job sheets in to the company to get his 50% payment so what they are saying is rubbish,these comanys need wipeing out,watchdog need to get to md of these companys,these companys tell u to drag the jobs out,the subby is at fault but jpl would have taken the payment for the 5k job so would have known what was going on...close these people down ......
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 27th May 2010, louise wrote:I'd have him for theft... unbelievable...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 27th May 2010, Jay wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 27th May 2010, STEVE wrote:I am absolutely fed up with the ´óÏó´«Ã½ paying these Rogue Traders with our license fee. Please by all means catch them on tape but do the sting before you pay them. It's not rocket science.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 27th May 2010, bazzaste wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 27th May 2010, Katie wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 27th May 2010, chriskennell wrote:Why is it that on every Rouge Trader you investigate, it always cost huge amounts of money to get to the point? Do you ever recover the fees paid to these people and if not, why is the licence payer expected to fund these people? Also why are these people not prosecuted and a result given to the viewing audience? [post edited]
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 27th May 2010, Degz1e wrote:I am a serving police officer and would love to arrest the plumber for the theft he committed on screen - can I help .... pleeeeeease!!! Seriously though - he could have been arrested by anyone there under common law and if he had assaulted anyone it would be treated as if he had assaulted a police officer !!!!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)
Comment number 10.
At 27th May 2010, allan inver wrote:THE PLUMMER IS OVER THE MOON,HE'S GOT £600 OF ´óÏó´«Ã½ CASH,OK HE'S GOT A WEE BIT BAD PUBLICITY.I THINK RATHER THAN ALL THE SMOKE AND BUBBLES IN THE SINK ´óÏó´«Ã½ SHOULD HAVE HAD THE POLICE WAITING IN CASE HE STOLE AGAIN IF HE DIDNT HAVE HIM ARRESTED FOR PREVIOUS THEFT.AT LEAST BLOCK HIS VAN IN SO HE CANT JUST DRIVE AWAY.´óÏó´«Ã½ ARE TOO EASY ON THESE MAGGOTS,TAKING OVER £600 FROM WHAT HE THINKS IS A PENSIONER(HOW WOULD HE FEEL IF THAT HAPPENED TO HIS GRANDMOTHER).COME ON ´óÏó´«Ã½ BE AS HARD ON THEM AS THEY ARE ON ELDERLY PUNTERS.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 10)
Comment number 11.
At 27th May 2010, stanley4358 wrote:Hi,
what I would like to know is why do the rogue traders team pay out that amount of money to these rogues in the first place? like the plumber we saw tonight, step in before any money is exchanged, after all you have all the evidence you need on film. Another thing is these people are never hardly ever prosecuted, trading standards should be a lot tougher on these rogues.
stanley4358
Complain about this comment (Comment number 11)
Comment number 12.
At 27th May 2010, Hobbie wrote:MANY THANKS TO MATT AND DAN FOR CONFRONTING LEE WAKELIN. I HAD WATCHED THE REPORT WITH INTEREST BUT WHEN I SAW THE WHITE DOG IN THE VAN EVERYTHING FELL INTO PLACE. ABOUT 4 YEARS AGO MY SINK WAS SERIOUSLY BLOCKED AND A FIRM CALLED PRO-TECT SENT A GUY WHO LOOKED JUST LIKE HIM WITH A WHITE DOG. HE EVEN HAD THOSE SORT OF CLOTHES ON. HE CHARGED ME A MASSIVE AMOUNT AFTER USING ALL KINDS OF EQUIPMENT ON THE OUTSIDE SEWER DRAIN. THEN I HAD TO CALL HIM BACK WHEN THE SINK BLOCKED AGAIN BECAUSE HE HAD NOT DIAGNOSED THAT THE FAULT WAS MORE SERIOUS AND CAUSED BY THE MAIN SEWER PIPE BEING COMPLETELY BLOCKED, CAUSING BACK FLOW. THIS WAS AFTER HE HAD SCREAMED FURIOUSLY DOWN THE PHONE AT ME, BECAUSE HE DID NOT LIKE COMING BACK, [comment removed] HE EVEN STOLE MY ONE AND ONLY GARDEN SPADE. I SHOULD HAVE TOLD THE POLICE BUT WAS TOO FRIGHTENED. I COMPLAINED TO THE FIRM BUT THEY WERE NOT VERY INTERESTED AND SAID HE WAS A CONTRACTOR.IF HE EVER READS THIS PERHAPS HE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO AT LEAST RETURN MY SPADE.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 12)
Comment number 13.
At 27th May 2010, bluemaximus wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 13)
Comment number 14.
At 27th May 2010, Mittsy wrote:could someone tell me if these rogue traders pay income tax and was the dodgy plumber reported to the police for stealing?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 14)
Comment number 15.
At 27th May 2010, Tony wrote:why does watchdog always devalue the good it could do by pulling its punches. This plumbing case is a classic example Given the guy was caught stealing red handed, why were the police not called in and why pay in cash ?. Also Ann let the director from DVLA escape answering the crucial question on the legality of charging for alledged non declaration of sorn.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 15)
Comment number 16.
At 27th May 2010, aardvark7 wrote:Why does Rogue Traders continually pay these fraudsters their outrageous bills, when they have indisputable evidence of their deceit?
We watched tonight while yet another conman lied, cheated and stole from a customer, yet still received a huge payout in cash!
When is Watchdog actually going to confront these people BEFORE paying them (licence fee payers money, I might add!)??
Not only that, but this particular man should be reported to the Police and prosecuted for the theft.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 16)
Comment number 17.
At 27th May 2010, tommyt1 wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 17)
Comment number 18.
At 28th May 2010, john smith wrote:That plumber was a discrage but after being paid the £600 for the job I think the cameras should have confronted him just after he was given the money or they should have confronted him before they gave him the money as £600 IS A LOT OF LICENCE PAYERS MONEY going to someone ripping of the elderly.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 18)
Comment number 19.
At 28th May 2010, Vincent O kane wrote:matt, I totally agree with steve & chriskennell that why are you talking big & doing nothing about these people. I have been watching rogue traders for years & you keep doing the same thing, as you like to portray rogue traders as the peoples championI am amazed that you are still paying them, I can only guess that the money does not come out of your pocket so thats all right then. maybe you should that you are no better than they are, you call them rogues yet you pay them with other peoples money, get the point matt, you did say that you were going to throw everything at him, lee waklin, including the kitchin sink, you did'nt even throw the plug at him never mind the sink, your all talk, talk is cheap when the licence payers are footing the bill, perhaps if you acted as tough as you talk & confronted him on his first visit & sent him on his way empty handed you would look more of a man, actions speak louder than words.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 19)
Comment number 20.
At 28th May 2010, JoseH wrote:I'm very concerned that this rogue trader (JPL Plumbing Ltd) may be confused locally with the similarly named JPL Plumbing, which operates in the West Sussex area. Unlike the company featured on Watchdog, JPL Plumbing is an excellent, highly reputable plumbing business run by John Leary, whose workmanship and attention to detail are absolutely first-class. As a recent happy customer of the 'good' JPL Plumbing, I'm worried that he may be tarred with same brush and that his business may suffer as a result. Please could the ´óÏó´«Ã½ make a point of distinguishing between the two companies in the next episode of Watchdog, and make it clear that they are not related? Thank you!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 20)
Comment number 21.
At 28th May 2010, squidge2008 wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 21)
Comment number 22.
At 28th May 2010, squidge2008 wrote:Although I totally agree with the ´óÏó´«Ã½ for exposing rogue traders like the plumber in last nights show, however are they going about it in the right way? I seems to me a little like entrapment, also why, when the BEEB have on camera the plumber clealy stealing, why on earth did they not call in the Police? I really do think the BEEB are just using these cases purely for their entertainment value.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 22)
Comment number 23.
At 29th May 2010, chriskennell wrote:Thanks Vincent O kane for the support. Come on ´óÏó´«Ã½ lets have a fair playing field. We all love the program and feel that it is time to put a stop to dodgy dealing. You have the perfect opportunity to do some good and prosecute these people. With the hard evidence and the support of the public, surely this will help Trading Standards and the Courts put an end to these types of con men? Don't just inform the public, do a public service and stop them!! You will be amazed at the support you will get from a gratefull veiwing audience.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 23)
Comment number 24.
At 29th May 2010, AnfieldRed08 wrote:JoseH, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ don't need to do such a thing. Matt Allwright said at least once or twice during the show "Not to be confused with any other companies with similar names."
As for the rouge, he should have been issued with a police charge for theft, rather than a £600 payment!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 24)
Comment number 25.
At 1st Jun 2010, rogerbenfield wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 25)
Comment number 26.
At 2nd Jun 2010, mrs ried wrote:What a con man,how can he sleep at night?.
He must be earning more than a well paid exec or solicitor,and the cheek of stealing aswell as charging a small fortune!.
I recently had a blockage and i looked on the net as i'd heard so many horror stories about the yellow pages and tompsons.I found a company called [firm removed] and they were very polite on the phone and told me all the charges not just labour,not like most firms.
The man turned up and explained the charges again before i signed anything.He found the blockage,cleared and tested and showed me it was working.
I will be recommending them to my friends as i don't want them going through what that poor man went through,there are honest companies out there,it's just finding them.I must admit i was very sceptical as its's a lottery but i was pleasantly surprised.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 26)