DR writes: I advised my mother to open a bank account with Sainsbury’s Bank last summer, and she received a letter in August confirming receipt of her deposit and application form and asking her to verify her identity. She sent her BT and gas bills and her TV licence. Six weeks later her account was still shown as “awaiting authorisation” and she sent her council-tax bill, a Virgin cable bill and another personal bill. A month after that, with her account still awaiting authorisation, she sent electricity and water bills. All these bills had been passed to customer services and subsequently returned, but the account is still not operational.

By the time you wrote to me you had accumulated a pile of correspondence one-and-a-half inches thick. According to the bank, a clutch of these bills failed the hurdle because they were more than three months old, while others, though up to date, did not confirm her name. The bank accepts it could have sorted this out earlier. Your mother’s account is now up and running, and she has been sent some Sainsbury’s vouchers as an apology. I gather she does shop there, so has accepted them.

British Gas made aunty’s life hell

CR writes: My aunt, who is in her nineties, changed her gas supplier at the end of 2006 from British Gas to Southern Energy. British Gas continued to take £165.50 per month by direct debit from her bank account until July, which is when she became aware of it and asked me to help. The statement confirmed that my aunt was in credit for well in excess of £1,000. I telephoned several times (very time-consuming, as you know) to request a refund, but was told my aunt’s account was “not accessible”. I wrote to the complaints management team. No response. I e-mailed, following which my aunt received a letter from the “complaint management advisory” department in August, assuring her that her inquiry was being dealt with. We have heard nothing since.

“When the account was closed it was archived, so the appropriate actions could not be made” is British Gas’s explanation for this. This is half an explanation at best, as it doesn’t explain why someone could not have unarchived it when the situation became clear.

Anyway, the company has promised to refund the full sum, plus interest. It has also sent your aunt a very nice bunch of flowers, and apologised. Your aunt is delighted with her flowers; you and I are crossing our fingers the correct sum will be refunded.

T O had also been having problems with British Gas. In his case, he changed from BG to Powergen after he and his wife bought a second home. A month or so later, he received a “final gas bill” from BG for £172 in respect of gas used since his purchase. This was an estimate only, and way above what was actually owing as he and his wife had not actually moved in by that stage.

While his own telephone calls and letters were ignored, final demands and letters threatening court action from BG and from various firms of debt collectors and solicitors spewed out in a more or less continuous stream for the following nine months. The actual amount owing was just £6.56.

British Gas has, at last, done the right thing, writing off the bill, apologising and offering a very modest gesture of goodwill, a mere £20.

It’s notoriously difficult to put a figure on the recompense appropriate for “stress and inconvenience” suffered by customers, but it does seem to me there’s a bit of a dual tariff operating between the Financial Ombudsman Service and the Energy Supply Ombudsman (which would have been the one dealing with TO’s case), with the former being far more generous.

All the same, nine months’ worth of harassment from solicitors and debt collectors for something that was demonstrably not the customer’s fault seemed to me to merit more than £20.

When I put this to BG it agreed, at least to some extent, and upped it to £50. By then, however, you had the bit between your teeth and succeeded in increasing your compensation to £100. My congratulations.

My white van man nightmare

KD writes: My car was hit in June by a white hire van which failed to stop. I reported the incident to my insurers, Direct Line, and was able to give it the number of the van. Direct Line promptly arranged to repair my car, but since then I have had no success in getting a refund of the £200 excess I had to pay. I’ve been really disappointed with its poor customer service.

I’m not surprised. You called and wrote, and called and wrote, most assiduously, yet you were passed round the call centre. You were apparently given the wrong reference number at one point, and received letters on notepaper headed Tesco Insurance. Six months on, you were still nowhere. It seems there was some problem at the other end with the van’s insurers, or so said Direct Line, but it failed to tell you. However, once I got in touch, this problem had evidently been sorted out, because within 24 hours Direct Line had contacted you, apologised, refunded the £200 and assured you your no-claims bonus was intact.

Holiday cover hit by wife’s illness

PH writes: I am experiencing some difficulties in having my insurance claim for a cancelled holiday properly addressed. The insurance was arranged through Bradford & Bingley and First Assist. My wife and I had booked a fortnight’s cruise in November. In August, my wife was experiencing severe pain which was originally thought to be a disc problem. Following a scan, bone cancer was diagnosed. We cancelled the holiday in October and the travel company refunded half the cost. My wife’s insurers, Axa, promptly paid up. Mine did not.

The main reason for the delay, according to B&B, is that when you applied for the insurance, you answered “no” when asked if you knew of any medical conditions affecting an immediate relative or travelling companion. This was despite the fact that your wife was still on medication following an earlier bout of breast cancer in 1999. In theory, this being the case, the insurer might have been entitled to turn you down, if it could have shown this was linked to her current illness.

It has, however, done the sensible thing, which is to ask itself whether, if it had had the correct answer to this question, would it have refused cover? The answer to that is no, so it is now refunding you the full sum of £982.50, waiving the £50 excess, and is apologising to you.

E-mail Diana Wright at questionofmoney@sunday-times.co.uk (no attachments please) or write to A Question of Money, The Sunday Times, 1 Pennington Street, London E98 1ST, giving a daytime telephone number. We cannot send personal replies or deal with every letter. Please do not send original documents or SAEs. Advice is offered without legal responsibility