Brighthouse problems, advice please.

[angel49]

o-k, help needed for friend now as I don't really know about these people save what I've read on the site.

Brighthouse were threatening repossession of household items and she sent for credit agreements etc. These have now arrived (4 in total) and on 3 of them she has met the sums required which prevents repossession unless through a court order.

From what she says Brighthouse hound her on the telephone day and night demanding to know when she will bring the account up to date etc and someone will be calling to collect the goods.

I have hopefully given the right advice and suggested the following but need further guidance on this.

 

1, suggested cancelling the insurance to start with.

2, start a claim for all the charges they make.

 

Placing the account in dispute which may prevent anyone calling/phoning.

 

Any suggestions/advice appreciated. thanks

[adarling2006]

first of all get the telephoning to stop, write to them and say that all communication to be done in writing, under the telephony act 1949 which makes it an offence after requesting such an action to continue phone calls. also under the communications act 2003 but i'm not so sure what bit of it is. something to do with harassment. i'll look it up.

as for the door step visit ur friend has the right to refuse them, meaning they can't just show up as they like, they have to apply for your friends permission. if they show up uninvited, tell them they better leave or get lifted by the police. there is alot of help in the debt action group.

CCA request them under the consumer credit act 1974, should stall them and even better if they can't produce anything. best i can think of at the mo.

[angel49]

Thanks adarling,

 

I gave her the letter for CCA last week and the 4 credit agreements came back today with statements of all monies payable/paid.

 

She "allowed" me to see them and thats how I noticed the insurances and payments to date etc. There are quite a few charges there to be claimed.

Best of all, she's only 2 weeks behind with repayments but she's quite stressed with the phone calls and has 2 very young children.

 

I will try to get a letter of sorts done tonight but need to get it to her for signature then get it mailed a.s.a.p

[adarling2006]

i'd go over the agreement's carefully to see if they are properly executed or unenforceable, do they contain all the prescribed terms under the OFT guidelines for consumer contracts, have a look in the cca thread, also in sure under the UTCC reg's if there is an unfair term/terms ie the charges then i'd argue that the contract/agreement is void unless it can operate without the unfair term in place. would take a court to judge that one though. maybe one of the mod's would help better than i can but at least it's a good start.

[angel49]

Thanks again for your reply,I'm scouring the site for everything to get the letter sorted. Have found a piece on telephone harrassment,tresspass, for starters. Should keep them at bay for now.

I'll see the credit agreements again tomorrow.

Thank you once again for your response:)

[adarling2006]

no problem, every little helps, and that's what this site is about. will post more when i know more ok.

[tamadus]

The first thing that strikes me is that thay cannot seize goods without permission or a court order once the minimum ammount has been paid under the agreement.

 

Double check those 'agreements' and let us know what you find.

 

If the 'insurance isnt worth the paper it's written on then I'd be looking to a misselling claim. Also put together a claim for the charges.

 

It's worth sending a letter as advised above telling them no more phone calls quoting the Harrasement act and the administration of justice act along with the telecommunications act.

[angel49]

Thanks for your reply Tamadus. I've so far managed the following, hope it's enough for now. It was the insurances that caught my eye and I have suggested cancelling them immediately in order to lower the amounts to be repaid. I will learn more tomorrow. Any thoughts on the letter?

 

ACCOUNTS IN DISPUTE

xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx

I am formally requesting that all further correspondence be made in writing only.

I demand that all phone calls from BRIGHTHOUSE stop immediately. I am now familiar with the terms of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1970 and I believe your harassment places you in breach of these acts.

If you continue to call, you will also be in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1949) and, as such, I will report you to both Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading.

You will be deemed to have been served notice of my request and I will deem it served by 11th May 2007, I am advising you that any calls received after this date will be recorded with the intention of them being used as evidence.

Please also be advised re your threats to send someone to collect goods from my home that:

There is an implied license under English Common Law for certain people to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.).

I revoke license under English Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit us at our property and if you do so without our permission, you will then be liable to damages for a tort of trespass. You would also be conspiring in a trespass if you sent someone to visit me.

[tamadus]

Thanks for your reply Tamadus. I've so far managed the following, hope it's enough for now. It was the insurances that caught my eye and I have suggested cancelling them immediately in order to lower the amounts to be repaid. I will learn more tomorrow. Any thoughts on the letter?

 

ACCOUNTS IN DISPUTE

 

xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx

 

 

I am formally requesting that all further correspondence be made in writing only.

 

I demand that all phone calls from BRIGHTHOUSE stop immediately. I am now familiar with the terms of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1970 and I believe your harassment places you in breach of these acts.

 

If you continue to call, you will also be in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1949) and, as such, I will report you to both Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading.

 

You will be deemed to have been served notice of my request and I will deem it served by 11th May 2007, I am advising you that any calls received after this date will be recorded with the intention of them being used as evidence.

 

Please also be advised re your threats to send someone to collect goods from my home that:

 

There is an implied license under English Common Law for certain people to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.).

 

I revoke license under English Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit us at our property and if you do so without our permission, you will then be liable to damages for a tort of trespass. You would also be conspiring in a trespass if you sent someone to visit me.

 

 

 

Looking good so far Angel but you have tomorrows date as the date of being deemed served, that doesnt leave time for it to reach them, I'd change it to mondays date and make sure its posted tomorrow.

 

Have the insurances been added into the loans? If so then cancelling them may not reduce the costs, much better if you can show they have been missold and were never of any value to the debtor.

[angel49]

I believe she wants to deliver them to the branch in person and hopefully ensuring a hassle-free weekend. Quite brave I think - I would have mailed if it were me.

 

Thank you for your input/response. Will post when I've seen the agreements tomorrow.........oh, later today.

[adarling2006]

from what i've read in your letter, that should put a stop to it, the only thing i would leave out though is the account in dispute bit, if you look over the agreements and the insurance, and find something wrong ie: the insurance being missold, write to them explaining that, you feel that it's been missold etc etc and that you intend to dispute the agreement in a court of law over such mis-selling etc. that should make them investigate it and put it in dispute.

[angel49]

O-K thanks for that. Will be checking what I can, then on to the next stage.

Thanks for your time.

Heading for the hills now.......

[adarling2006]

no problem, have subscribed to this, will help out when i can, wish your friend good luck and that she's in good hands.

[angel49]

O-K, Have looked at the agreements today and they appear to be in order with the exception that Brighthouse have no signature (but nowhere to sign either) so don't know how relevant this is.

Two letters ready for issue,thoughts/suggestions please.

 

I am formally requesting that all further correspondence be made in writing only.

I demand that all phone calls from BRIGHTHOUSE stop immediately. I am now familiar with the terms of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1970 and I believe your harassment places you in breach of these acts.

If you continue to call, you will also be in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1949) and, as such, I will report you to both Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading.

You will be deemed to have been served notice of my request and I will deem it served by xx/xx/xxxx, I am advising you that any calls received after this date will be recorded with the intention of them being used as evidence.

Please also be advised re your threats to send someone to collect goods from my home that:

There is an implied license under English Common Law for certain people to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.).

I revoke license under English Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do so without my permission, you will then be liable to damages for a tort of trespass. You would also be conspiring in a trespass if you sent someone to visit me.

Further to the above, it is my understanding that you need to issue a default notice before making any threat to repossess goods. I have met the payments required under your repossession clause which now requires you to produce a court order prior to any action you are considering.

Yours faithfully

This one I'm a bit stuck on, but so far...

Dear Sir/Madam

With reference to the above accounts, I wish to cancel the OPTIONAL INSURANCE attached to each of these agreements giving the required 7 days notice as per the following taken from your terms and conditions.

“Your Obligations: Optional Service Cover

Section C (b) The service cover premium is renewable each time your regular instalment is due under the agreement. If the premium is not paid Service Cover will lapse.

 

Section H (3) This policy shall continue in force until you give seven days notice…”

Further to the above, I have recently discovered that it is likely that you have not dealt with my accounts in a lawful manner, and, whilst I have every intention of always paying my lawfully incurred debts, in this particular instance I am placing the accounts into dispute pending the outcome of my inquiries.

Regarding the aforementioned OPTIONAL INSURANCE, I believe each one was mis-sold to me. Even when I questioned the store manager about its necessity I was told I had to have it and duly signed where a cross had been placed ready for my signature.

With reference to my accounts, I have always made you aware of any change in circumstances and offered token payments which you have always refused to accept. This in turn incurred charges.

[tamadus]

they look good to me angel

[angel49]

Thanks Tamadus, is there anything else I should add to the second letter? Brighthouse do not have their signature anywhere on the agreements,but there is nowhere indicating that it should be,is there any relevance in that?

[tamadus]

Only relevance is that with no signature it makes them vitually unenforceable as they have not been properly executed.

 

I would keep the 2 letters totally seperate so no real need to include anything further.

[angel49]

Thanks for the reply.Will get them printed off and signed tomorrow morning, then I believe they will be hand delivered. Will post with further developments. Thanks for the help.

[angel49]

Just got a phone call from my friend - not a happy bunny,as 2 guys from brighthouse were banging her windows early this morning.

She was very happy with the letters and signed them, took them into her Brighthouse shop to deliver. She asked for a receipt,the letters were read/looked at then handed back to her telling her to send them in recorded delivery and get her own receipt.

So,the letters will be sent on Monday with copies to Caversham Finance.

[Lula]

Angel, what did your friend do when they knocked? she didnt answer the door I hope or invite them in

[angel49]

hi lula,

She didn't open the door, apparently they have done this 2/3 times this week seeing as she is 2 payments behind.Thats when she asked for some help as she has no access to p.c. and shes heard me on about this site...

She has 2 very small children so it's a bit worrying till these letters reach the right people.

[tamadus]

hmmm thats a new twist to refuse to accept the letters. I hope your friend sent them packing with a big flea in their ear.

 

If she is a woman on her own with 2 young children it may also be worth her having a few words with her local Police officers. Sending 2 guys out is clearly intimidatory, especially so often and it's designed to frighten her. Advance notice to the police may get somebody around quickly if she calls when they arrive.

[angel49]

Hi Tamadus

Did suggest this to her,she is just not going to answer the door/phone etc.She has said she will ring the police if they try to call again between now and Monday.

Re taking the letters in,she's more intimated than anything and didn't want to just leave them there,in case they got binned!

Never mind, they and Caversham will have them by Tuesday. Is Caversham Finance the Head Office? I'm thinking a letter of complaint being something else they'll receive.

Many thanks for your input

[adarling2006]

she should have just phone the police, they were there without express permission.

[angel49]

Hi Adarling

I agree,but she's going round in circles at the mo.Didn't want to give her too many do's and don'ts.

I can't understand why they refuse to accept any monies unless it's for the correct amount. Didn't think they'd be allowed to do that.

I've just been reading a great thread with lots of info about B/House from Lefty. Just so I can understand her situation a little better regarding these people.

Thanks for your comments