Three Commit Fraud

Monasaver

My original thread was Problem downgrade price plan on 3 , for the ones who want to understand what is happenning.
I had previosly asked 3 to send me a deadlock letter confirming they had received my complaint in writting and that they stated they could not do anything about that and also a letter confirming that I received my upgrading handset in September 06.
I didn't received a deadlock letter that they had promissed me in two occasions to send me in 24 hours. Surprisely today I received a letter stating my handset upgrating was done in November 06. Basically this letter is dated 18 November 2006 and it was the letter saying that my new handset was on it's way. To make it worse, 3 addressed the letter to the place where I live now but I moved here just on December 06. How could they have sent me my new phone in November in an address I moved only in December?
I am so glad that I found in the despatch Note from 3 with all my details, the mobile serial number and of corse the despatch Note was addressed to my old flat, and the date??? 7 SEP 06
Now I am still waiting for the deadlock letter and I would like to know with action could I take now?
Thanks for taking the time to read that and any advice will be great

Monasaver

Going to the Citizen's Advice tomorrow, sure they will be able to help me.
I'll post later the next steps I'll take.

diamonds

its not fraud but they have sent you something that states via its date to be a lie as you can prove the address discrepancy, futhermore this coupled with your first bill from Sep and prove the upgrade discrepancy and citizens advice/ofcom your complaint

dinglebert

diamonds wrote: »

its not fraud but they have sent you something that states via its date to be a lie as you can prove the address discrepancy, futhermore this coupled with your first bill from Sep and prove the upgrade discrepancy and citizens advice/ofcom your complaint

which is why is could be viewed as fraud. they have sent a letter as "proof" of a date of a contract which in reality could not be true given what the OP has stated. The result of the letter could be to tie in the OP to a contact which should have finished earlier. Therefore they would be attempting to make him pay money when he wouldn't have needed to.