Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I would suggest that you stop trying to rely on legal theory – as you understand it. Firstly, because we are dealing with practical/pragmatic situations and at a low value level where these arguments tend not to work. Secondly, because you clearly have misunderstood the assessment of quantum where there are breaches of obligations. The formula that you have cited above is the method of loss calculation in torts. In contract it is entirely different. The law of obligations generally attempts to remedy the breach. This means that in tort, damages seek to put you into the position you would have been in had the breach not occurred. In other words it returns you to your starting position – point zero. Contract damages attend put you into the position that you would have been had the breach not occurred but this is not your starting position, contract damages assume that the agreement in dispute had actually been carried out. This puts you into your final position. You sold an item for £XXX. Your expectation was that you your item would be correctly delivered and that you would be the beneficiary of £XXX. Your expectation loss is the amount that you sold the item for and that is all you are entitled to recover. If you want, you can try to sue for the larger sum – and we will help you. But if they ask for evidence of the value of the item as it was sold then I can almost guarantee that either you will be obliged to settle for the lesser sum – or else a judge will give you judgement but for the lesser sum. This will put you to the position that you would have been had there been no breach of contract. I understand from you now that when you dispatch the item you declared the retail cost to you and not your expected benefit of £XXX. To claim for the retail value in the circumstances would offend the rules relating to betterment. If you want to do it then we will help you – but don't be surprised if you take a tumble.  
    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
    • amusing that 'bad economic judgement on behalf of prior party ISN'T a major reason to wingers to move to deform yet immigration is, where record levels of such has been driven by the right wings terrible brexit and the later incompetent dog whistle 'proposals largely driven to whistle to the right wingnuts Just seems to confirm the are clueless numpties 'wetting their own shoes   Has farage bought a property in Clacton yet?   yet concern for the NHS is listed as a major issue even by those saying they are moving to deform  
    • Also, have you told us how much you paid for this vehicle? Are there any other expenses you have incurred – insurance, inspections et cetera? How far away from the dealership do you live?
  • 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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4933 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 got a tv from Bright House in May 2009. I haven't had any major problems with them other than canceling the extortionate service charges in the first week (something along the lines of £9 a week). I had the occasional late payment, mainly due to my bad memory but I always paid the late fee etc etc.

 

In June this year I had to go on income support as my partner left us for another woman and got me sacked from my job in the process. Obviously this put me in problems financially, so I contacted Bright House and asked if it was possible for my payments to be reduced and they said no. I then asked if I could give the tv back, they said that was possible but that I would incur a penalty which was a percentage of what I owed. I can't remember the specific figure but it was several hundred pounds.

 

I wasn't in a position to pay a penalty fee so I carried on paying my £13 a week. In September my benefits were reduced by £25 a week to pay back an overpayment and a loan that I had last time I was on income support, a few years ago. This put me in dire straits financially- I now have a weekly income of just over £100 a week to support myself and my son. I have been looking for a job for several months now with no luck and I had to miss a payment because my gas bill was due. Then something else happened the following week....and so it went on.

 

I don't want to give the tv back as I obviously don't want to be without a telly, but Bright House won't accept a lower payment plan from me. Someone came to my house today and put a letter through the door stating that they will come and remove the tv if I don't pay up. I didn't answer the door and have no intention of doing so- I don't answer the door unless I know who it is but for different reasons.

 

Obviously I accept that if I want to keep the tv then I have to pay them what I owe. If they take me to court and I can show a judge that my financial situation isn't great can they make an order for a lower repayment plan? I am quite happy for it to go to court if it means that Bright House would be forced to accept a lower amount from me each week- maybe a judge can make them do what I can't!

 

Judging by other posts here it would have been wise of me to make a note of dates of when I spoke to the store but I didn't- you live and learn.

 

I'm not really sure which direction to go in now- I only got the bloomin tv because my ex wanted an all singing all dancing lcd and nothing but the biggest one available would do!

 

I hope that someone can come along and give me some advice.

 

Many Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi connor

 

Welcome to CAG

 

The guys will respond shortly.

Thank you :)

 

Am just trying to read my way round this part of the forum- my eyes are hurting there's so much to take in!

 

Would I be right in saying that if they turned up and I let them in and they took the tv back WITHOUT me signing anything to state that I am authorizing removal that I can get back the money that I have paid so far? I just did a quick mental calculation and I think its around £800- I could buy a nice tv with that AND be free of the nasty people at Bright House!

 

Is this an option?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they do come round tell them to bog off.

They cannot just walk in and take it and they only other way of getting the tv is called breaking and entering and thats illegal.

 

Your quite right, a judge would look at your outgoings so tell them this. Stop asking for them to accept £x amount a week and tell them this is what they are getting. Like you said, the worst that will happen is court and a judge will help you to make affordable payments.

 

Ok so what I would do....

Write to Brighthouse (Their main customer service dept, not the local store), tell them you are struggling and offer them your 'temporary' repayment terms. Keep to this arrangement and they won't goto court. The reason being is the courts do not like their time wasted by this type of thing.

I personally would ignor any letter they send that refused to accept that and I would just keep to what I wrote. And make sure you send the letter recorded or better so you have proof you have written to them.

 

Don't let these parasites bully you anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And remember its your money and you will spend it how you see fit. Brighthouse are at the bottom of the pecking order when it comes to repaying debts. Pay your rent, gas, electricity, food etc... All the important things you need to live and whatever is left can be divided between the debts that do not have a high priority ie Brighthouse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for your reply.

 

I sent letters recorded delivery to both my store and head office explaining the situation AND requesting that no more visits to my home be done without an appointment. If anyone turns up I will call the police- I have kept copies of the letters so can prove that I have asked for no more visits. I also said (in a nice way) that if they won't agree to reduced payments then they are more than welcome to take me to court.

 

However, when I came home there was a big white van sitting outside my house (literally- on the grass in my front garden!) with 2 huge men who tried to intimidate me into letting them in. I decided that rather than take the risk of them barging past me I would go to my friends house instead so after telling them to get their van the heck off my grass I turned around and walked away to the sounds of them calling me names like fat b1tch and the like. Another letter is in the making expressing my disgust at their 'representatives'.

 

I know that they provide a service to people (like me) who can't get credit elsewhere, but there is no need for the disgraceful treatment of their customers- just because we have bad credit for whatever reason doesn't make us bad people!

 

Thanks again for the advice, I will keep you updated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

these guys have no right to enter your property at all.

only bailiffs chasing council tax can actually force entry with the police.

 

Brighthouse employ idiots, i doubt any of them have certification to be bailiffs, they just threaten people.

 

and certainly what is happening is harassment and should be reported.

 

whilst i sympathise with Brighthouse that you have their goods and arent paying what they expect, there are ways and means to achieve things and a reduced payment plan is cheaper and easier than the route they seem to take so often, i do wonder who heads up this department they seem so clueless.

 

my advice, is stick to everything in writing, make it clear that you have offered and been declined assistance in repaying your debt to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: The last comment, slightly off topic but I must respond that baliffs do not have powers to force their way into property even with the poilce in attendance for council tax unless given peaceful entry on a previous occasion.

 

I agree that their behaviour was absolutely disgusting and rude, you may want to remind the head office is that the way they treat all customers, and if so, you will report them to the statutory authorities.

Edited by jb000
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Small update: Bright House have chosen to ignore the letters I have sent them and haven't contacted me since sending the goon squad out. However, the tv that I have has stopped working (can't get it off standby) so now I have no tv. I know that if I call them they will a.demand all monies from me immediately and b.laugh at me for not taking out the optional service cover.

 

Anyone know if there's anything I can do in this situation? The tv is 18 months old and I don't have home insurance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...