Sky continuing to charge after death of subscriber.

bluphoto

I was going through my elderly mum's finances over the weekend, trying to help her reduce monthly outgoings etc, and I noticed that she was paying over £50 per month for SkyTV. I know she rarely watches TV, so I suggested that she cancel it.

She asked me to call them and cancel, which I did, but they didn't have her name on record. Instead, the contract is still in my step-fathers name, who died in April 2019.

They said that they had not been notified, but my mum is convinced she had phoned them at the time, though she has no evidence. Either way, they cancelled the service on the spot - which is fine - but it got me to thinking whether they were entitled to continue to charge my mother £50+ per month after my stepdads death.

Of course, honest mistakes can be made on both sides, but technically, Sky has been charging my mum every month, though the contract was with my stepdad. The joint bank account was changed to an individual account around the same time.

Should Sky refund the charges made to my mum, as they didn't actually EVER have a contract with her directly? If so, how should I go about making that happen? I have PoA for my mum, if that is relevant.

[Deleted User]

They had the right to charge for the contract until they were informed of your stepfather's death.

The account details for payment were provided to them by either your stepfather or mother - they didn't need a separate contract with your mother for her to be able to make payment.

You may get a goodwill gesture if you ask nicely, but don't get your hopes up.

user1977

They're entitled to charge until somebody cancels, the only remedy you might have (other than relying on their goodwill) would be some sort of evidence of there being a call to cancel it. Did you ask them to check for any previous call (perhaps they have notes of a call but didn't put it down as a cancellation for some reason)?

They wouldn't be told by the bank about the account being changed from joint to sole name.

Thrugelmir

bluphoto said:

Of course, honest mistakes can be made on both sides, but technically, Sky has been charging my mum every month, though the contract was with my stepdad. 

Your mother has seen the direct debit leave the account every month. That's ample notice of the fact that the contract wasn't cancelled. Nor the direct debit when the account was made sole not joint. Ultimately people have to accept responsibility for their own actions. The world would become chaotic if we could all use hindsight to rewrite history. 

Aylesbury_Duck

As above, someone must have told Sky to draw direct debits from your mum's account instead of the joint account, which would imply consent to continue the contract.  It won't have happened automatically. It's also permissible to have the contract in one name and payment by another - our utility bills are in my name but the DDs come from my wife's account, for example.

I would try the charm offensive here.  You may be able to get a gesture from Sky, and if it's not cash, does your mum have their broadband for example?  If so, would they offer her a decent discount on it?

Sandtree

Aylesbury_Duck said:

As above, someone must have told Sky to draw direct debits from your mum's account instead of the joint account, which would imply consent to continue the contract. 

The changing of a joint account into a single account wouldnt have necessarily triggered a new account to be created so all existing DDs would have continued to have been drawn... to the best of my knowledge any checks on the name of the account holder isnt repeated each time a payment is taken. 

TELLIT01

Aylesbury_Duck said:

As above, someone must have told Sky to draw direct debits from your mum's account instead of the joint account,

Changing an account from joint to single, or single to joint, does not generate a new account number. 

Aylesbury_Duck

bluphoto said:

I was going through my elderly mum's finances over the weekend, trying to help her reduce monthly outgoings etc, and I noticed that she was paying over £50 per month for SkyTV. I know she rarely watches TV, so I suggested that she cancel it.

She asked me to call them and cancel, which I did, but they didn't have her name on record. Instead, the contract is still in my step-fathers name, who died in April 2019.

They said that they had not been notified, but my mum is convinced she had phoned them at the time, though she has no evidence. Either way, they cancelled the service on the spot - which is fine - but it got me to thinking whether they were entitled to continue to charge my mother £50+ per month after my stepdads death.

Of course, honest mistakes can be made on both sides, but technically, Sky has been charging my mum every month, though the contract was with my stepdad. The joint bank account was changed to an individual account around the same time.

Should Sky refund the charges made to my mum, as they didn't actually EVER have a contract with her directly? If so, how should I go about making that happen? I have PoA for my mum, if that is relevant.

Sandtree said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

As above, someone must have told Sky to draw direct debits from your mum's account instead of the joint account, which would imply consent to continue the contract. 

The changing of a joint account into a single account wouldnt have necessarily triggered a new account to be created so all existing DDs would have continued to have been drawn... to the best of my knowledge any checks on the name of the account holder isnt repeated each time a payment is taken. 

TELLIT01 said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

As above, someone must have told Sky to draw direct debits from your mum's account instead of the joint account,

Changing an account from joint to single, or single to joint, does not generate a new account number. 

Ah, I see.  I misunderstood the bolded bit, and interpreted it that Sky had started taking the DDs from a different individual account and not the joint account.  I now assume that OP means that her mother converted the account to an individual one.

sheramber

Has she watched SKY in that time?

bluphoto

I get it that they are entitled to charge until somebody cancels, but my concern was WHO are they entitled to charge?

Looking into it a bit further, it looks like liability for most contracts falls to the executor after someone dies, so she would continue to have liability for the contract for as long as it isn't cancelled. Whether "most" contracts applies in the case of a monthly subscription I can't really tell, though I guess it most probably does.

bluphoto

sheramber said:

Has she watched SKY in that time?

Definitely, yes, though mostly freeview channels via her sky box - which is why we are cancelling it now as she rarely (but not never) watches any paid / premium channels.

I also occasionally have visitors who watch Sky TV on my TV while visiting my house, but I don't think that makes them liable for the subscription.