I travelled to Salonika with easyJet with my wife and two children. We took three bags weighing 65kg, well below easyJet's 80kg (20kg per person) limit. No one queried our baggage on the way out, but on the way back the check-in assistant informed us that our bags, which now weighed 75kg, were 15kg over the limit, for which we would have to pay an excess baggage charge of €157.49. She said that the 20kg limit was per bag, not per person. I pointed out the EasyJet terms and conditions, but we were not allowed to fly without paying. I contacted EasyJet when we returned to ask for a refund, but was told that the Salonika staff were correct and I could not have a refund. I have a copy of the terms and conditions, which clearly state per person, not per bag. Why is easyJet refusing to refund my money?

DAVID GOODALL, Maidstone

Your eyes were not deceiving you; the 20kg limit is per person, not per bag. However, easyJet seems to apply the same “no frills” principles to staff training as it does to flights.

A spokesman for easyJet said that “the policy was simply not observed correctly by the staff” - neither employees at Salonika, nor those handling your e-mailed complaint. Troubleshooter would go so far as to say that what happened to you at the airport was tantamount to extortion. What happened after that was a series of lame excuses, with one person even telling you that easyJet couldn't possibly refund your money because it was now impossible to weigh your bags.

The clause clearly states, in black and white, that “irrespective of the number of checked-in bags, each passenger has a free hold baggage weight allowance of 20kg”. You would think that a rigorous understanding of baggage terms and conditions would be a prerequisite for an airline check-in job, and most definitely for a job as a complaints handler. Isn't it a wonder, then, that so many were completely oblivious?

EasyJet says that “adequate measures will be taken” to fill this gaping hole in staff knowledge. It also refunded your money. The airline says that such problems do not happen often. Is that right, readers?

I don't know what to do. HSBC has obtained our address and is harassing my husband with debt collectors for a debt he did not incur. No matter what we have done to prove his innocence, we have not been left alone. The original debt was made by a South African with the same name as my husband - this is the only connection. We proved my husband's innocence by proving his identity at our local branch, but he is still being chased. Please help.

HENRIETTE BEZUIDENHOUT, Magherafelt, Northern Ireland

You would think that an unusual name would make mistaken identity less likely. Except, apparently, when it is so unusual that a company assumes that there can be only one person in the world so named.

In 2002 a different Mr Bezuidenhout borrowed several thousand pounds from HSBC. In 2006 he defaulted on the loan. After several months of no contact, HSBC closed the account and passed the debt to a collection agency. In the process of trying to trace the customer, this agency contacted your husband. Your husband then contacted HSBC, providing all relevant ID. The agency stopped contacting him, but having failed to trace the other Mr Bezuidenhout, sold the debt to another agency. This agency made the same mistake of contacting your husband.

This is one of many examples of mistakes made by collection agencies, if Troubleshooter's inbox is anything to go by. HSBC apologised and has now bought back the debt and written it off so that this error cannot happen again. It has also offered you compensation.

I bought a £590 hi-fi storage unit made in China. I found it to be of poor workmanship and damaged. I contacted the company, China Mainland, which promised to send someone to inspect the goods. Two months later a man came to repair it. I told him that I did not want it repaired because of the nature of the damage. Neither do I want a replacement because I do not think it would be any better.

LEITH MCDONALD, Birmingham

China Mainland told Troubleshooter that the damage you describe is not damage, but is part of “the unique character of a hand-made object”. There is a very fine, subjective, line between flaws and charming imperfections that add character. Troubleshooter has not seen the unit in question, but China Mainland has convinced her that it is character you have, not damage. Take the replacement on offer, then choose between them.

To tell us your problems, visit timesonline.co.uk/troubleshooter or write to Troubleshooter, Times Money, Times House, 1 Pennington Street, London E98 1TB

On the bright side

Margaret Stokes, of Surrey, says: “I booked a flight with XL through expedia.com with my M&S MasterCard to travel in a few weeks' time. When I learnt of XL's fate I booked with another airline on Friday September 12, then rang M&S Money to report the loss. Two days later M&S Money called to reassure me that I would receive a full refund, but that the investigation could take a few weeks.

“The next day, at 9am, I received a call from expedia.com. The woman said that a refund would be credited to my card within a week - and it was. Thank you Expedia and M&S Money.”

Readers to the Rescue: New-build problem

“I am suffering from a poor standard of house building, along with my neighbours, in relation to our roofs. In mid-March a high wind blew off roof tiles. Everyone who has inspected the roof says that the building work is poor, but the insurer and builder deny liability. I am pursuing the builder and going to arbitration through the National House-Building Council, and I will go to the ombudsman, if required. How do I get a builder to take responsibility for poor work on a four-year-old house?”

GILES DUGMORE, Stratford upon Avon

Litigation is the way forward, says Steuart Campbell, of Edinburgh. “I don't see why the insurer is denying responsibility,” he wrote. “Most cover includes wind damage. You could try taking the insurer to the small claims court to force it to take responsibility. I guarantee that it will agree to cover the damage before you even get to court and you will get all your expenses paid by the defendant.”

But John Bradley, of Mundesley, Norfolk, wins this week's £25 gift voucher. He says: “First, look at the surveyor's report for the building society with which you have the mortgage. Next, engage a surveyor of your own. Have the work done according to the surveyor's recommendation and sue before the builder goes out of business. The NHBC will favour the builder, which has paid for membership thereof.”

Can you help? E-mail troubleshooter@thetimes.co.uk with your answers to the following problem for a chance to win a £25 gift voucher.

“I have money invested for income in several bonds, such as Prudential, Clerical Medical, Norwich Union and Friends Provident. My financial adviser says that the income is tax-free, so I do not have to declare it in my tax returns. Is this true?”

OLAF DACOSTA, Stourbridge, Worcs

Do you have a problem you would like other readers to solve? E-mail troubleshooter@thetimes.co.uk with your query and write “readers” in the subject line. Please also include the name of your town.