EE cancelled my credit – can a network cut off a PAYG phone?

QI bought a cheap Alcatel phone for emergencies on a T-mobile pay-as-you-go (PAYG) subscription. I haven’t used it often but when I last tried to do so I found that all the credit has disappeared. EE, which owns T-mobile, said its low-use policy means phone numbers not used for 180 days are automatically reissued and any outstanding credit is “forfeited”. Can it really do this? Pete Harland

AYes they can, as unfair as that may sound. Loss of credit and service from a PAYG mobile isn’t unusual. Your rights do depend on the terms and conditions of your contract.

This has become such a common problem that Ofcom recently published a web page explaining your rights ( www.snipca.com/25432). As it says, mobile companies cancel services that haven’t been used for a while so they can give the number to another customer. Some companies do this after just 70 days of inactivity, while others, like EE in Pete’s case here, wait 180 days.

However, Ofcom also says that networks must act fairly. For example, their terms and conditions must be easy to understand, and customers must be given ample warning that they stand to lose credit.

Since first emailing us, Pete got back in touch to say that EE has refunded him the outstanding balance, though it took him two efforts to persuade the company to do so. If you’re unhappy with your own network’s response, use an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme (explained by Ofcom at www. snipca.com/25433).

To avoid ending up in a similar situation to Pete, Ofcom recommends making a call or sending a text on your PAYG phone once every few weeks. You should also contact your provider to see how long it waits before suspending an inactive phone.

It’s very satisfying when our intervention leads to a company admitting products it sold to a reader are faulty, particularly if it leads to a refund. In Issue 508 we reported that QAV Direct ( www.qavdirect. co.uk) wanted to test burner units for a patio heater, after reader Keith Bond said they weren’t working. Keith returned them, expecting an instant refund, but the company wanted to check whether the fault was inherent (present since purchase) or caused by accidental damage (by the customer). All companies have the right to do this, though they have only 30 days after receiving them from the customer.

QAV Direct was initially reluctant to discuss Keith’s case with us, citing privacy concerns. It didn’t even talk to us after Keith gave it permission to do so (although we’d like to think our phone call nudged it into action). Instead it went straight to him, but not with a full refund of £149.99. Instead it offered to reimburse him £59.99, and send him a new burner that works with the heater. Legally this is known as ‘damages’, rather than a partial refund. Some customers agree to this kind of deal, but Keith rejected it, and asked instead for a full refund, which QAV Direct has now provided.