Jump to content



Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2841 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I would ask on their blog for them to explain this then.

 

hello again! ask away! :!:

imho - the law I am quoting is easily understandable. i am unsure as to why Brighthouse have said on their blog that they have consulted the relevant government bodies who have stated that they are not in breach of such legislation. the brighthouse blog is now archived in wayback machine so can be admitted as evidence for Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi, just an update to this thread:

 

Email sent to Brighthouse on 18th November:

 

I refer to the letters that were sent to your offices approximately 4 weeks ago in addition to the letters that were given to store staff and manager as well as in addition to the emails I sent your company 3 days ago.

 

The emails were sent to: customer.relations, andy.parkinson giles.david as well as to Brighthouse CEO leo.mckee

I have not received an email to say that my communication to you has not been delivered, therefore I am assuming that it has actually been delivered.

I am still waiting for a response to my communications. I am still waiting for acknowledgements.

 

From my previous email and telephone communications with yourselves, I have attempted to get yourselves honor your price guarantee which you advertise. I have quoted the relevant law in why I am relying on, this can be seen at the following link: www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/2705/made - this law states the following:

1.5.2. Do not make statements like “if you can buy this product elsewhere for less, we will refund the difference” about your “own brand” products which other traders do not stock, unless your offer will also apply to other traders' equivalent goods. If there are any conditions attached to the offer (eg it only applies to goods on sale in the same town or excluding Internet sales) you should show them clearly and prominently, with the statement.

 

The Governments Intellectual Property Office shows that 'Baird' and 'Baird Television' is owned by yourselves. http://www.ipo.gov.uk/t-find-number?detailsrequested=C&trademark=557204

 

 

Three items were purchased from your store:

Baird HiFi

Baird 46" TV

Baird 42" TV

 

I have tried to get yourselves to adhere to both your price promise as well as the relevant consumer law which I have outlined above. The ways in which I have tried this are requesting in store, phoning your head office, writing letters, writing emails. As stated above, you have not acknowledged letters that were sent approximately 4 weeks ago, you have not acknowledged letters given to store manager approximately 2 weeks ago and you have not acknowledged emails which have been sent to yourselves this week.

 

It is my understanding that as I informed your staff I was recording a telephone call for legal purposes, then, this telephone call can be admitted as Court evidence should this matter go to Court. It is also my understanding that I can use email as evidence in Court. Furthermore, it is my understanding that I need to be seen by the Court to have attempted to reach a solution to the problem previously, thus avoiding legal action. In my own opinion, I have now exhausted all attempts at trying to resolve this with yourselves and feel that the only course of action I can now take is legal action against yourselves.

 

If you fail to reply to this email, then my next course of action would be to initiate legal action against yourselves without any further reference to yourselves.

 

For the purpose of making it absolute clear, I reiterate the legislation:

1.5.2. Do not make statements like “if you can buy this product elsewhere for less, we will refund the difference” about your “own brand” products which other traders do not stock, unless your offer will also apply to other traders' equivalent goods. If there are any conditions attached to the offer (eg it only applies to goods on sale in the same town or excluding Internet sales) you should show them clearly and prominently, with the statement.

 

Of course, should this matter proceed to Court, then all the necessary paperwork and in depth legislation (my arguments) will be served to you in due course.

 

I hope that you will reply to this email in an attempt to rectify this situation prior to legal action being taken against you.

 

Kind regards

 

 

 

Email received from Brighthouse on 19th November:

Dear Mr xxxxxxx,

Thank you for your recent email.

We can confirm that we have received your previous correspondence and are currently clarifying some of the points you have raised.

We would like to thank you for your patience and assure you that we will provide a full response to you in due course.

Yours sincerely,

Customer Relations Department

 

Email sent to Brighthouse on 21st November:

 

cleardot.gif

hello,

 

It is my opinion that you have had ample amount of time in order to answer my questions concerning the relevant statute law regarding your price promise. It is approx a month since you received communication concerning this - your only response to my communications is that you will provide a full response in due course.

 

Please note that I am unwilling to wait forever for you to deal with this matter. Unless you are able to rectify this matter and honor your price promise under consumer law, then I feel as if there is no other choice than to pursue this matter within the small claims Court without any further reference to yourselves.

 

This link: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/2705/madeshows the following law:

1.5.2. Do not make statements like “if you can buy this product elsewhere for less, we will refund the difference” about your “own brand” products which other traders do not stock, unless your offer will also apply to other traders' equivalent goods. If there are any conditions attached to the offer (eg it only applies to goods on sale in the same town or excluding Internet sales) you should show them clearly and prominently, with the statement.

 

 

This link: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/t-find-number?detailsrequested=C&trademark=557204 shows that 'Baird' is your own brand.

 

Please note that I informed yourselves that telephone calls were being recorded. Within one of the phone conversations, my call was transferred to another member of staff who informed me that she has a knowledge of the law and that the law I quoted was not law but was infact a guide. This is incorrect. This is not a guide, this is law - hence why it appears on the 'legislation' government website.

 

This situation is quite clear. You sold own brand products with a price guarantee, in my opinion your own brand products are highly priced when compared to other traders equivalent goods. It is further to my opinion that you are now ignoring consumer law and are failing to abide by the relevant legislation.

 

Now, turning to the Consumer Credit Act - It will be my intention to pursue this within Court and to request that the Judge make an order under section 140B to rectify this matter. In addition to this, there would be the small matter of costs, disbursements, reports etc.

 

The law is quite clear in this matter and I fail to see why you simply can not abide by the relevant law without ignoring the consumer or fobbing the consumer off. (I feel as though I have both been ignored and then fobbed off during my attempt to escalate this complaint with yourselves)

 

Please note, my communications to yourselves are not threats. Whilst I do not want to start legal action against yourselves, I now believe that this is the only way I am able to get yourselves to abide by the relevant consumer law. I reiterate that I am not willing to wait forever and consider that you have already had ample time in order to rectify this matter. I am willing to give yourselves another 2 days before legal action is initiated against yourselves.

 

Regards,

Link to post
Share on other sites

email sent to Brighthouse on 26th November:

 

 

 

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

 

My last email stated that I would start legal action against you within 2 days if you failed to provide a satisfactory response to my last email. As usual, it was not acknowledged by yourselves (again). I am now in the process of preparing a legal case against yourselves, therefore, I am now sending you this letter before action.

 

I am writing in compliance with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. I refer to the numerous letters / emails sent to you

 

As you have not been able to resolve my complaint concerning your 'price promise' and have not answered my letters and emails, then I consider there to be no other choice than that to initiate legal action against yourselves. I am willing to consider Alternative Dispute Resolution in this matter in order to avoid legal action and invite your proposals. However, please treat this document as a final letter before court action will be initiated against yourselves after 5 days unless you make an attempt to amicably resolve this matter.

 

As you have not answered my letters / emails, then, if you choose to ignore this letter then it is my understanding that the court can impose sanctions if you fail to comply with the practice direction, including your failure to respond to this letter before claim. Whilst it could be argued that my previous communication to yourselves can be considered as 'letters before action', then, for the purpose of clarity and to ensure I have complied with the Civil Procedure Rules - this letter informs you. It is as it says, a letter before action. You have already had ample time to reply to my previous communications, therefore, I am giving you a total of 5 days in order to rectify this matter. Unless you rectify this matter within 5 days or provide a very good reason as to why you need more time to clarify the points I have raised, then legal action will be taken against yourselves.

 

 

Summary of facts:

 

Current legislation states the following:

"[1.5.2. Do not make statements like “if you can buy this product elsewhere for less, we will refund the difference” about your “own brand” products which other traders do not stock, unless your offer will also apply to other traders' equivalent goods. If there are any conditions attached to the offer (eg it only applies to goods on sale in the same town or excluding Internet sales) you should show them clearly and prominently, with the statement."

 

 

Upon a telephone call (recorded), Brighthouse staff stated they had a knowledge of the law, and that the law I am quoting is not a law but just a guide. Unfortunately, the Brighthouse staff who states she has a knowledge of the law is infact wrong, it is not a guide, it is law. The word 'legislation' in the link would also suggest this to your staff who has a good knowledge of the law.

 

On your own blog: http://liveweb.archive.org/http://www.brighthouseblog.co.uk/tv-technology/get-seriously-social-for-less-with-a-vodafone-blackberry/ you also state that you would not honor the promise, - despite being provided with a link the the relevant legislation. You also stated on your blog that you have been in touch with relevant government bodies who say you are not in breach of such legislation.

 

You have refused your price promise on your own brand products when attempting to use your price promise to price match other traders equivalent goods.

 

You have failed to respond to letters sent to your head office, you have failed to respond to letters that were given personally to store staff. All letters sent under separate cover as one letter from my mother, one from myself - making a total of 6 letters ignored. In addition to this, numerous emails were sent to various people within your company. I have one reply only, and this reply is an acknowledgement stating that you had infact received my previous correspondence and are still waiting to clarify the points raised.

 

 

 

 

How you can avoid legal proceedings:

 

Provide your price promise in line with the above legislation - other traders equivalent goods. In order to do this, I request that the original agreements to be terminated on all products and new agreements made - the new agreements showing the price of traders equivalent goods - in addition to this, all money already paid to yourselves so far will be deducted from the price of the new HP agreements.

 

Financial:

I am attempting to claim for a financial adjustment to the HP agreement. In addition to this financial adjustment, there are other costs which are at the moment at £600.00 - this is representative of the amount of time it has taken me to research various consumer laws and other related legislation, contacting yourselves, etc. This figure is not limited, for example, should further time be spent in this matter then the figure would be increased accordingly. In addition to this, other costs are such things as travel expenses, court costs etc.

At this late stage, I am still willing not to pursue legal action against yourselves on the provision that you honor your price promise as per my requests.

 

My documents & evidence:

1 - Copy of 3 letters sent to Brighthouse head office

2 - Copy of 2 letters given to staff in Brighthouse store.

3 - Copy of email sent to: CEO xxx xxx xxx and customer relations

4 - Copy of email sent to customer relations

5 - Copy of email received from customer relations

6 - Copy of Brighthouse blog where Brighthouse state they have contacted government bodies and are not in breach of the legislation, despite legislation being shown on their blog.

7 - Copy of phone call recordings in which I stated the relevant legislation 3 times with each time a Brighthouse staff member from head office informing me that the price promise is for identical products only.

 

8 - Copy of phone call recording in which my call was transferred to someone within Brighthouse who stated she had a 'good knowledge of the law' and that the legislation I had quoted was infact not law but was just a 'pricing guide and not law'

 

9 - Document showing that 'Baird' is an own brand product from Brighthouse.

10 - Various documents showing equivalent specifications for all products - this supporting the price I have stated what I believe the products should be reduced to.

11 - Details as to my costs in pursuing this matter

 

 

 

 

I request that you provide me with copies of the following documents:

1. My original HP agreements and the HP agreements I had to resign (as a friend told your staff to remove both insurances, i had to make new agreements)

2. Details and a breakdown of all payments paid by myself.

 

 

Please note that as stated above and again, for the purpose of clarity - this is a letter before action. Legal action will commence against yourselves after 5 days unless this matter is rectified. As you have already stated you need time to clarify things, I consider that you have already had enough time to clarify things, therefore, unless you can provide me with a very good reason as to why you need more time then legal action will commence against yourselves after 5 days.

 

Yours sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

Copy of email sent to Brighthouse on 28th Nov:

 

 

My previous email sent to yourselves on 26 November stated that I am now preparing a legal case against yourselves.

 

I will not bother going into detail concerning the problem as I am sure you are well aware from the numerous letters given to store staff, the numerous letters posted to yourselves and the numerous emails that were sent to your customer relations, andy parkinson, giles david and leo mckee.

 

In line with my previous communication sent to yourselves in compliance with the Practice Direction, you are respectfully reminded that you have 3 working days remaining, including today in order to resolve my concerns. Therefore, in order to prevent myself starting legal action against yourselves, you are required to perform one of the following:

 

1. Allow your price promise (eg, price of your baird product to same specification product albeit a different manufacturer)

2. Provide a legal reason as to why I am not entitled to this price promise.

3. Have a very good reason as to why you need further time to respond to me.

 

This communication serves as only a reminder to yourselves. I consider that I have already sent my letter before Court action to youselves.

 

Regards,

Link to post
Share on other sites

email received from Brighthouse on 28th November:

 

Dear Mr xxxxxxxx,

 

I write further to your emails received regarding our price match policy.

 

I confirm we intend to respond to you by the close of play, 30 November 2012

 

Best Regards

 

Customer Relations

BrightHouse

email sent to Brighthouse on 28th November:

 

Thanks for your response.

 

I am unsure as to why you need such a large amount of time to allow your price promise or to provide a legal reason as to why you will not allow the price of your Baird TV (around £900) to be price matched to an equivalent model of £329.99 from Currys plus the other 2 Baird product reductions.

 

I will await your response by close of play on 30 November - in compliance with the practice direction email I sent you previously.

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brighthouse answered in their blog and phone calls that the legislation I had quoted to them was not law and that it was just a guide. This is partly correct. I did quote them a guide and I mistook it for law as the guide was on the legislation website. But as a guide on the legislation website, it is considered to be secondary legislation, or secondary law.

 

Contravention of the Code does not of itself give rise to any civil or criminal liability but evidence of breaches of the Code can be used to support a prosecution for the offence of giving a misleading price indication

 

The misleading price indication would be Brighthouse price promise. The price match promise indicates that they will match the price of identical goods from other shops. But, this is not possible as Brighthouse products are mostly exclusive to Brighthouse, or are Brighthouse own brand products, (eg Baird).

The price promise seemed to inspire confidence to purchase 3 Baird products, the price promise influenced a transactional decision that would not have taken otherwise. Eg - if there was no price promise, the purchases would not have been made since other retailers would be taken into consideration. The price promise gave a distinct impression that the 3 Baird products could be compared with other retailers. It is misleading to advertise something that is not possible.

 

Unfair commercial practices are prohibited. An unfair commercial practice is unfair if it materially distorts or is likely to materially distort the economic behaviour of the average consumer with regard to the product. Again, the price promise could be considered as an unfair commercial practice since the price promise does not take into account that Brighthouse products are mainly exclusive or are 'own brand' - therefore making it almost impossible to search for an identical product elsewhere.

 

Misrepresentation Act 1967, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/7/section/2 states:

(1)Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the misrepresentation would be liable to damages in respect thereof had the misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that person shall be so liable notwithstanding that the misrepresentation was not made fraudulently, unless he proves that he had reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made the facts represented were true.

 

Brighthouse said they would reply today, I feel that they will not honor the guide or the secondary legislation I quoted to them. So it looks like I need to take them to court. Ive looked at a few different laws (shown some above) but unsure what other laws to read.

 

At court, do I use consumer law? misrepresentation law? trade description act? what laws should be used?

 

The main law I quoted is secondary legislation, Brighthouse do not have to abide by it, but the Court will use this secondary legislation as any breaches of it can be used to support a prosecution.

 

Any ideas please? Guidance? Help? Myself and friends are determined to see this through as we all feel the price promise is misleading !!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Final Resopnse! letter received from Brighthouse ---

 

1. They replied explaining what their OSC offers other than the statutory minimum supplied by law. Not much!!!

2. They have said £50 credit to be given to account as a goodwill gesture because of the time they have taken to deal with this.

3. Their main response is that they believe it is clear from advertising that the Baird brand is not covered by the price match promise because both store and website state that the product must be 'identical'. It is Brighthouse view that products which cannot be found elsewhere like Baird, are not covered by this promise.

Brighthouse stated that my dispute with them concerning the governments 'Code' which I quoted to them is not mandatory and not retailer has to follow it. This is correct, I quoted a statutory instrument or secondary legislation, it is just a Code - not law. But as Brighthouse breach this code, then:

Breach of the Code is not itself an offence but, where an offence of giving a misleading price indication is alleged, breach of the Code can be used in court as evidence for the prosecution; and compliance with it can be used as evidence for the defence.

 

 

My response is that the misleading price indication is the price promise. It is not clear from advertising that the Baird brand is not covered by the price promise, despite what Brighthouse say. An average comsumer such as myself and my friend did not know that 'Baird' was Brighthouse own brand product. The misrepresented price promise caused 3 purchases to go ahead. If there was not a price promise, then other reatilers would have been considered.

 

 

 

http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/cons_int/safe_shop/fair_bus_pract/ucp_en.pdf

 

A commercial practice is misleading if it either:

• Contains false information and is therefore

untruthful, or

• in any way, including overall presentation,

deceives or is likely to deceive the average

consumer, even if the information is correct

and

• causes or is likely to cause him to take a

transactional decision that he would have

otherwise not taken.

It is misleading to:

• omit material information that the average

consumer needs, according to the context,

to take an informed transactional decision;

Information must be displayed clearly: obscure

presentation is tantamount to an omission to inform;

“Undue influence” means “exploiting a position

of power in relation to the consumer so as to apply

pressure, even without using or threatening to use

physical force, in a way which significantly limits the

consumer’s ability to make an informed decision.”

• Market information

“Passing on materially inaccurate information on

market conditions or on the possibility of finding

the product with the intention of inducing the

consumer to acquire the product at conditions less

favourable than normal market conditions.”

 

 

The price promise imo is unfair. its misleading. baird product does not represent good value for money. equivalent to baird products can be bought for just under 50% less from other stores.

 

can anyone help with laws or legislation i can use in court? or if you think there is no chance in winning this in court please say so!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

just a quick update to this. my friend who purchased from Brighthouse has now agreed to start legal action concerning their price promise. i have to prepare court paperwork and start the court process. Brighthouse have already been sent a letter before action.

 

one thing that is interesting, since I sent them previous correspondence, I see that in two of their stores they have changed their advertising concerning the price promise. they now state that the promise does not cover 'Baird' TVs.

 

I will update this thread with the outcome of the court case.

 

Meanwhile, if anyone can help me with this, provide ideas, legal arguments etc, please do so!!!

 

Hopefully soon I will be able to post info so other people can claim using their price promise. IMO, a Baird TV sold for a cash price of around £900 is extortionate since the equivalent specification product from other retailers are around £329.00 (Baird TVs although newly sold are outdated technology)

 

If anyone can help with ideas etc, please post! Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...