To be delighted that Brighthouse is about to go bust?

[AgeLikeWine]

It’s not all bad news at the moment. .

Brighthouse is a nasty, exploitative business which rips off the poor, the uneducated and the vulnerable by selling household goods at inflated prices on finance at extortionate interest rates. Their business model relies on creating spirals of debt in a similar way to Wonga.

Normally I would sympathise with the staff of businesses which go bust, but not in this case. Good riddance.

We have been NC with him and his father (who is my actual cousin) and most of that family for some time but do speak with mutual family. They're both massive fanny's so can't see them being aggressive in person, but he'd threaten them with legal action. See reference to suit and paperwork.

I suppose if you can afford the repayments of an LS and the repayments aren’t too much then having someone offer to give you money for Xmas etc is far too appealing.

That's how they reel people in. You can afford the £1 or £2 a week. It's when you then get fined for being out, or late, or giving him what he perceives as a dirty look or whatever. So then you have another £1 or £2 a week to pay. Then you have a bill so even £2/3 a week is a struggle so they let you off that week, without mentioning that they've added another fine on.

Bear in mind that what I borrowed was tiny. Originally he was adamant he wouldn't lend less than £50, but I'd have stolen the school shoes rather than get into that much debt with him.

So for most people it's say £50 and £5 a week. Which then becomes £10 a week because you miss something or get one of the fines. That's quickly unaffordable when the summer holidays come and suddenly the kids need lunch every day so you get more interest tagged on.

There are some who use sexual coertion as a tactic as well. Anything drug dealers will use - loan sharks also use.

I.can imagine it is it they suck.you in saying we will.give you X amount for Xmas and your only paying back a few quid a week it can seem reasonable even if that few quid goes on forever my friend who used shopacheck and provident had appalling credit she also used a lot of catalogues etc ,not sure she ever used any loan sharks though ,but she was fairly vulnerable financially ,single mum.on benefits living in a fairly rough area this was 15 -20 yearsago.

Omfg fining folks for giving him a dirty look, wtaf, what a big hard man he is not nor has ever been.

I hope this man comes to a nasty end, as they say If you live by the sword then you die by the sword and he deserves it.

Yeah your cousin with a suit and tie, forgot that you said that.

Thankfully I never met any really nasty dealers when I had my addiction, the majority of folks I bought from we’re dealing to find their own addictions, it’s the ones that sell smack and don’t take it, that I loathe, they’re also the ones that would be the quickest to call their clients junkies and they deserve everything they get, in terms of the law.

Were not we’re

Oops and fund not fine

I think that it's actually experiencing very dark financial times that gives you the empathy for those for whom it's their permanent state - and which would make the idea of deliberately visiting that on to another person pure anathema.

For some comfortably-off people who've never experienced hardship, and who tend towards the 'the poor are all just a load of lazy scum who should try harder' mentality, I can kind of see how they might justify running a racket like this and seeing their customers as not actually quite human.

I'm not saying that their actions are on the same level as those who traffic barely-adult women into prostitution, thousands of miles away from their homes, with false promises and deceit; but I believe that the principles along which they think and how they value other humans are not a million miles apart.

Thank you Buffet, you've articulated beautifully what I couldn't.

Don't forget the suggestion that local loansharks are better than Brighthouse as they don't insist you spend your debt with them...

Was that a twisting of my comment? I was obviously stating that to emphasise a negative of the BH trap - even though they have a high street presence and work according to the law (albeit not any kind of moral law); it was not in any way intended to suggest that loan sharks are not filthy, despicable people.

Did anybody see "I Am Kirsty" with Samantha Morton last year? It was one of a brilliant short series of similar TV films based on common predicaments that women in particular can easily find themselves in.

She played a single mum who fell into appalling financial circumstances and Paul Kaye played her (at first) friendly neighbour who offered to 'help her out'. Of course, he deliberately made sure that she borrowed more than she'd be able to repay and was actually hesitant to take back the repayments that she offered him.

Very soon, it turned to the predictable "Hey, I've just thought of another way that you could repay me, if that's easier than going short on money". An alternative that 'occurred to him' was that, otherwise, her children could end up trapped in their flat at night whilst it caught fire....

I think that, with loan sharks (unlike BH, at least), they don't so much want to get people financially in hock with them as to buy them and gain power and control over their terrified victim, to make them jump to their tune. The money is just their inroad into doing that. They'll just add arbitrary amounts as and when, for no reason whatsoever, as their plan is that you never get free of them once they've 'bought' you. They obviously would never explicitly call it an 'at risk (to me) of eventually getting yourself free of me and out of my clutches' penalty, but that's their general MO.

That's why they particularly target women: they're more likely to be in vulnerable social positions, have children to consider and, of course, the sex (well, rape, let's be honest) aspect. They know that a lot of men would turn violent and retaliate and they're hardly in a position to call the police when an angry male 'customer' puts them in hospital, as that would expose what they've been up to.

At least the likes of BH will give you statements that clearly show the (outrageous) interest rates and other fees or penalties, and it is possible to eventually break free of them. They will use high-pressure sales to keep you with them (as well as cutting off your other avenues by not sharing their credit reports) rather than intimidation and threats of violence and rape.

With the loan shark playbook, there probably isn't all that much of the separation that I mentioned before between getting into debt and then ending up forced into some form of prostitution.

I'm guessing that a lot of people watched 'I Am Kirsty' and thought that it was a wild imagining of how things could theoretically turn out if the worst came to the worst in the most extreme circumstances. Sadly, I think it was probably not at all untypical of the experiences of everyday loan shark victims.

In the same way, one evening a few months ago, I watched 'I, Daniel Blake' with a couple of middle-class friends.Their reactions told me clearly that they saw it as a very sad theoretical Kafkaesque scenario that somebody had dreamed up rather than the simple reality for many, many people.

@TabbyStar thanks for signposting to Fair For You. I'd never heard of that company. What a bloody brilliant social enterprise. I'll be raising awareness of this org all over the place.

An actual alternative!

Thanks so much you are a 🌟 your name is accurate.

I loved “I am Kirsty”, the other 2 episodes of that series were crap, and the Kirsty episode was the most shocking in terms of what women in poverty have to put up with.

I get why women turn to those jobs even without being forced, and as much as they need and want the money from the punters, then I feel the punters are exploiting them and this is why they delude themselves into thinking that “they must just love sex”, it really boils my blood.

I'd be fine with a slight mark up for risky credit terms but brighthouse prices are the very definition of the never never.

BH is expensive but when your paying little amounts each week then it doesn’t feel like lots, plus they have the best of the electrical stuff.

Thanks SciFiScream - I've spoken to customers of Fair For You though my advice sector work, and they have also been very complimentary about the way they are treated with respect as human beings as well as making the the financial savings, unlike the way that some of the other companies and doorstep lenders etc. treat them.

I was initially glad to hear BH had gone bust but then realised that loansharks will now have a field day. They are the lowest of the low imo.

I was brought up in a working class environment but my parents (especially my late Pa) drummed it into me that debt was bad, and that if you want something then you save for it.

I watched the TV show about UC and it showed a woman who took the maximum loan upfront offered by UC and she then spent it on a new mobile, flashy trainers for the family, etc. Sorry but I can't understand that mindset at all.

I think financial planning, household budgeting etc should be compulsory in schools so that our young people have at least some awareness of money management.

I feel for the staff, losing your job is hard at the best of times and these are not the best of times.

Anyone who has no sympathy because of who they work for can get fucked.

So it’s not ok to be glad when someone loses their job when it’s an MLM?

Or loses their job pressure selling things to OAP’s who can’t afford them

Or other businesses that take advantage of vulnerable people?

People who work for these companies let them continue.
Take some responsibility

Or when someone loses the only job they could get and now has no means of paying their bills?

No, it's not.

Not if that job is ruining other people’s lives it’s not

So where is the cut off?
Cause every business could be classed as questionable.

Insurance, they don't pay and leave people in shit.
Banking, take people houses and leaves them homeless.
Used cars, charge more than they should.
Retail, work people hard for no money.
Vets, charging £30 per 15 minutes consult.
Charity shops, using free voluntary labour to maximise profit.
Starbucks, don't pay tax.
Amazon, slave their workers.

So if its okay to celebrate a BH worker losing their job because BH is questionable, is it okay if a legal secretary loses their job at questionable law firm that charges £££ to wrote a letter?

Not if that job is ruining other people’s lives it’s not

What are you supposed to do if there are no other jobs? Lose your home? If working for Brighthouse was the difference between losing my home or not I'd bite their hand off for a job.

If one of your friends or family members had been working for Brighthouse and then was made redundant, potentially losing their home (because a lot of people live month to month and don't have a partner to support them), and you had a spare room, would you happily see them homeless and glad that they are unemployed because you disagree with the morals of their company ? I don't think so. But complete strangers.. Who cares what happens, apparently.
Something quite sickening in revelling in the misery of someone's redundancy and loss of income.

Or, do you not 'associate' with people who work at such stores ?

@NemophilistRebel

Are you saying that if you had a choice between you and your family being homeless and hungry, and taking a job at brighthouse, you'd choose the former?

Are you saying that if you had a choice between you and your family being homeless and hungry, and taking a job at brighthouse, you'd choose the former?

If you were trapped in a sealed-off room with a crazed violent maniac and lots of other hostages, would you keep grabbing other random people and holding them in front of you so that he would king-punch them in the face instead of you? You wouldn't? Really? Even if your own face were at great risk of being smashed in? Yes, you could try and form a group to overpower him from behind and neutralise his powers, but it's much easier to just keep grabbing other, smaller people and holding them between you as his punchbag instead. Eventually, he'll get tired - and there's no way at all that somebody else who is bigger than you might get the same idea and turn the tables.

In a sense, this is kind of the same principle that we saw with the panic-buying Those who did it weren't deliberately trying to deprive the rest of us of food and sanitary/hygiene products for our families, they were just doing what they believed they needed to do to ensure the safety and comfort of their own families. Those of us who couldn't get the supplies that we needed for a week or two because others had taken three years' supply in one go were just collateral damage for their greater good. They believed that they potentially had a choice between panic-buying and their family being hungry, so they made what they considered the only 'wise' decision.