O2 Default & Disputing it

OneADay wrote: »

In that case, you will have to wait to see whats on those bills they supply.
But eventually, o2 will pass it on to a debit collector.

No, they won't. They have not passed it to a DCA despite non payment for two and a half years, and they just last month accepted £20 a month to settle the balance, which is being paid, whilst I establish who owes who what, and we'll continue paying the £20 a month whilst the issues are being looked into as to how much the default notice should have been for and whether or not it should have been recorded in the first place.

I'm also going to SAR Three, who sent a default notice years and years ago, I rectified the problem within the timeframe they provided on the DN, and no default was recorded on my credit report. So I can show O2 what Three do, and say well you didn't, so up yours sort of thing. OTELO want to start getting their guys involved with O2 right away, but I've told them to hold off until I've recieved the SAR data and offered O2 a reduced F&FS in return for removal of the DN. If they won't comply then OTELO will have at them

h4zel - you lucky person, in one way, insofar as you only got a DN for £65. They Added £630 to this one because of the remaining months on an extended contract that for all intents and purposes is fictional!

Jon01

This is the thing, she conceeded that fraud has probably taken place and advised that still we are liable for the bills incurred as a result.

HOWEVER in the two and a half years of the account being in default O2 have never asked for any money, chased the debt, or passed it to a debt collection agency.

If my goal was not paying then it wouln't be an issue; that's not my goal. My goal is having the default notice removed.

I said to her that we can prove that we weren't living at that address by way of a council tax bill from another county covering the tax year that the "Upgrade" handset was delivered to the old address, she said that's nice but your still liable.

I don't mind the liability for call charges, because the SIM was left at the old address without a PIN, but liability for them taking an upgrade order from someone other than the account holder?

We comply with the data protection act because we ask for three pieces of information she said, even though I got through to her by providing only two thing - phone number and password, which incedentally was the pets name. One of their suggested questions. Bloody stupid question when the pet is in a shared house!

She even admitted that the IMEI of the "Upgrade" handset had a PAYG sim used in it, which was registered to someone else, after they disconnected the contract SIM.

Absolutely shocking that they don't want to investigate further. As far as they are concern it's an open and shut case. Yes there was fraud, no they aren't liable. That's their stance.

I've even quoted the distance selling act in that any alleged agreement to contract must be held in a durable format for it to be enforcable, by way of a call recording, signed agreement paper, or digital signiature. She conceeded that they don't hold this evidence which is likely why they haven't enforced the debt through a debt collection agency, but she said the default notice still stands because you used the upgrade handset. Forgetting that earlier in the conversation I offered up evidence that I was living somewhere else the date the handset was delivered. She wasn't interested.