In a challenging situation involving a mobile contract, a writer encountered difficulties with telecommunications company O2 after discovering that their mother's phone line, unused since her Alzheimer's diagnosis in 2020, continued to incur charges. Despite multiple attempts to cancel the service, O2 maintained its policy of non-refund for active accounts, leading to a two-year billing period and a total cost exceeding £1,000. The resolution came only after intervention from the Communications Ombudsman.
The issue began in July 2023 when the writer discovered the unused mobile contract and immediately contacted O2 to request its cancellation. The monthly charge of £21 had continued unabated, accumulating a significant financial burden. Despite the writer's follow-up in September 2023, O2 did not respond. In February 2024, the writer's sister attempted to cancel the contract but was similarly unsuccessful. O2 insisted on its right to bill for services as long as the account remained active.
In July 2024, the writer reached out to O2 once more and finally received a response that included an offer of a £20 goodwill gesture for the "overall experience." Furthermore, the writer's mother received a notice threatening to involve a debt collection agency over an outstanding £21, despite her not having used the phone since 2020.
O2 later credited the writer with £100 as compensation for the service shortfall. The company explained its actions, stating:
“In line with the ruling, we have provided CW with £100 compensation. While we apologise for this delay, once his email was picked up by our dedicated specialist team that provides support when a customer unfortunately becomes ill or passes away, the disconnection was swiftly processed and all debt has now been waived.” – O2
O2's policy on non-refundability of active accounts was reiterated:
“does not cover providing any refund for an active account, even if is not being used” – O2
The involvement of the Communications Ombudsman was crucial in mediating the dispute and ensuring a resolution. This case highlights the challenges faced by individuals dealing with long-term illnesses and underscores the importance of clear communication and flexible policies from service providers.