I can think of a couple of things they could use against BB

-Emotional distress from not knowing they were and that four would be evicted
-Unfair that they weren't nominated
-Viewers weren't told about the twist for days, so it was blatant manipulation

Other things too but they're not going to be smart enough to do so. Even though there's probably a rule that says BB can do whatever it wants, great lawyers (maybe even Sarah herself lol) could help them get some serious compensation from Edemol.

BB clearly stated at the start that they could change the rules at any time and I guess that is also in their contracts

Lol

I don't think they can sue, they would have signed a contract to let BB do what they are doing now or plan to do in the future.

There is definitely a fix going on here though, you would be really stupid to think the show isn't fixed at this point. It's very clear that they don't want to lose cerain HM's this year.

Well, who is going to bother to spend money voting now, if the producers can blatantly keep in who they wish and throw others out, then what is the point of a phone-in show.

Stupid people.

Seriously though, you are right, why would anybody vote now ? I don't think anybody can even justify voting in the show now when it's quite obviously rigged.

I have a feeling that none of the original HM's will be there for the full time i think they will replace them all at some point.

Just because it's written in the terms of a contract, doesn't necessarily make it legal or enforceable - even if the contestants initially signed it. For example: Big Brother could put in the contracts they have the right to shoot a contestant dead too at anytime. But if they pulled the trigger on someone, I don't think the fact a contestant signed up to allowing a member of the production team to shoot them dead would be an acceptable excuse in a court of law.

I'm actually surprised BB has been able to get away with so much for so long. Because game shows with prize money tend to be quite tightly regulated to ensure they are fair.

This could well be the tipping point that sees them plunged into hot water. Because clearly what they are doing now is very much against the fabric of the entire game show.

LOL. Good luck to them if those are their complaints.

Housemates who have sued in the past have not come off well. Deana sued them for doing very little to help when Conor bullied her. I was on Deana's side about that, but she didn't win the court case. This is most likely why she never appears on BOTS - in any other circumstances I think she would, as she is undoubtedly one of the most popular recent Housemates, especially by Channel 5 standards.

I thunk suing them is a bit over the top somehow, Big Brother has the power to change the rules whenever they see fit. Although i do find this twist an act of desperation to try and attract more viewers to whats a struggling show!

I think the theme is totally unfair to the public as well as the contestants, if they were going to do four out four in then ALL the housemates should be up, except Jack who had his pass.

Also only the winner is suppose to win the £ 150,000... no one else earns a crust for being in there (except free food and accommodation lol)... at least they will go down in BB history as being evicted without being nominated and they can still sell their stories to the newspapers and make a few bob for a couple of months..

I think it is really unfair what BB are doing, especially as the people who will leave weren't even nominated.

I've always enjoyed watching BB but the channel 5 producers are ruining it IMO.

While it is true that illegal terms in a contract would indeed make the contract unenforceable the contestants are aware that Big Brother can change the rules at any time and putting contestants that aren't nominated up for the public vote is not illegal and therefore the contracts are enforceable. I am assuming someone you like is in danger or someone you wanted out you can't get out now!

And pray tell me who is going to pay the fees of any lawyer who would be stupid enough to advise them they have a case? No legal aid is available for the items you cite and a no win/no fee agreement is far too risky. As mentioned Deana did bring a claim and perhaps the person(s) representing her may have waived their fees but after losing Deana would be responsible for Endemol's legal fees.

It's so Jade can grin like a Cheshire Cat when the twins are evicted, BB don't want to lose Jade as she's getting all the airtime with her games and 2 faceness

I'm amazed anyone still thinks BB is meant to be fair.

BB was meant to be a social experiment, fairness has nothing to do with it, manipulating people (including the public) is what it is all about.

Those who really want to see the back of Harriet, the twins and Danny and feared they were going to coast to the final.

They signed their rights away when they signed their contracts.

I feel that they are still trying to remain within the law, even if they are on shaky grounds. Last year the one thing that they would not twist to change was Helen's pass to the final. It must have been obvious that Helen and her golden pass were bringing them nothing but negative reviews, but once they made the foolish decision to give her that, I imagine that there wasn't a lot they could do. Regardless of what the contracts say, I'm sure that it is highly frowned upon by the bodies in charge of regulating games and competitions (and possibly even illegal) for a game show to guarantee something to a contestant and then later renege on that. If they'd taken her pass away, Helen would have grounds to sue the pants off them.

Exactly.

They make the rules up as they go along, that has been known for years

And then they will start moaning and whinging when Big Brother decides to turn on their favourites and then say they won't ever vote again. Like i said, stupid people are the only people that will vote now.

BB make it clear they can change the rules whenever they want. It's pretty obvious they use that to their own advantage.