Orange billing query

Anoneemoose

The_Deep wrote: »

That does nothing of the sort

What do you mean by "that"

The company simply failed to show any evidence that it made an attempt by post or facimile to notify the customer.

True, but it was also criticised for breach of contract and poor customer service in failing to reply to a written request in writing.

... , it probably wasn't worth their legal team taking the lid off the pen.

But they did, they produced a full legal defence eight pages long, did you not read my previous post?


And I am not wrong OP. They did send letters and texts. My Pa in Law got both explaining what was happening.

You are wrong, they did not inform ME

There is no way they can provide proof you received the letter and or text.

Of course there is, have you never heard of "signed for"?

I am getting tired of know it alls posting comments such as this on MSE. Please check your fact before you ,press the submit button.

I did check my facts and I stand by them, albeit I did miss the bit about the legal defence. Either way, you got lucky. And as I said, once they get taken to CISAS, it costs them £400 ish I believe. So they will either not bother submitting a defence, or in your case, have a go.

It is normally a recognised practice that companies are not required to send letters recorded. This is why myself and other posters mentioned such. Notes on an account or some record of them being sent are usually sufficient for them to have been deemed as being received, especially in addition to them sending you a text (which you have admitted you probably deleted).

I doubt it would have cost them a fortune. I imagine the fact they didn't respond to your official complaint has more to do with your 'win' That is bad practice, I agree.

I know for the sake of a tenner, if they had responded to your written complaint, they would have probably refunded you and told you to either accept the new charges or go elsewhere.

The_Deep

... once they get taken to CISAS, it costs them £400 ish I believe. So they will either not bother submitting a defence, or in your case, have a go.

They decided to have a go and paid dearly for their hubris

It is normally a recognised practice that companies are not required to send letters recorded.

Indeed, but they should have some proof that it was sent. They could not even give a date of despatch.

... Notes on an account or some record of them being sent are usually sufficient for them to have been deemed as being received,

Not in this case as I put them to strict proof that I had received it.

in addition to them sending you a text (which you have admitted you probably deleted).

Whether they did or not no-one knows but there was no mention of text messaging in the contract.

The fact is. they mounted a full defence (and lost) over a tenner, a waste of shareholders' money.

Anoneemoose

The_Deep wrote: »

... once they get taken to CISAS, it costs them £400 ish I believe. So they will either not bother submitting a defence, or in your case, have a go.

They decided to have a go and paid dearly for their hubris

It is normally a recognised practice that companies are not required to send letters recorded.

Indeed, but they should have some proof that it was sent. They could not even give a date of despatch.

... Notes on an account or some record of them being sent are usually sufficient for them to have been deemed as being received,

Not in this case as I put them to strict proof that I had received it.

in addition to them sending you a text (which you have admitted you probably deleted).

Whether they did or not no-one knows but there was no mention of text messaging in the contract.

The fact is. they mounted a full defence (and lost) over a tenner, a waste of shareholders' money.

They didn't 'lose' by mounting a defence. And I doubt the paid dearly. They already had paid circa £400 once it got as far as CISAS, so they had nothing (more) to lose by defending the case at that point

They really lost when they didn't answer your written complaint, as I said. Knowing what I do, they would normally have offered you a refund and waved a polite goodbye had they actually acknowledged that.

Glad you got your refund though.

mobilejunkie

The_Deep wrote: »

That does nothing of the sort

What do you mean by "that"

Exactly what I said, replying to your first quote and statement on the previous post. The other three were not wrong in saying the defendant had to prove receipt of notice, followed by your quote of the Ombudman's findings which specifically state that they had to show they had notified (not that the plaintiff had received). Not sure why you have problems understanding that.

The_Deep

Result.

Complete victory , CISAS found in my favour on all counts. Orange ordered to apologise and refund me all overpayments with effect from change of tariff last April. .