One of the biggest costs to hit households is education. I'm not talking about the prep school/Eton/Oxford/Conservative party frontbench journey, but university and other tuition fees which typical families now face paying. For whether students are financed by the Bank of Mum'n'Dad or through loans, this represents a near five-figure sum over a normal three-year undergraduate stint - and often £5,000 or more for other courses.

So what happens if you don't get value for money? When degrees were free, students could simply walk away from bad courses. Now there are monetary losses. The answer is to challenge the educational establishment - through the courts if necessary. You have paid money for a service and, if you don't get it, you should demand a refund.

Earlier this month, a Freedom of Information disclosure showed that universities have paid out more than £100,000 over the past four years to students who complained about unsuitable, badly labelled or poorly taught courses. And academics expect that amount to rocket as more students become disillusioned with the quality of their education, focusing on value for money.

Look at the case, which I took up in my Capital Letters column, of a Newcastle woman who opted for a masters degree, paying £3,600. This involved online "flexi-learning", which was delayed by six weeks due to an internet problem. Then, due to lecturer strikes, little work was assessed by tutors. So when the student quit, she did not expect to be chased for outstanding fees. I argued that there was a substantial element of non-delivery - and, finally, the university compromised on 25% of the fees.

At least universities are around to give refunds. Even harder hit are those who pay upfront - usually around £6,000 - for the "computer engineer" or "central heating expert" courses often advertised on daytime TV. Besides the "certificate", the attraction includes flexible learning and a "guaranteed job". But the flexible training, if it exists at all, is flexible for the provider, not the student. And the very small print shows the "guaranteed work" is only for a few months. In fact, this is nothing more than a part- refund of the very large fees.

The gap between what is promised and what is provided is so great that court action is often the only way to get a refund. But even that can be tricky - as all too many of these providers go bust, leaving students as unsecured creditors.

Health is another area that is on the cusp between something you pay for privately and being supplied by the state. Families are urged by advertising (as well as a lot of editorial) that they must have travel insurance, even for Europe where the EHIC covers them - and, for the better-off, why not have private medical cover as well?

Then you enter the minefield of "pre-existing conditions". This means they won't pay out if you already have the illness for which you are claiming. The trouble is that travel insurers in particular now stretch this to breaking point. Insurers know most claimants will accept their decision, but you don't have to. Challenge it by, for example, pointing out that the condition you are claiming for was not diagnosed when you took the policy. And be prepared to take the case to the ombudsman.

Finally - literally - don't forget that undertakers' bills can also be challenged. Arm yourself with comparisons from other funeral parlours, and be ready to plead that your ailing loved one was the victim of strong-arm selling when they agreed to the oak coffin with brass handles pulled by eight black horses. And as with any claim you make against any organisation, never take the first "no" to your claim to be their final answer.