Tonight ` Once you've got flawed data that you're trying to analyse, then it doesn't matter what you spit out the other end. It's gonna be flawed, isn't it? ACC's car-safety blunder continues. Imagine that new car thrill, only for it to be left looking like this. It's like an old car, and I want my new car back. Is your smartphone getting too smart? They know where you are, what you're doing, who you're doing it with. And the refund that's dropped off Jetstar's radar. It was our money, and they kept it. Welcome to Fair Go. Can you hear that screeching noise? It's the echo of ACC's U-turn last week after our investigation into the way ACC sets the price of your new car rego. Yes, Shirley from Tokoroa kicked it off. If it's not safe, I will be getting another car. Um, I've got three kids to think about. But it turned out Shirley's rego fee was based on a model manufactured 20 years ago. We actually found we had this coding error. Thank you, Fair Go, in terms of the, um, raising that. Now, ACC is trying to fix this. First they said the error we exposed affected 18 models. Then there were 22. Now it's 24. We think it could be more. One of the many, many complaints we got really stood out. It's from someone who knows a great deal about the safety of cars on our roads. Here's Garth with more. Warrick from Waikato imported a 2006 Toyota Avensis station wagon because he thought it was a car outstanding in its field. I was definitely aware of their` that they were safe, and I knew they were made in Europe, and, um, some of them have got nine airbags. Europe's new car-assessment programme, or NCAP crash test, gave it five stars, and Toyota told us the Avensis was the safest vehicle in its class at launch. Despite this, ACC put his car in the highest risk category. No, I was thinking, 'Well, that can't be right.' You can't go for a five-star NCAP-rating vehicle that's been touted as one of the safest vehicles on the road to the worst rating that ACC can give it. It's just wrong. So then I did a bit of other digging. He discovered ACC uses a database of five-and-half million car crashes here and in Australia to justify its decision. Warrick dug deeper, and he knows how to investigate better than most. Warrick is a police officer. We found him in our archives, showing former TVNZ reporter Liam Jeory around Morrinsville roads, a fresh-faced constable who had an idea that nailing up white crosses at the site of fatal crashes might warn other drivers to stay safe. It caught on. < Oh, you see a fair few crashes, I guess? Yeah, I do. Warrick is out of uniform, though, because this is him speaking as a motorist, not a representative of NZ police, though it's very hard to ignore his experience. I attend hundreds and hundreds of fatal crashes over my` over my years. You see, Warrick isn't just any police officer. He's a dedicated police forensic photographer, capturing the scene of fatal and serious crashes since 1997. Data from every crash report would have gone to Monash University in Melbourne to add to that crash database, generating safety assessments that ACC is now using to tell Warrick his car is not very safe at all. How is that for irony? And just how 'not very safe' are we talking ? I then printed off some level-one cars, which is 1975 Ford Escort with no safety features at all. Yet his much more modern car is in the same bracket. Why? Warrick asked ACC, the NZ Transport Agency. He even heard back from Toyota Australia. And what did Toyota say? What I've found is that this vehicle was never sold in Australia. That's important because most of the data in the Monash studies comes from Australian crashes, meaning cars common here but not there have been lumped together. What they did have in Australia was a vehicle that was... a similar name. So it was a Toyota Avensis, but it was a Verso model, which is completely different. Completely different. Not even... Not even... Doesn't even look the same. It's a people mover. We don't get a Verso here, but we do import something very similar from Japan ` the Ipsum. (GASPS) How do you like my car, then? Same colour. (CHUCKLES) Same colour. You reckon you could spot the difference between these two cars? Definitely. Practically identical, aren't they? Maybe we should show ACC. OK, at first glance, you may think they're alike, but Toyota insists his wagon and the seven-seater are not comparable due to differences. in production, chassis, body shape and specifications. So why did ACC treat them the same? They've pooled the data from two completely separate vehicles to come to... a flawed result. Warrick feels he's been going around in circles Once you've got flawed data that you're trying to analyse, then it doesn't matter what you spit out the other end. It's gonna be flawed, isn't it? It's useless. It doesn't mean anything. And what's worse ` the rego is nearly due for renewal. It's not so much the money that I'm gonna pay. It's the fact that they've got it wrong. You know, they've clearly made a mistake, and trying to get them to acknowledge that they've made a mistake is quite difficult. Because, you know, trying to get past the person that first answers the phone is quite difficult. Good news for Warrick ` the day after Fair Go contacted ACC, it reclassified the Toyota Avensis from band one to band four, the safest. ACC says it had been well aware and was working on that one. It has a final list, but we're still hearing from Fair Go viewers, who say, 'What about my Hyundai i45? My Hyundai Getz? My Kia Sportage? 'My Mazda Demio? My Daihatsu Terios? My Nissan Dualis? My Subaru Tribeca?' Just some of the models you've been asking about because you still aren't convinced they're in the right risk category. Well, ACC says it continues to look and review various makes and models raised by customers with us. So, if you're not sure, keep at it. That fix-it list may not be final after all. Now, we can't fault ACC's intentions here ` improving road safety ` and good on them. But, to use an obvious pun, this has been a car crash. Yeah, they got it badly wrong. Keep telling us if you think they are still getting it wrong. Warrick, the cop in Garth's story, reckons the ACC should just whack a blanket $100 discount on every rego until they sort out the mess. But it's not car safety that's got our next motoring couple seeing red. Now it's shattered. My dream's just shattered of having a new car. Plus ` we can finally reveal just what your smartphone knows about you. We reckon you'll be shocked. How many apps on my phone are tracking me? Just about all of them. And flight attendant Brodie Kane is on the case over a costly ticketing error by Jetstar. Please ensure your seat belts are fastened, your tray tables are stowed away, as we are in for a few bumps along the way. Welcome back. 'It's not our fault.' Is there a more frustrating thing to be told when you've got a problem? A decent couple from Palmie North have been told that quite a lot lately. We think their problem certainly isn't their fault. We think they should have been hearing, 'Don't worry. We'll fix it.' Ah, the smell of a new car. The purr of a new car. The beautiful shine of a new car. This was the first ever new car for Graeme and Judy Hanson of Palmerston North. Well, I've never owned a new car, and having a new car, you just feel relaxed and smile on your face when you drive down the road. You go, 'Yes.' They're both caregivers. It was time to take care of themselves just a wee bit. The smell is wonderful, and to be able to drive down the road, and it's just everything's new and fresh and... And it is ` was ` just a little bit special. Because it was for my wedding anniversary, our wedding anniversary. It was for me. < So it was a gift? Yes, it was. Yes. But something has taken the shine off. I don't like to drive it. < You don't like to drive it? I don't drive it any more. No, no. Graeme does the driving of it. I just don't drive it any more at all. Something has gone badly wrong. Now it's shattered. My dreams are shattered of having to own a new car. Look at the paintwork. The entire car is covered in spots, and they don't come off. It's a brand-new car. It should look` still like a brand-new car. It's all turned to custard. It looks horrible. Looks like a car that's 20 years old, not just five months old. They bought the car from the local Suzuki dealer. They recommended the Hansons get a special protective coating, Dura-Seal. MAN: The perfect mirror shine. It was applied by the Suzuki dealership. Graeme paid... About $600. < What are you feeling about that money? Uh, wasted, gone. That money included a special car-cleaning kit. It was a good month before Graeme used it. Back in January, there was a drought, so no car-washing. The very first time that I washed it that the spots started appearing on the car. Oh no. What have I done? But I'd followed the instructions which they gave us. What did you wash it with? Their products. Uh, it's just getting worse. So they took it back to the dealer. We just felt that maybe they would have supported us, uh, because the contract was originally with them. Now, these guys make a pretty good point. They aren't responsible for crashes after they sell a car, and they aren't responsible for mystery damage to the paintwork. And do you feel looked after by Eurocar Suzuki? No. No. No. The dealer said talk to the Dura-Seal people, a company called TF Group. They had various theories. < Did you spray chemicals on the car? No. < Did you take the car to the beach? No, never been to the beach. < Did you park near a foundry? Never. < Is it your fault? Nope, not our fault. But Dura-Seal said it wasn't covered by their warranty. It was caused by acid or corrosive substance. They said the Hansons should claim on insurance, and they offered to cover the excess, along with Eurocar Suzuki. Well, I think it's a bit of an insult, really. Do you feel looked after by Dura-Seal? No, no. No, we've been let down. Horribly let down. So the Hansons went to their insurer, AMI. AMI told them, 'Sorry, no cover for corrosion.' Sorry, AMI. We think you are wrong. We do not think this is corrosion. My interpretation of corrosion is rust. Do you feel looked after by AMI? No, no. Not at all. I've paid my insurances on time, and I've been horribly let down. So it isn't not Eurocar Suzuki's problem. It isn't Dura-Seal's problem. It isn't AMI's problem. But it most certainly is the Hansons' problem, and we think it just isn't their fault. Somebody has to come to the party and fix this. Only person who's coming to the party is Fair Go. That's the people we all come to. When we got involved, AMI had a rethink. They sent out an assessor. Oh yeah. He's a most experienced guy. He said, 'I've seen damage.' But he said, 'I've never seen one like this before.' He says it's not like some corrosive spray has blown or drifted over the car. That's usually localised on one side. This is evenly distributed over the car. But it's all over the car and covered, he said. That's why he was amazed. The assessor's worst-case scenario is strip the paint bare, replace all trim, maybe even all the glass. Up to $15,000. But AMI won't accept a claim. They say it's a product application problem. 'Rubbish. It's AMI's problem,' say Dura-Seal and Eurocar Suzuki. They got four paint experts, who all say some mystery corrosive liquid has settled on that car. They point out the flat surfaces are worse and looks like it's pooled in some places. The Hansons don't care. They just want the damn thing sorted. I would like this car to be restored to its brand-new condition, like we drove it out of the showroom. Like brand-new, not like as it is now. It's like an old car, and I want my new car back. And that seems fair enough. So deadlock. Nobody taking responsibility. Everybody blaming somebody else. Or are they? Let's just say there was a change of heart late last week. On Monday, I went back to the see the Hansons. It's all gone around in circles, Gordon. It's gone back to square one again. That's how we feel now. We think the Hansons deserve better than they've got so far. No one's coming to the party. Everyone's blaming everyone else. But they didn't know what I did. I've been talking to Suzuki NZ, Eurocar Suzuki and the Dura-Seal people, < and they will now cover the cost of your car. Oh wow. Oh, fantastic. Wow. (CHUCKLES) That's all we wanted right from the start. Oh, well, that's great. I'm so pleased about that. I've got the rest of the day. Go back to work, and I can be happy. Now, important thing. They say it is a goodwill offer. They say it's not a product issue, and it's not a manufacturing fault. So they're doing this to look after you guys, but they're not accepting any fault on their part. Oh, I'm so thrilled. It's taken so long, but it's been worth it, and thank you, Fair Go, for coming and helping us. I thank them, and I thank, uh, Fair Go for their help. I thank you. < My pleasure, mate. Really has been my pleasure. Oh, that is really lovely. And more good news for the Hansons too. Their insurer, AMI, has also come to the party in a big way. The Hansons will be paying nothing for car insurance, both their cars, for the next two years. They are pretty happy about that. So our thanks too to Suzuki NZ, Eurocar Suzuki, TF Group, the Dura-Seal people and AMI. Good on you all for sorting this ` eventually. Now, did you know that 90% of us will have a smartphone by 2018? But did you also know that phone is so smart, it knows where your home is without you even telling it? Should that worry you? Here's Mark. SLOW INQUISITIVE MUSIC I really don't think I can live without my smartphone. Do you think you can live without your smartphone? No, probably not. Thanks, mate. But did you also know that your phone is constantly tracking you and sending back that information to the manufacturer? My iPhone even knows that I have my hair cut every three weeks here at Maloney's. That I took the pup to the museum on a lazy Sunday; and where and when I buy my groceries; plus other things I'd rather not tell you about but Apple now knows. So is my phone snooping on me? Time to phone a friend. Hello? Andrew, is my phone watching me? Absolutely. Andrew Colarik's a senior lecturer at Massey's Centre for Defence and Security studies, and he's about to scare your pants off. How many apps on my phone are tracking me? Just about all of them ` your messages, your phone calls, your games, even your flashlight. Yes, your phone flashlight can track you, read and change your calendar, knows your gender and month of birth and even access your contacts. On my phone, apps like Angry Birds, Facebook Messenger, iHeartRadio and Trade Me are also checking me out. When I download an app, I have to accept the terms and conditions, but I never read them. Who does? But what you're consenting to is allowing your apps to access your UDID. That stands for Unique Device Identifier. It can then be transmitted to advertisers tracking my UDID, so over time, they can build a profile of me... or you. But they know where you are, what you're doing, who you're doing it with, who's in close proximity to you. They are recording your transactions. So, right now, I'm sitting in this cafe. That fact is being shared worldwide with companies that collect smart user's profiles. All this information is being sold. It's being transactioned. It's being shared with other businesses. Worldwide, the business of data-brokering is now worth $500 billion. It'll only get bigger. So why worry if you're not doing anything wrong, right? Well, think again, because everything you say to your phone could be used as evidence against you. Let's say that you like a couple of bottles of wine every Saturday, and then you have a health problem, requiring a kidney replacement or a liver replacement. So your insurance company purchases your purchase history before authorising you a new liver, and they find out you're a heavy drinker on the weekends. You don't deserve a liver. There's somebody else who's more deserving. This is actually occurring. Andrew says this is happening in America through loyalty card apps. In NZ, our health insurance companies wouldn't be able to do that unless they're given your express consent to the loyalty company to share your shopping info. But make sure have a good look at the terms and conditions of any app you download. You can also try to minimise your digital footprint by turning off the location services function, but that would make your smartphone pretty useless. Do you say, 'Yeah, sure. What the heck. I just want the benefits. I want the features, 'and I'm going to forego my privacy and security.' Or, 'I'm not going to have one at all because I don't control it. I don't own it. I just pay for it.' But there is a Back to the Future solution. I use a dumb phone ` this one right here ` and it's very simple, and it's very easy, and I prefer it. So it's privacy versus capability. Lots of popular apps like Google Maps need your location to work best. Turning off location services will mean your smartphone is a wee bit dumber. But that might be worth it if you're really worried about your privacy. Mark's got more tips on protecting your smartphone privacy on our website, as well as a link which will show which of your apps are watching you. So they charge you three times for the same thing. It's 1 million per cent their fault, and you fight two years for a refund. Good grief. What is that all about? She took the paper out, put it back in, and then the one... receipt came out perfect, but in the meantime, we'd paid three times. Welcome back. Ever missed a flight? What can you do? Suck it up and buy new tickets. The unlucky pair in this story did exactly that. So why were they charged three times for those new tickets? And why didn't they get a refund? Time for Brodie Kane to take the controls. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard this Fair Go Flight 745, bound for Resolution Land. Please ensure your seatbelts are fastened, your tray tables stowed away, as we are in for a few bumps along the way. But in approximately 4� minutes, we'll have you landed safely in Happy Town. On this journey is mother and daughter Jan and Lorraine Wymer. They'd booked a gorgie weekend away together in October 2013 to the World of Wearable Arts Awards in Wellington. We missed our flight. Oh. Why? Well, cos they were late, and Jetstar does not tolerate lateness. It was our fault. We weren't worried about that. (CHUCKLES) They were happy to pay to get on the next flight, which was going to cost $175. So she went to put her Visa card in the machine, and, um... They said 'Oh, it's not working. So can you do it again?' And you did it three times, didn't you? Three times, yes. Three times the EFTPOS machine didn't work, and before trying it a fourth time, they asked the Jetstar lady to check the machine, only to discover the paper had jammed. She took the paper out, put it back in, and then th-the one, um, receipt came out perfect. But, in the meantime, we'd paid three times. So instead of paying $175, they'd paid 525 bucks ` 350 more than they needed to. The Jetstar lady told them she could not refund them then and there but that they could ring the 0800 number, and it would be no problem. But... I rang the 0800 number. They said, 'Oh no. You'll have to wait for your Visa to come through.' So they got their statement through. Sure enough, it confirmed the three payments. But a family illness meant that that refund wasn't the top priority. But they did get all their documents together in January 2014 and sent them away to Jetstar. But Jan received a reply from the airline, saying that Jetstar's finance department was not able to locate these payments in their settlement records and that she should go back to her bank to try and get the money back. But the trouble is, by then, a few months had gone past, and the bank couldn't do a chargeback query. So that was` We understood that part. So we went back to Jetstar, and we went backwards and forwards and backwards and forwards and just got absolutely nowhere. To say they were frustrated would be an understatement. OK, we did miss the flight. You know, we agree with that, but... We just felt like it was... that they just needed to pay us the money, you know? It wasn't fair. Just over a year passed, and they decided to try again in May. You see, that family illness had put it on the back-burner, but the women weren't prepared to throw the towel in. OK, it might have been $350. It's not a lot of money in the realm of things, is it? But it's the principle of the matter. It's just the principle that it was our money, and they kept it. And after numerous calls again, Jetstar's answers were exactly the same. So 350 bucks out of pocket through absolutely no fault of their own. So get this ` Jetstar has a 10-point customer guarantee, and number seven is, 'You can have confidence in how quickly we will respond to an issue.' And number eight? 'You can have confidence in how quickly we'll refund your money.' I don't know what the guarantees they're talking about. So what say you, Jetstar? Well, it turns out they stuffed up. Once we got involved, they looked into the issue and found out they'd got it wrong. They sincerely apologise for the significant delay the women experienced and will refund the 350 bucks ASAP, along with another 350 bucks in vouchers as a further apology. I had a quick yarn on the old blower with Jan and Lorraine to tell them the good news. Well, I'd like to say thank you. You know, like, um, finally, when you listened to us, they listened to you, basically. Jetstar acknowledges that they should have resolved this issue much sooner and are carrying out an internal review into the matter. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Happy Town. We hope you've thoroughly enjoyed your journey with us. Have a great day. Good on you, Jetstar, for fixing that. It's just a shame it took you nearly two years. And let's pray that's the closest Brodie ever gets to being in charge of any form of passenger vehicle. Yes, indeed. Well, that is the show for tonight, but we will be on Facebook for the next half hour to answer any of your questions. As always, we do love to hear from you. We're on Facebook. Email us... Write to us... Well, tonight we saw Brodie dress up as a pilot. Next week, she plays dress-up again. Ah, jean shopping ` what a nightmare. Even more of a nightmare when you think you're one size and in one shop you are, but in another you can't even get them past your thighs. We want to look at why. Sometimes I'm a 10. Sometimes I'm a 12. How on earth does it actually work? That's next week. Goodnight.