These are real cases that the Ombudsman has investigated and made a decision on how to resolve the complaint.

Customer Service

A customer, we shall call him Ben, contacted his service provider to inform the company that he was moving house.  Ben also wanted to cancel his second telephone line and advised the service provider on this.  However, Ben continued to be billed for the service provider's services at his previous address.  As Ben was unable to resolve his complaint with the service provider he asked Otelo to investigate.

After conducting an investigation and asking the service provider for information on the complaint, the Ombudsman was disappointed that the service provider failed to provide her with its opinion on Ben's complaint.  On the balance of evidence available, the Ombudsman was of the opinion that Ben had received a poor level of customer service from the service provider.

The Ombudsman required the service provider to provide Ben with a full refund for the incorrect charges that he had incurred following the house move and ensure that it no longer sent bills to his previous address.  Additionally, the Ombudsman required the service provider to provide Ben with a goodwill gesture for the poor customer service he had received.

Customer Service

A Customer, we shall call him Peter, decided to change companies for internet, telephone and TV services; these had previously been supplied by the service provider.

The service provider was first contacted by Peter's new provider, which had asked for his telephone number to be transferred to it.  Therefore, the service provider cancelled the telephone and internet services which relied upon the telephone number.  Peter contacted the service provider and informed it that he would like to keep the TV service.

A month later Peter cancelled the TV service and he disputed the final amount owed.  He stated that the service provider had ignored his letters of complaint and hadn't referred him to Otelo.  In an attempt to resolve the complaint, the service provider applied a credit to Peter's account equivalent to the outstanding balance.

After investigating Peter's complaint, the Ombudsman was satisfied with the service provider's explanation of the outstanding charges.  The Ombudsman concluded that Peter had been charged correctly.   Although the Ombudsman found the service provider's level of customer service to be poor, she was satisfied that the credit applied to the account was reasonable.

On this occasion, the Ombudsman didn't require the service provider to take any further action.

 Mis-Selling

The customer, we shall call him Simon, was out of the country when his telephone service was transferred to the service provider without his knowledge or permission.  Simon complained to the service provider when he returned to the UK and he requested cancellation of the account.  Simon also requested an investigation as he believed the service provider's service had been mis-sold to him.

Simon sent the service provider several letters of complaint and made numerous phone calls.  However, it took the service provider a long time to respond to Simon's issues.  The service provider gave Simon a copy of the contract which had been signed by a member of his family.  Simon believed that the signature on the contract was not genuine and requested compensation from the service provider.  The service provider closed Simon's account but continued to chase him for payment of the outstanding balance.

The Ombudsman conducted an investigation into Simon's complaint and considered that the family member was not the account holder and so the contract was not valid.  The Ombudsman was of the opinion that the account should have been cancelled and the mis-selling issue investigated.  The evidence presented to the Ombudsman suggested that the signature on the agreement was similar to Simon's signature but was not identical.  The Ombudsman was of the opinion that Simon had experienced a poor level of customer service.

The Ombudsman required the service provider to write a letter of apology and to investigate the mis-selling issue.  The service provider was required to provide Simon with an assurance that his credit file hadn't been affected by this matter and it was required to make a goodwill payment for the poor level of customer service Simon had experienced.  The Ombudsman considered that Simon should pay for any call charges incurred on the account but the service provider was required to credit all other outstanding charges.  The Ombudsman asked the service provider to make sure that Simon didn't receive any further bills or reminders.

Stolen Phone

A customer, that we have called Clare, reported the loss of her handset to her service provider.  The service provider placed a bar on the service and sent Clare a replacement sim card.

Clare received a bill and complained to the service provider about the call charges.  The service provider advised Clare that the charges related to calls which had been made after the handset was stolen.  Clare paid the undisputed portion of the bill to the service provider.  However she was unable to resolve the matter of the disputed call charges, although she had escalated her complaint with the service provider.

Clare's service provider said that no calls were made on the old sim card after the loss had been reported and that calls were not made using the new sim card until it a week after it had been activated. 

After carrying out an investigation into Clare's complaint, the Ombudsman considered that she was responsible for the disputed calls and that the service provider was correct to maintain the charges.  However the Ombudsman was of the opinion that the service provider had provided a poor level of service to Clare.

The Ombudsman required the service provider to make a goodwill payment to Clare for the poor level of customer service had experienced.  The Ombudsman could then see no reason why Clare shouldn't pay her outstanding balance.