Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Omg!!! What a mess help?????!!!!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4993 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I have only just posted a previous thread on here about my washing machine and to add matters worse I have just been digging out my contract with Brighthouse to find that my TV has been sold to me at the NEW price when it says USED on the contract!!!! The TV was a display model but I was told they had no new ones and that the display one was in fact NEW but I thought it was strange that it didnt come with the original remote and had some scratches on the base of the tv which I did complain about to the store. With regards to the remote when I complained I was told I could buy one off the internet for £70 at my expense!!! And the straches they werent even bothered about. The thing is it took 3 weeks for them to deliver it and in that time i was paying for an item that was still sat in the shop window everytime i went into the store, I cant believe how stupid I have been havent a clue where to go from here?????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure where you stand on this one, as it would appear that you were aware of the scratches before purchasing the tv, but still went ahead with the purchase. I can't make out from your posting whether or not you knew about the lost remote at the time of purchase or whether it arrived without the remote when you thought it would arrive with one. If you had been expecting the tv to come with a remote control, then you may have been better refusing the tv on delivery as being faulty because by accepting it you could now be seen as being happy with it.

 

If I were you, I would contact your local trading standards (number easily available in the phone book or from the website for your local council) and ask them for their advice. Things might hinge on the difference between new and used on the contract, and whether or not you agreed to pay the full price. Also, it might be worth checking whether or not there is any clause in the contract (if it's worth the paper it's printed on that is) that allows for you to return the tv within a set time if you are unhappy with it. Again, I think trading standards might be a good place to start on that one.

 

Good luck. It is so very frustrating when you realise that you have been taken for a ride, so I really hope you manage to sort things out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like the seller has put 'used' on the contract to get round this, however have they put in writing anywhere that there were any faults/missing parts? I think you need to get onto the seller and explain that you want to refuse the goods as they are not in the condition that you were expecting. Like I said, I think a call to your local trading standards may be a good idea as they can help you clarify exactly where you stand. Also, you can use their information when contacting Brighthouse, who might be more inclined to listen if they know that you are aware of where you stand.

 

Just one small point that comes to mind... Can you actually use the tv without the remote? I know that my tv is almost impossible to use without the remote (can turn it on, but not off again without actually switching it off at the mains!) If you can't use your tv without the remote then it's no good and it should not have been sold to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. And welcome to CAG

 

It would appear to me that you are very unhappy with the service you have received from BrightHouse (taking your other thread into account as well.) But, to be honest, it's all because you are looking at things in the wrong way... And, to be even more honest, that's because BrightHouse don't explain how "things really are" in the right way to their customers..

.

You are not BUYING, nor have you been SOLD a TV from BrightHouse (or a washing machine for that matter), you are only HIRING (renting) them - with an option to purchase them when, and if, all (hire) payments are completed. Also, contrary to what you may have been told, you will only ever own the items if, at the end of the contract, you apply in writing (and within 30 days) to have “ownership” transferred to you. If you choose not to do this, then the items should be returned to BrightHouse. In all fairness, most branch managers don’t bother with transferring ownership, they simply write the goods off… But, they do not, at any time during your contract, belong to YOU.

 

So you see, that’s the long and short of it. And, once you get your head around THAT bit, BrightHouse suddenly becomes a lot easier to deal with…

 

As you are also purchasing BrightHouse Optional Service Cover (which, again, is NOT a policy owned by you, it is just simply a “pay-as-you-go” weekly service provided by BrightHouse), just cancel your contract(s) and have BrightHouse take the goods back. End of. (All payments you have made to date were nothing more than hire charges whilst the goods were on-hire to you.

 

Now then, having done that you could (if you wanted to) renegotiate NEW hire contracts on both a TV and a washing machine, but this time making sure you get the items you actually WANT. (Or, you could take your business elsewhere… There ARE other “rent to own” companies on the high street… all the same deal… all the same system…)

 

This, in my view, is the easiest and most straight forward way to solve your problems. (You could go down the road of involving Trading Standards and invoking the power of the Supply of Goods and Services (Implied Terms) Act 1973, but you’ll only end up at the same place.

 

Hope this helps

 

Cheers

Lefty

 

PS—why not have a good old read of our BrightHouse FACT SHEET here … It could have saved you lots of hassle...

If the left side of the brain controls your right, and the right side controls your left, then left-handed people are always in their right mind!

 

Please help to support this site with a small donation... every little helps...

 

CAG- The Nation's Weekly Info Store!

;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou I understand what you are saying its just that I wish to own the products at the end of it and dont want old goods from the off set if you understand what i mean I have no problems with the payments I just want the right goods that I am paying for if I wanted refurbed goods then I would have signed up for that in the first place but as it goes I wanted them new from the start with regards to the goods could I just go back to the store and say come and collect them because with the TV i dont have the OSC??? Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...