Did we like it?

No because the revelations that some estate agents have unscrupulous tendencies didn’t come as a shock, and there were no Roger Cook-like foot-in-the-door, smack-in-the-mouth confrontations.

What was good about it?

• Confirmation that many estate agents are nasty little flash Harrys and Harriets who’d do anything to bump up their commission

• There was enough evidence in some cases to lead to criminal proceedings. Let’s hope the ‘businessman’ who faked passports, the slimeball who wanted to con a “nice old boy” out of 50K and the Foxtons agents who doctored information given to surveyors all face justice.

• The trainer at Foxtons being hoist by his own petard when he told his eager apprentices: “We are associated with sharp sales tactics. People believe that we are going to try and sell them something for a lot more money than they want to spend, find them somewhere that is completely different to their requirements. And, funnily enough, they’re not wrong in that.”

• Buyers will now be extra cautious – but we can’t imagine blatant rip-offs will ever end however hard we try to stand-up to bullying tactics and misinformation.

What was bad about it?

• Undercover reporter Anna Adams spent too much time worrying about herself rather than coming up with hard facts about misdeeds. Colleague Emma Clarke did a better job, getting Foxtons staff to incriminate themselves on camera. As a journalistic exercise, it seemed lame compared with the TV consumer investigations of the past.

• The lame denials and worthless promises to investigate thoroughly from the thick-skinned, caught-out companies. We wanted to see them squirm and sweat beneath their cheap suits – all we got was platitudinous messages typed out on screen.