The default was removed. As soon as I found out, I called Three and they cancelled the old account. Interestingly, there was no issue with contracts when I did so, nor was I ever called at any point to renew that particular contract, which they always did with the other accounts.

Thanks for that, though I have to say that Citizen's Advice here do not seem to know very much about these matters. I was wondering what might happen if this were a UK case.

I am currently in a billing dispute with Hutchison 3G in Ireland. I'd like to get an opinion on this UK forum as there does not seem to be a similar forum in the ROI. The dispute began in May of this year, though its origins go back to April 2013. The details are as follows: • On 4th April, 2013 I spoke with Three’s Sales Team about purchasing a new Broadband account. I explained that I wanted to upgrade my account from the €21.99 I was paying to the new rate of €34.99. Three claims to have advised me that the old account number (8215453427) could only be cancelled after the new account was activated. Three claim I agreed to call back and get the cancellation processed, though I have no recollection of this. The old account remained active and invoices were issued by Three in relation to it, though the details of the account were never available online at My3. Nor were the details of my new broadband account. • Part of the confusion on my part in relation to the existence of these two broadband accounts was due to order of the figures on my bank statements. Any time I looked at these statements, which have numerous transactions over a monthly period, my broadband bill of €34.99 and my phone bill (also with Three, and which varied), were always deducted at the beginning of each month by direct debit. The old broadband figure of €21.99, which I somehow missed, was debited later in the month. • Three tells me that on 27th September, 2014, I spoke with their Collections Team and paid €21.99 by card to clear an outstanding payment on the old broadband account. This, they seem to imply, illustrates that I was aware of the existence of the account I thought had been cancelled. In fact, I assumed we were talking about the new broadband account for €34.99 I had ordered on April 4th the previous year. • Three also inform me that on the same day I also spoke with their Customer Service Team about the old broadband account as I needed assistance accessing it on My3. Again, I assumed we were talking about the new broadband account. And, as stated above, I was never able to access details of either broadband account on My3, only my phone bills. • On 15th May, 2015 I received a letter from Three, informing me of an increase from €21.99 to €24.99 on the old broadband account. I called Three’s Customer Service Team to find out why I was being charged this amount for broadband. As far as I knew, I was paying €34.99 monthly for line rental. It was then they informed me that the old account had never been cancelled, and that it had been active since I ordered the new one on 4th April, 2013. That is, over a period of two years. The total deducted on the old account during this time came to €502.84. • Since May 20th I have had seven telephone conversations on this matter, all of which I recorded. I had the last of these on July 28th. In three of those conversations (May 26th, June 26th, July 9th) I was told in no uncertain terms that the sum of €502.84 (Case no. 19929979) would be refunded to me within 21 working days. It transpired that the date of payment was constantly deferred, even though I was categorically told by Three’s Customer Service on July 9th that a refund had been approved on July 6th. This turned out to be a false pledge, and the debt was not honoured. • On July 28th I was finally informed by Three’s Costumer Service that because I had not confirmed the cancellation of the original broadband contract for €21.99 (as in, I had cancelled it but not confirmed it, as outlined above) their finance team deemed me to be culpable. I was then offered half the amount due (€251), though Customer Service could not promise that this would be honoured either since their finance team would again have the final decision. I rejected this and told them I expected a full refund. In written correspondence I received a bill from Three on June 24th, offering me the sum of €506.12 in credit (which included the refund sum of €502.84). Again I rejected this and said I expected a full refund. • I have sent two letters to Customer Care in Dublin (July 29th, August 14th) informing them that I intended to take my case to the small claims court. I received an email from their Executive Office Case Manager on August 12th, claiming that (as outlined above) I was culpable for not confirming the cancellation on my old broadband account. I replied on August 14th, telling them I would be initiating legal proceedings on Monday August 31st. There has been no communication since. • In relation to the recording of the telephone conversations in question, I informed all Three Customer Care personnel that I was doing so and to let their supervisors know about it. I did this so that, in the event of legal proceedings being necessary, I would be able to show precisely what was discussed. These recordings clearly detail the matters above, and show that I have been consistently misled by 3G on this matter. I have also made verbatim transcripts of these conversations. I basically want to know if I have grounds for a legal action. The weakness in my case clearly pertains to the fact that, if I received bank statements detailing all my transactions with Three, then I should have been aware of the continuing existence of the old account. I can only say that I did not expect to find it on those statements, and so I did not look for it. That Three would set up a new account without cancelling the old one as a matter of course - particularly after I had explained to them that it was for the purposes of an upgrade - appears to be a deceptive business practise at best, whether or not they claim I should have confirmed the cancellation. I was also, it seems, deliberately and consistently misled on the matter of a refund, which again shows how Three is so casually given to deceiving their customers. As it seems unlikely that Customer Service personnel would decide on such a ruse by themselves, it is hard not to conclude that they were instructed to lie by their superiors. Any advice welcome Ian