I just had a look. Surprisingly emotive and unprofessional style of descriptions, lots of attacks upon others, and with the key questions of liability glossed over. Interestingly they are unable to cite even one case of a defended RLP claim being upheld in court. The blustering tone reminds me of those supposed internet piracy solicitors who were always yelling the odds about how strong their case was, right up until it collapsed under them.

An awful story. For future reference, it's worth saying that store guards have no power of search, and can only detain you until a police officer arrives. For any innocent person (including people who have accidentally taken goods out of the store) I would recommend refusing to be searched. It's a distressing and dis-empowering experience, and will undermine your confidence. Tell the store guard that you will wait peaceably for a police officer to arrive, but if they attempt to interfere with you or your property during that period you will defend yourself and you will make a complaint of assault against them. Reclaim some power and self-esteem, refuse to feel false shame. When the Police officer arrives, do not sit like a naughty child and let the shop guards dictate the process - made a clear and firm complaint of assault and false imprisonment against the store guard. Hold your head high, speak courteously but firmly - take the officer's name, and the names of the store guards. Ask the Police officer to ensure that the store's CCTV is secured for evidence, and ask him for the crime reference number for your complaint.

blacklace states that clean CRB is important to her. Whilst RLP & credit reference agencies are not linked to CRB, some employers will make checks on multiple systems. If blacklace has signed a form (or been AV recorded) admitting to theft and promising to pay a settlement, then failure to do so may be recorded on one or another database. If it's recorded as a civil debt via Experian etc, then it will likely be identifiable as a dishonesty flag, and that will impact upon credit ratings and insurance etc. If blacklace did not make any provable admission to theft, then I have no reservations and agree that the RLP should be robustly ignored.

I agree - this will be NFA'd by the Police, because the evidence does not support intent to permanently deprive and they know that CPS won't waste money prosecuting it. No court will convict a person of good character in a case like this. What was so excellent was the OP's girlfriend taking a clear and principled stance, and the comment about using the free solicitor too.

He had no power to stop you and inspect your shopping (although with an alarm sounding it would be reasonable to co-operate). If his attitude was discourteous or you were in a hurry, you have every right to ignore him and go on your way.

Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. If I had a moment of madness and committed shoptheft, I would be very grateful for the opportunity to settle it via RLP. The critical point is whether people get a fair and informed chance to make a decision when they've been stopped. Children and vulnerable adults should be exempted as a category, because their capacity for informed consent is not reliable.

I'm no friend of the clampers, but I wonder if this is a line of attack which will benefit the interests of consumers. Credit cards are a vital last-resort option in a crisis, typically because something has gone wrong and a large payment is immediately needed. Maybe your central heating blows up in February, and you have to pay for a new boiler. Maybe you missed a flight and you have to book onto the next available plane. Maybe a loved one is injured abroad and their travel insurer is quibbling about repatriation, so you bypass that debate by arranging it yourself. I had a car written off a few years ago, while a terminally-ill family member was in need of daily care & support - I didn't have the time or energy to mess about with insurers and hire cars, so I walked into a main dealer and drove a £8,000 used car away 40 minutes later after payment by card. In all these cases the customer might feel that the liability more properly rests with someone else, and they are being 'forced' to use a credit card because the other party has failed to meet their duties. Nonetheless, and speaking only for myself, it would be a bad thing if such payments could be easily reversed. If I decide it is necessary to make a large emergency payment, then my credit card is the obvious way to do that. I don't want the call-centre to refuse the transaction on the grounds that I might try to cancel it later. And I don't want the supplier to refuse a card and demand cash, because they've had card payments reversed so they don't trust that method any more. "Under duress" in it's proper meaning applies to immediate threats of unlawful harm, and is inherently criminal. We should not broaden it to apply to any payment which the customer resents having to make. Good luck to stu997, this general comment isn't intended to say anything about his particular case and I hope he gets a chunk of money back one way or another.

This is bad advice. The operator of a private car park is only entitled to sue the driver, and there is no duty upon the Registered Keeper to assist in that. Those powers and duties apply only to statutory penalty charges issued by police & council officers. The car park can only sue for damages which reasonably reflect their actual losses (eg the lost income from the space being unavailable for rental to another customer). For a few hours parking anywhere outside London, that will be £10 at most. £60 is a wildly-inflated claim, and they know that the courts would be very unlikely to uphold it. So they rarely take court action, and such threats can be ignored. There is no duty upon the rk to negotiate or communicate with the parking operator, and I would advise against wasting time on their sham "appeal" process. If an RK or driver feels anxious about the demands, then it is sufficient to send them £10 in compensation for lost parking revenue. This entirely discharges your moral duty as a good citizen, and completely removes the basis for any legal proceedings. Tony216's comment that "the court could draw the conclusion that a person has something to hide" is nonsense. A civil court deals with contractual liability, not with speculation about a person's character. To the extent that the Judge takes an opinion of the conduct of the parties, the bullying, greedy and dishonest behaviour of the claimants would be a more obvious target.

This is a good result - I wouldn't hesitate to take it, in your position.

The same mistake is made in all the cases mentioned above. Don't allow the retailer to dictate what rights you have and how you may exercise them. Keep careful detailed notes from the beginning, and when they've let you down three times...... sue them. Claim a full refund if the computer is less than 6m old, or if it's older claim a fair price allowing for depreciation at 20% pa. Claim a fair sum to meet your expenses and loss of earnings, and of course the court fees too. As long as your claim is basically reasonable, and supported by clearly explained evidence, they will not contest the case. Sending a lawyer to your local county court will cost them serious money (which they cannot claim back from you, even if they win). The small claims stream is designed for ordinary people, any sensible, organised person can easily bring a claim. Great example here - www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?264286

Yes, I daydream about spending a day outside a BH branch with a 3G laptop and a calculator. Big signs - "Compare Prices Before Shopping at Brighthouse!" "Free PriceChecks!" etc. Use a flipchart to demonstrate the full purchase cost with hidden extras. Then use the web to search equivalent products at less than half the price. Make a show of it, picking items from the BrightHouse brochures and conducting Bruce Forsyth price guessing with the crowd - "Higher!" "Lower!" etc.

Excellent result, fluffy - a lesson for other readers too. You can make as many threats and complaints as you like to firms like BH. They know that 99% of the time it's just hot air, and they brush you off. But when a customer actually goes to the county court and files a clear, and well-written claim, everything changes. The courts are there for all of us, and a lot cheaper and simpler than most people imagine - use them!

They cannot be compelled to sell for cash.

Write to head office, with the account number. Say that you are struggling financially, but you wish to pay as much as you can towards the arrears. Enclose a cheque for a small but useful amount - £20 to £50. They will phone you to refuse it, because they know that to put that in writing makes them look very bad. Have a tape recorder ready.

Write to them, keeping a copy. Say that they cancelled the agreement and were due to collect the goods on Monday. You are content to allow collection at any convenient time in the next 14 days, after which you will dispose of the abandoned goods. Make no further payment, apart from clearing arrears.

They will lie. They will say that she consented, and there's two of them to swear to it. You will never prove otherwise. Unless your wife is able and willing to wear a recording device, this is a poor tactic. If she's ready for a bit of espionage then it might work out really well - catch them on tape saying that they are taking the goods against her protests, and you have an unloseable claim.

The best thing you can do is end your account with them, recover as much as possible, and then tell your family & friends what sort of a company they are. If you can stop 2 or 3 customers going to them you've paid them back in spades.

He's right - they cannot threaten people with the Police, it's disgraceful behaviour.

That's a good result - they have run some good stories in the past, but unfortunately people don't seem able to resist the lure of shiny new things. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/2760675/The-peril-of-easy-credit-at-Christmas.html

A lucky escape. Tell them in writing, that they have failed to meet the contract within a reasonable period and you require a full refund. Keep a copy. If they refuse, come back here and we'll deal with the next stage.

Congratulations, this is excellent news. Don't hide behind your curtains, stand out in the street and show them where to back the van up. Then tell your neighbours that you worked out how much BH were trying to charge you and you were not going to stand for their shameful rip-off tactics. You have escaped a complete [problem], tictoria - you would have paid them 3 or 4 times the true value of the appliances, and they would've still treated you like dirt. Be glad, be happy, and make sure they take their property back as soon as possible. When you've got rid of their stuff, sit down and work out an affordable alternative. Does your family have a spare washer? Would someone lend you £200 to buy a new one for cash, from Comet or Currys etc? With the better weather coming, could you manage with hand-washing for a few months until your situation improves? Can you scrounge the use of a washing machine from a friend or neighbour? Is there a social services or domestic violence service that can get you a working washer? Sorry if this is in poor taste, but will you be receiving anything from the estate of your father & stepmother? Whatever you do, do not take on credit - you are a very poor risk and you will only be able to borrow at very high rates. Good luck!

I wonder how many people are declining to get involved with this because of your churlish remarks towards Gaston? Me for sure.

Good grief - you were supposed to repay £9,721 for a loan of £2,799? That's worth talking to CAB about, it seems indefensibly costly terms.

I am baffled by the sense of priorities here. If my household suffered an appalling incident like this I wouldn't waste a moment informing BAYV or any other supplier of goods. That would all be left to one side, for days or even weeks, whilst the immediate welfare of the family was dealt with. Sallywallwoo decided to call BAYV immediately, which is far more than they could reasonably expect. Any decent company would then have waited a week or two before making tentative, sympathetic contact. BAYV instead sent a menacing representative to visit 3 times a day and threaten the family. There are no words for the low moral character of a company which will behave like this.

You've worked it out. Their 'appeal' process is just another fiction to mislead people into thinking it's a statutory process. Any information you give them is to their advantage not yours.