Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Wait for more replies, but that letter to me can be interpreted as a letter before action. Ignoring it can have consequences. The court to impose sanctions for failure in responding to a letter of claim.
    • 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.🙂
  • 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

Brighthouse: replacement TV problem, please Help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4638 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

Hi, my partner has a 32" HD TV from Brighthouse, unfortunaly it accidently fell and broke, so we figured because we had insurance on it we would get a replacement TV, so we sent it to Brighthouse roughly on the 15th June to see if they could fix it or replace it, they have had it since and given us no temporary replacment TV (like they have given us in the past), they said its un-repairable (which i suspected), and now they are claiming since they cant find a TV which is the same model and age that we have to pay £250 (split into weekly payments) for a replacement (newer but same model) TV. I dont want to accept that as while they have had our TV our contract ran out with them, so its fully paid off, I could understant and accept there offer if I still had an outstanding debt with the TV i wanted fixed. is there anyone on these forums that could help with this issue? I would be extremly grateful. Thank You

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, my partner has a 32" HD TV from Brighthouse, unfortunaly it accidently fell and broke, so we figured because we had insurance on it we would get a replacement TV, so we sent it to Brighthouse roughly on the 15th June to see if they could fix it or replace it, they have had it since and given us no temporary replacment TV (like they have given us in the past), they said its un-repairable (which i suspected), and now they are claiming since they cant find a TV which is the same model and age that we have to pay £250 (split into weekly payments) for a replacement (newer but same model) TV. I dont want to accept that as while they have had our TV our contract ran out with them, so its fully paid off, I could understant and accept there offer if I still had an outstanding debt with the TV i wanted fixed. is there anyone on these forums that could help with this issue? I would be extremly grateful. Thank You

 

Hi, and welcome to CAG.

 

Unfortunately, even if you had Optional Service Cover (OSC) AND Damage Liability Cover (DLC) agreements on your telly, it still was not covered for accidental damage. This is a common misconception. Your DLC policy only covered your LIABILITY on your Hire Purchase agreement - it would have NEVER provided a like for like replacement for accidental damage.

 

All payments (Hire Purchase, OSC and DLC) should have stopped at the point the TV was returned on a DLC claim. If you have been making payments AFTER the TV was returned, then BrightHouse owe you some money. (This is probably reflected in the offer of another TV for £250 - which, to be honest, sounds quite reasonable...)

 

Probably not the reply you had hoped for, but you have to consider that if you had bought your telly from, say Currys or Dixons, and you accidentally dropped it after two years, would you be expecting Currys or Dixons to supply you with a new telly?

 

Unfortunately you have just learned the HARD WAY that BrightHouse OSC and DLC agreements are a complete and total waste of money.

 

Cheers

Lefty

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

I understand that Currys or Dixons wouldnt replace a broken telly after 2years, but I was told by a member of staff inside Brighthouse that my TV was covered for accidental damage, so if what you say is true then they have mislead me havent they?

 

Edit: Also, when we gave Brighthouse our TV back we told them if they were going to write it off, we didnt want them to as we could have claimed on our More Than home contents insurance, only reason we didnt claim them first is because of the £100 excess, so we thought we would try our luck with the Brighthouse insurance first.

Edited by stephent86
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. You have well and truly been misled. This problem comes up a lot on here.

 

The thing you have to remember is that you DLC policy only insured your LIABILITY on any future payments on the Hire Purchase agreement. In the event of a successful claim, all further payments would be waived. There is - nor never was - any promise of a replacement product due to accidental damage.

 

Bottom line is the telly did not belong to you. It belonged to BrightHouse. You were only hiring it. (It would only have become yours at the time of your final payment on the agreement.)

 

Cheers

Lefty

 

 

 

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

I know what I'm gonna do, record them telling me its covered by accidental damage, then if they dont replace TV sharpish I'll take recording to my lawyer, sounds like a plan. :) thanks for your info Lefty

Link to post
Share on other sites

...or better still get it in writing!

 

I wish you luck, but I know BrightHouse pretty well. Unless you are still a customer and have other agreements still active, the store will simply wash their hands of the whole thing. (Which is why I would suggest a little friendly negotiation with the manager and his offer of another telly for £250...)

 

Oh - and if you DO succeed with a fair compromise, don't take the OSC and DLC.... ah, but you know that now, don't you! ;)

 

Cheers

Lefty

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

I actualy have a decent amount of things still in contract with Brighthouse, and have been a customer for nearly 4 years, and only been late with my payments once or twice in all that time. I gave them an option, I wanted to put the 32" in my bedroom when/if i got it back, and take out a 3D Smart TV for the living room, I offered them to forget the 32" TV if they would give us money off the Smart TV, but they refused that and claimed they cant do compromises on NEW TV's only reconditioned ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My bet is your store manager will do his best to please a valued customer. BrightHouse customer service has improved vastly over the last couple of years, and store managers DO have a LOT of descretion at their disposal.

 

Negotiate yourself a fair compromise.

 

I would also suggest that if you DO have other current agreements, you may like to re-think any OSC or DLC policies you have... ;)

 

Cheers

Lefty

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

Edit: Also, when we gave Brighthouse our TV back we told them if they were going to write it off, we didnt want them to as we could have claimed on our More Than home contents insurance, only reason we didnt claim them first is because of the £100 excess, so we thought we would try our luck with the Brighthouse insurance first.

 

Hi again - just noticed your edit above.

 

If, as you say, you have home contents insurance of your own, why on EARTH are you paying for BrightHouse Damage Liability Insurance? It is completely POINTLESS!

 

If you were to remove all OSC and DLC from your agreements, you would see a weekly saving of around 30-40% !!!!

 

Cheers

Lefty

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

yea that was the plan, but thats another problem I have with Brighthouse lol, we moved town last year and to a different Brighthouse branch, but the old branch refuse to let us change branch, so in order to remove the insurances we have to go through to the old town where we lived and hand sign documents, we cant do this as we have no car. Now there excuse for not changing store is that they cant do it while theres a current dispute (TV issue).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...