Hi Walleandeva First of all, don't panic! Even if they have been to your house before, you are a £19 a week customer. Believe me when I say that there are more customers at your branch who owe a lot more than you do, therefore you are fairly well down the list of doors to knock. However, unless you have a particularly bad time with the staff at your branch, I would suggest that you DO keep in communication with them, and if you think you can be there to pay on a certain day, tell them and do your best to be there. But if things change tell them again. They can't then turn around and accuse you of not keeping them informed. I won't lie to you,they will try and make you feel bad, but distance yourself from it, be strong and stick to your guns. If you haven't got the money, how can you pay it. They can't barge into your home and reposess the items, even if they get a judgement at court. It's a much longer process than they would have you believe. The advice eralier about not allowingthem into your home was spot on and if they persist then you are perfectly within your rights to call the police. If the problem persists with home visits, then there is a letter you can send to stop this, and having a young child in the home will only re-inforce this with the authorities, menaing if they then persist, they will be in deep doodoo. PJ

Yes very true Sol! That was one of the questions I first asked BH when I was being interviewed for a Manager position. Bottom line is, you have to subscribe, therefore pay money, to add details to CRA's. And BH like to "roll" in their profits far too much to waste any on something that isn't going to benefit them! Unfortunately this is yet another case of BH "loading" their customers to breaking point. They know the analogy of "the last straw to break the camel's back" too well, and exploit it at every opportunity. Why? Simple really, because it will then mean that they have you where they want you. They want to control you, or at least give you the impression that they do control you. BUT, they don't, you control your finances and if they push you to breaking point and your circumstances channge, then more fool them. You are going through a tough time Scorpio09, but so are a lot of people, and the best way you can deal with this situation, is to carry on the way you are. Pay what you can when you can. Don't fall for there bully boy tactics. I do think you need to tear your house apart to see if you can find your original credit agreements though. It sounds like you had a re-write, and if they have just signed you up for a new term without working into the new agreement the time you have already paid for, then they have broken the law. It is difficult to prove if you can't find them, but if you have receipts for your weekly payments, you also have the original account number. This means you can send a Subject Access Request, which costs £10, but legally, BH then have to provide you with a full detailled breakdown, meaning you will have all the information you need. Meanwhile, don't let them grind you down, play your face, get your late fees taken off, go into the store in numbers, when it's busy, create a scene! YOU ARE THEIR CUSTOMER!! Without customers, they wouldn't exist. PJ

Thanks Slick Sending that very same letter RD tomorrow. Thanks again for your advice. Looks like I'm in for the long haul on this one! PJ

Oh and also, not heard a dicky bird from [problem]! Quiet before the storm perhaps? PJ

Now, Now!! Almost sounds like you are expecting it to break down!! Tut, tut!! PJ

Yes Ida Exactly what I was thinking. Have they not shot themselves in their own foot I wonder? PJ

Hi, me again! Another update for you, this letter hit the doormat the other day. There are some bits that seem to argue with the points in the dispute letter I have used. For example, they say they CAN still register a default on my credit file AND still chase me for payment. PJ

so can someone please say, after looking through this whole somewhat disjointed thread, LOL, when is this meet and who is buying the damn drinks?

Love it!!

Why do I get a bad feeling about the changing direction of this thread??

I have been watching this thread develop with interest, and sometimes that's the best thing you can do. Let it all unfold and get the emotion bit out of the way. That's why these forums are so good, because we need to let off steam here, not in the "public" eye. I've only been on here since last October, and I wish I had been here a lot sooner, especially as its 6 years now since I left BH. But ever since the emotion and sensationalism that was the News of the World article, I realised that unless we really tackle the core ways in which BH run their business, then these stories aren't going to do anymore than move the dust about a bit. The process is going to be a long one, but there are people out ther who are working on it. If we are going to win this fight, then we need to play it like chess, always looking several moves ahead, on both sides of the board! Because believe me, they already have an arsenal of replies to any and every criticism we may have about their business practises. Lefty has made a great thread about discussing the ongoing strategy, which needs more input. Less emotion, more fact, and always several steps ahead. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/brighthouse/185281-discussion-strategy-direction-your.html

AWW thats cute!!! And I'm trying to imagine calling one of my cats after a plumber!! So Clemma and Lefty are much more appropriate, well done! And glad we could all be of assistance to you. PJ

No Martin That's about it. BTW, love the easter Bunny pic!! PJ

Thanks Clemma, was just about to do that!!

1) the laptop slipped off the settee & the screen broke 2) i did have a OSC on the old laptop 3) i did sign a new agreement on the new laptop Sorry, but you're not going to like this! As unfair as this sounds, the claim was because of accidental damage. Therefore the branch was right to make a DLC claim. Unfortunately, DLC only protects the future payments to BH, at whatever point the agreement is at. It DOES NOT replace your item. This is why I always tell people to use their own house contents insurance, or get it if you don't have it. If you had not long to pay for this, it would have been more "customer focussed" to see what other options were available to you, rather than just following the book. I will forward this post to some members on here who are still employed by BH and see if they can help too, but I'm afraid the news isn't great. PJ

Ok Sounds to me like you have been conned by BH good and proper. This needs really clarifying though, to make sure we get them by the short and curlies!! Did you have OSC (Optional Service Cover)? It's incidental really, because the Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act would be more than sufficient to make sure that your faulty laptop was either repaired, replaced or refunded. The only exception is if the damage was caused accidentally, or through natural wear and tear. If it was dealt with via this method, then BH would have to pick up the tab, and redress it to the manufacturer themselves AFTER you had been dealt with satisfactorily. However, they have simply gone down the route of processing a DLC claim. The item has been BER'd (beyond economical repair) and you had to pay a standard £100 excess that they levy on claims for laptops, and another 3 weeks payments while they drag out their decision. This is ludicrous and down right theft IMHO. The new laptop you have is on a new agreement isn't it? Well they just signed you up for a new laptop from the beginning again. As the other was written off as part of a DLC claim, the money you have paid on it is written off too, as it is considered as a rental! So, we need to clarify 1) exactly what was wrong with the laptop and how it occured, 2) did you have OSC on the old laptop and 3) did you sign a new agreement for the new laptop. If they have done the dirty on you, then we have many ways in which we can get justice for you, including exposing them in the media. But lets not get ahead of ourselves, lets get the facts straight first. PJ

This thread needs bringing to the forefront again. It might be quiet, but I can assure you, the enemy will be gathering their strength, so we should too! PJ

Use this letter to ge rid of the OSC, should take 7 days. Send to your branch and a copy to Head Office. You can also modify it where necessary to get rid of DLC. Obviously, fill the bits in where appropriate: Item Description/Account Number XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Dear Sir I am writing to give the required 7 days notice, as detailed in my agreement(s) that I wish to cancel all "optional" service cover on the above product(s). To simplify matters, I have today (date) presented a copy of this letter to the store manager of Brighthouse (Branch), which has been duly acknowledged, so 7 days notice shall commence at the date of this letter. As stated in my agreement: “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…” I shall, therefore, be making my next payment on (day) at Brighthouse (branch). This payment will not include "optional" service cover. I understand that I may be required to sign a revised agreement. I will only do this on the firm understanding that all payments made previously on this agreement are reflected in any revised agreement. I do not waive any of my rights under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 regarding, in particular, “early settlement” and “repossession” as set out in section J of the original agreement. Kind Regards You Good luck!! PJ

Hi, and welcome to the forums. Firstly it sounds like you're a little confused with the BH jargon. OSC (optional service cover) is the worthless add on that supposedly give you "peace of mind". But if your buying a new item then the Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act does everything you need. DLC (damage liability cover) is the again worthless in-house insurance policy, designed to protect BH's interest in the value of their item while you are paying for it! It is DLC that they force on you if you have not got your own house insurance. The O in OSC means optional, therefore exercise your right to OPT out of it. Show them your insurance certificate and OPT out of the DLC too, and see how much money you save. PJ

That's a point we have been discussing on here since time began, or at least BrightHouse! If an insurance is cancelled by a provider due to not being paid for, then fair enough, it should simply leave the customer un-insured. Should the customer wish to re-instate the insurance at a later date, then they should be allowed to, but only from that point on. As a customer, you cannot go to an insurance provider and ask them to insure you for last week, then pay a premium for it! It's practically fraud! Why therefore, if BrightHouse claim the insurance is invalid when a customer goes late, do they then STILL charge the premiums when the customer settles? It's BH having their cake and eating it, but not actually doing anything for the money. My advice has always been simple. Get you own household contents insurance WITH accidental damage cover, that ALSO covers portable items, AND covers items that you are responsible for that are subject to HP finance. That way, if you go late with BH, your item is still insured. Most policies are new for old (but always check what it says on the tin) and the added benefit, you get to cover the whole house instead of just 1 item! On top of that, all this rip-off DLC is there for, is to protect the cost of the item to BH, NOT YOU!!! You get no benefit from it AT ALL!!

Yes they are taking the p1ss!!! This is the very same address that I sent my CCA to, and heard absolutely diddly squat!!! I ended up sending it AGAIN to the Andover address and only then did I get a response. Try this address in future with everything, in fact bombard his mailbox to the point where he gets so fed up, he folds and just gives up!! Mark Bartle Operations Manager Credit Operations Customer Service Recovery Lloyds TSB Bank Plc Three City Parkway The Droveway Hove East Sussex BN3 7AU This is who I have had the only response from so far. PJ

Hi all UPDATE 31st March received another letter from Mark Bartle, asking for another 4 weeks!!!! In same post received a letter from [problem] solicitors, now acting on behalf of Lloyds TSB. To say I am somewhat annoyed is the understatement of the century, so I have just typed and sent this letter "Thank you for your letter of 31st March 2009, again stating that you need another four weeks to investigate this complaint fully. I refer you to your previous letter of 11th March 2009, in which you also asked for 28 days. The nature of both of your letters mentioned above admits that I have a complaint that needs investigating by Lloyds TSB. Therefore, there is no doubt that this account is now in dispute. This being the case Lloyds TSB is now in breach of the guidelines set out by the Office of Fair Trading, for Debt Collection, namely sections 2.6 (h), 2.8 (i) and 2.8 (k). I summarise as follows: 1)On 5th January 2009, I wrote asking for a true signed copy of my credit agreement and enclosed the fee of £1.00, which was cashed by Lloyds TSB on 15th January 2009. 2) Lloyds TSB replied to my request on 9Th January 2009, stating that the bank was “unable to provide copies of the loan agreement documents”. 3) On 16th January 2009, I wrote again to Lloyds TSB, as the bank had failed to provide a true copy of the original signed credit agreement rendering the agreement unenforceable. In this letter, I also reminded the bank of its obligations whilst such an agreement was in dispute. 4) On 24th February 2009, I received a letter from Lloyds TSB Collections Centre in Andover (Letter ref: CLFR00) stating that the account was now in arrears and a special repayment programme had been cancelled, and the account would be referred for further legal action. This despite the fact that the agreement was now in dispute and Lloyds TSB may not demand payment on the account, nor pass the account onto a third party for debt collection purposes. 5) As I had received NO reply to my letter of 16th January 2009, I sent another letter dated 27th February 2009, this time to the collections centre in Andover. In this letter I also requested that all further communication be in writing only, as I was receiving numerous phone-calls asking for payment, despite the fact that the agreement was now in dispute. 6) On 5th March 2009, I received yet another letter from Lloyds TSB Collections Centre in Andover (Letter ref: CLFR10), demanding immediate payment, threatening further steps to recover the money. Again, this is in contravention to the obligations the bank has in disputed agreements. 7) On 7th March 2009, I received a statement of the agreement clearly showing interest being charged to the account on 14th February 2009 for £13.28. As this agreement is in dispute, Lloyds TSB may NOT add further interest or charges to the account. 8. On 11th March 2009, I received a letter from Mark Bartle, apologising for my cause to complain. The letter asked for 28 days for the Customer Service Recovery team to investigate. The letter was accompanied by a copy of the banks “Voicing your concerns” leaflet. 9) On 23rd March 2009 I received a Default Notice on the account (Letter ref: CLDFN0). The notice clearly stated that if I did not settle the account, then Lloyds TSB would appoint solicitors to claim what I owed through the courts, incurring additional costs. It also stated that details of my account would be recorded with credit reference agencies. It also stated that the notice would include the current information sheet on default from the Office of Fair Trading, but no such leaflet was sent. Needless to say, as the account is in dispute, Lloyds TSB should NOT be issuing a default notice, should NOT be registering account details with any credit reference agencies and should NOT be appointing a third party to collect the account. 10) On 31st March 2009 I received another letter from Mark Bartle, again apologising that investigating my complaint was taking so long! This time the letter asks for yet another four weeks. The “Voicing your concerns” leaflet enclosed with Mark Bartle’s first letter of 11th March 2009, states that Lloyds TSB will have a full response to my complaint in eight weeks. This means I should expect my response by 6th May 2009, which is in line with his second letter’s request. 11) Also on 31st March 2009, I receive a letter from Sechiari, Clark & Mitchell solicitors acting under instructions from Lloyds TSB Bank Plc (Letter ref: CLSOL9). The letter asks for full payment of arrears within 10 days, or legal proceedings will be commenced. Again it threatens to list details of the account with credit reference agencies. Whilst I understand that a complaint of this nature requires detailed investigation, I shouldn’t have to remind an organisation the size of Lloyds TSB, of their obligations in such circumstances. Lloyds TSB are clearly in breach of OFT guidelines and have now involved third party solicitors. As a result of the seriousness of these events, even though this complaint is still only half way through its allowed investigation time limit, I feel I have no choice but to report Lloyds TSB to the Office of Fair Trading and the Financial Ombudsman Service. Therefore, should I not have received a satisfactory response to this letter by Monday 13th April, I shall lodge such a complaint. I look forward to receiving your prompt reply" I also sent a copy to [problem] with this covering letter: "Dear Sirs In response to your letter of 31st March 2009, I refer you to a copy (enclosed) to Lloyds TSB. This account is in dispute. Lloyds TSB should not be passing accounts that are in dispute to third parties, for the purposes of collection. This is in contravention of OFT guidelines for Debt Collection, namely sections 2.6 (h), 2.8 (I) and 2.8 (k). I respectfully ask that you suspend any further action and communicate directly with the addressee of the enclosed copy letter at Lloyds TSB. I thank you for your cooperation." So let's see what happens next, any guesses???? PJ

Bit of a no brainer really..... Sorry to put it in those terms, but you don't have to read very far on your agreement to see that you have broken the law, and should BH get wind, then they are likely to involve the police. Meaning you are liable to prosecution! Perhaps, if you had the foresight to see that things might be getting out of control, we could have helped you before you took this step. My advice is to own up and face the music sooner rather than later. Be sure that it will catch out. PJ

Hi I have heard of this type of problem before. On certain types of laptop there are subtle design floors that mean if you open the screen up using the corner instead of gripping right in the middle, you can twist the screen unknowingly, thus cracking the LCD display. You don't need to smack or drop the laptop to do this either. What make is your laptop? It is worth researching more along the lines of durability under the Supply of Goods (implied terms) Act. Have a good look through the manual you had with the laptop. If it states that you must always be sure to open the screen in a certain way to avoid this type of damage, then you are already starting on the back foot. But I am sure you should have a case to get a repair. Do you have OSC or DLC with BrightHouse on this item?

Just a quick note, noticed something funny today! I use internet banking as it is very convenient. Although the accounts I have with Lloyds are still active, I don't use them and they are "dormant". However, I log on occasionally just to check. Today I logged on and was greeted by an update page asking me to update my contact details. I was surprised to see that all my phone numbers had been replaced by rows of 8's! I know my real numbers were on here before. I have left them with the 8's, as I don't want them calling me anyway. Do you suppose someone has at last acted on my request, and removed my phone numbers, so I am not called anymore? Seems a little to good to be true to me! PJ