Brighthouse family harassment

Fridge3

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Seeing as they state that they need the names for reference purposes, the data's use is redundant after their references have been obtained. They have no right to use that data later on.

You appear to be confusing 'referee' with 'contacting the above references'

"I agree that in the event that Brighthouse are unable to contact me using the contact details that I have provided they may phone the above references to get into contact with me."

MamaMoo_2

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Yes. Because the "referees" do not have any connection to the loan.



The reasons for the use was not clear, because they state that they need the names for reference purposes. Then later on, that they will call these people if you don't pay. Seeing as those people do not have any connection to the loan, the use of their data is irrelevant to the customer's account.



Seeing as they state that they need the names for reference purposes, the data's use is redundant after their references have been obtained. They have no right to use that data later on.

I was told to make sure I have permission from these references before I wrote any names or numbers down.
It was made clear they wanted numbers for both a reference, and as a point of contact in case of any issues.
I signed to say I was ok with both, however I was also told that I could fill in two forms, one for references, which expressly stated that these people couldn't be contacted in the case of missed payments, and one for contacts in case of missed payments, who couldn't be contacted for a reference.
The OP will have signed agreeing to this. He had an option, and he was happy to do this.
If Brighthouse are told by the person on the end of the phone to remove the details, when they do get hold of the debtor, they ask them for another contact. They do not repeatedly contact people (except for the debtor) if they have asked not to be called!

Flyboy152

MamaMoo wrote: »

I was told to make sure I have permission from these references before I wrote any names or numbers down.

You cannot give proxy permission.

It was made clear they wanted numbers for both a reference, and as a point of contact in case of any issues.

Then that should have been made clear when asking for them. It is too late to add it in later.

I signed to say I was ok with both, however I was also told that I could fill in two forms, one for references, which expressly stated that these people couldn't be contacted in the case of missed payments, and one for contacts in case of missed payments, who couldn't be contacted for a reference.

You cannot be coerced into relinquishing your rights. Read the Unfair Terms Regulations.

The OP will have signed agreeing to this. He had an option, and he was happy to do this.

If we are to assume that that it would be possible to do so, then it i clear that he wasn't given such an option, or he would have known they would do it; hence the point of this thread.

If Brighthouse are told by the person on the end of the phone to remove the details, when they do get hold of the debtor, they ask them for another contact. They do not repeatedly contact people (except for the debtor) if they have asked not to be called!

But they are not entitled to call them in the first place. As they would have to have given their express permission.

MamaMoo_2

Flyboy152 wrote: »

You cannot give proxy permission.
!!!!!!, what do you think you give when you leave a contact detail for a reference for a job or a tenancy?


Then that should have been made clear when asking for them. It is too late to add it in later.
it was made clear AT THE TIME. As I said above, it said it in the form that the details were recorded on!


You cannot be coerced into relinquishing your rights. Read the Unfair Terms Regulations.
I wasn't coerced into anything. By calling a friend and asking for alternative contact details, they are doing nothing wrong. Only when they discuss private details (ie DOB, arrears amount, credit amount etc) would they be breaking the DPA. As it is, they DON'T do this.


If we are to assume that that it would be possible to do so, then it i clear that he wasn't given such an option, or he would have known they would do it; hence the point of this thread.

The form that is given to the customer to collect the details says that this is what they will do, right next to where the customer has to sign. If the OP was stupid enough not to read what he was signing, BH cannot be held liable for this


But they are not entitled to call them in the first place. As they would have to have given their express permission.

I haven't given my express permission to be used as a character reference etc, but if someone calls and asks me to give a reference for someone, I can say yes, and do so, or I can say no, and they can p*ss off.

MamaMoo_2

Also, as a side note, my husband was reading this thread over my shoulder. He is one of my BH references, and apparently, when they called to verify my info, the conversation happened thusly:
BH "Hello there, is that Mr. x"
OH "Yes"
BH "Oh hi there, Mrs. X has put you as a reference. I believe you should be expecting this call. I was wondering if you could confirm some details for us?"
OH "Oh yes, sure, no probs"
BH "Can you confirm Mrs. X's address?"
OH "yeah, it's xyz"
BH "wonderful, and can you confirm her contact telephone number"
OH "yup, it's 0xxxxxx"
BH "great. How do you know Mrs. X?"
OH "I knocked her up & now she's my wife"
BH "OK, how long have you known her for"
OH "About 5/6 years"
BH "great. And would you say she was a reliable and trustworthy person"
OH "Yeah, she's great. Unless you try and hide chocolate from her. Then she'll kill you"
BH "That's all great, thanks. And finally, if we have trouble contacting Mrs. X in the future, can we contact you in order to get in touch with her"
OH "Yeah, no trouble"

Apparently, according to OH, this is word for word. If it is, I may have to poke him with a stick for his cheek!

shaun_from_Africa

You're in trouble now Mama.

In that post you've breeched the Data protection act as you've passed on details of what the Brighthouse employee said, and you've used comments likely to cause alarm or distress to your hubby.

Expect the authorities to come knocking on your door later tonight.

MamaMoo_2

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

You're in trouble now Mama.

In that post you've breeched the Data protection act as you've passed on details of what the Brighthouse employee said, and you've used comments likely to cause alarm or distress to your hubby.

Expect the authorities to come knocking on your door later tonight.

That's ok, I owe my hubby some harassment.
My hubby's alarm clock causes both alarm and distress to myself when it goes off at 6am. I shouldnt be awake at that hour. It's terrifying. Does that mean I can sue my hubby and Argos for using the alarm and manufacturing it, as clearly the clock is harassing me. I tell it to shut up all the time, but every time I hit the "snooze" button, it just waits 10 minutes and then wails again! Whilst the authorities are here, I shall have them investigate!

wealdroam

MamaMoo wrote: »

... Does that mean I can sue my hubby and Argos for using the alarm and manufacturing it, as clearly the clock is harassing me. I tell it to shut up all the time, but every time I hit the "snooze" button, it just waits 10 minutes and then wails again! Whilst the authorities are here, I shall have them investigate!

You can only sue your hubby if he gives his express permission for you to use his name on court papers.
Of course you may know and retain his name for other purposes, but it is a breach of the Data Protection Act to use that data for any purpose not previously defined.

Also remember, retaining his name longer than necessary may be likely to cause alarm and distress.

Please do not ring hubby up to ask for that permission, as surely that is not the reason he gave you his phone number.

OlliesDad

Flyboy152 wrote: »

You cannot give proxy permission.
Why not?

Then that should have been made clear when asking for them. It is too late to add it in later.
As per MamaMoo it is clear when applying

You cannot be coerced into relinquishing your rights. Read the Unfair Terms Regulations.
As has been asked too many times before, which section of this law are you referring too? or can you give some case law where the Unfair Contract Terms Act has been used in a similar situation. I think you have an overly optimistic view of this particular law.

If we are to assume that that it would be possible to do so, then it i clear that he wasn't given such an option, or he would have known they would do it; hence the point of this thread.

It is a regular occurrence on these boards that people rush into agreements as they are desperate to get their hands on the product but they do not think of the consequences of breaching the agreement.


But they are not entitled to call them in the first place. As they would have to have given their express permission.
No they wouldn't. Only after the person had made BH aware that they were not to use their details would they be acting illegally.

I do think its important to look at arguments from both sides so it is good (in a strange way) of Flyboy to look for the positives for all posters, but without backing this up with facts and resources just makes all the posts lack credibility.

shaun_from_Africa

You cannot be coerced into relinquishing your rights. Read the Unfair Terms Regulations.

tr.v. co·erced, co·erc·ing, co·erc·es
1. To force to act or think in a certain way by use of pressure, threats, or intimidation; compel.
2. To dominate, restrain, or control forcibly: coerced the strikers into compliance. See Synonyms at force.
3. To bring about by force or threat:

And is there any proof that anyone was coerced into anything?

And it is possible that you can legally sign away your statutory rights in some contracts.
(I hear that google is a wonderful tool so you shouldn't have any problem finding out that this is correct)