AOL have been overcharging me for years

[aragonite]

I signed up to AOL all the way back in the 1990s and initially connected to their service using a modem.

Several email addresses were established with them and I continue to use these email addresses currently.

 

A long time ago we signed up to a broadband account with NTL who went on to become Virgin Media.

I accessed AOL through their proprietary software but using the NTL/Virgin Media account for the actual internet access.

The narrowband modem dial-up connection to AOL was not used at all after we had signed up to NTL/Virgin Media.

I have long since even used their software and have accessed my email accounts through Outlook.

 

It would be fair to say that I haven't kept a close eye on what AOL had been charging me over the years for what was essentially

just the provision of email addresses but I recently found out that AOL do not actually charge anything at all for email addresses.

 

Over the last year they have been taking £31.99 a month from me via a credit card continuous authority transaction.

Looking back over my records I see various monthly charges of £26.98 and £19.99 going back into 2010.

I don't have records of what they were charging me before that but I think it was of a similar magnitude.

I believe these charges were actually the sort of charges they make for an AOL broadband account

but I have not at any time accessed AOL by their own broadband system.

 

I rang one of their representatives yesterday who wasn't exactly helpful.

I asked him why I was being charged all of this money simply for the provision of some email addresses.

He wasn't bothered that I have never had a broadband connection with AOL.

He also claimed that the £31.99 per month currently being charged was the cost of a narrowband service - something I highly doubt.

 

I believe I have been wrongly charged for a service I haven't received for a great many years

and would like to know my chances of claiming this money back.

 

I have written an initial letter to AOL (who are apparently now owned by Talk Talk) but haven't posted it yet.

Does anyone have any advice as to how I should go about this?

[dx100uk]

you need to send an sar to you bank to get all the bank statements.

 

it might also serve your purpose to to SAR AOL too.

 

them you need to reclaim the money

 

as, they need to PROVE they have provided you with a 'service' other than email addresses.

 

you are probably going to have to contact your bank at some point

and p'haps see if they might reverse all the CPA payments.

 

there is CPA info with in this post I keep:

 

We have been telling people to put a letter into their bank instructing them not to make any payments under any circumstances to these companie

http://whatconsumer.co.uk/visa-debit-chargeback/- it works!

 

banks MUST follow written intructions from their customers !

This fsa [now the FCA] 11:24 31/05/2013 guide has now been updated:

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/consumer_...ghts_guide.pdf

 

Here's the text:

 

Cancelling a regular

card payment:

 

When you give your credit or debit card details to a company and authorise them to take regular payments from your account,

such as for a gym membership or magazine subscription,

it is known as a ‘recurring transaction’ or ‘continuous payment authority’.

These are often confused with direct debits, but do not offer the same guarantee if the amount or date of the payment changes.

In most cases, regular payments can be cancelled by telling the company taking the payments.

.

However,

you have the right to cancel them directly with your bank or card issuer by telling it that you have stopped permission for the payments.

Your bank or card issuer must then stop them – it has no right to insist that you agree this first with the company taking the payments.

Be aware, though, that you will still be responsible for paying any money that you owe.

.

see: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?336569-How-to-remove-a-lender-s-continuous-payment-authority(2-Viewing)-nbsp

.

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/consumerinformation/product_news/banking/know_your_rights/solving/index.shtml

and

Attach the following to your claim and in the interim period write to your bank and attach the following (Keep a copy)

Regulation 55 of The Payment Services Regulations 2009:

55.—(1) A payment transaction is to be regarded as having been authorised by the payer for the purposes of this Part only if the payer has given its consent to—

(a)the execution of the payment transaction; or .

(b)the execution of a series of payment transactions of which that payment transaction forms part. .

(2) Such consent—

(a)may be given before or, if agreed between the payer and its payment service provider, after the execution of the payment transaction; and .

(b)must be given in the form, and in accordance with the procedure, agreed between the payer and its payment service provider. .

(3) The payer may withdraw its consent to a payment transaction at any time before the point at which the payment order can no longer be revoked under regulation 67.

(4) Subject to regulation 67(3) to (5), the payer may withdraw its consent to the execution of a series of payment transactions at any time with the effect that any future payment transactions are not regarded as authorised for the purposes of this Part.

This means that you can simply ask your bank to refuse the payments, it is also good practice to let the lender know too.

So, if you would like your creditor to stop trying to take a payment all you need to do, in theory, is to inform them that you remove their authority. It's probably better to do this in writing and via recorded delivery - if possible.

You can learn more about your rights via the following fsa guide :

Ending recurring payments from credit cards

57 Recurring payments, is the term used to describe transactions for which a client has granted written permission for her/his credit or debit card to be debited for recurring goods or services, for example, club membership subscriptions, insurance cover or payday loansicon. The card may be debited annually, monthly or at other regular intervals.

.

58 In most cases, recurring payments can be cancelled by telling the trader taking the payments. However, a client has the right to withdraw consent by simply telling whoever issued the card (the bank, building society or credit card company) that s/he does not want a payment to be made. S/he can tell the card issuer by phone, email or letter.

.

59 The card issuer has no right to insist that the client ask the trader to stop taking the payment first. The card issuer has to stop the payments if the client has asked them to. The client could point out to the card issuer that they should follow the FSA guidance available in the FSA know your rightsicon booklet which is available on the FSA website at www.fsa.gov.uk.

.

59a If money is still taken from the client's account, it will be deemed to be an unauthorised transaction, and the card issuer must give her/him an immediate refund. The card issuer will have to cancel any interest and charges added to the her/his account because the payment was taken. It is not up to the client to prove that s/he told the card issuer to stop taking payments. Instead, the card issuer would have to prove that s/he did not tell them to stop making payments.

.

60 The client should make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service when all the internal complaints systems within the company issuing the card have been exhausted.

I hope this information is of assistance

 

 

................

 

 

so something here might help without going through AOL system.

 

however lets see what happens

 

but you certainly need to get all the info together first by the SAR's

to ENSURE you get everything back

 

 

not just take AOL or your banks word for the figure

 

dx

[aragonite]

Thanks dx. That's very helpful.

 

If I SAR AOL themselves do I need to ask them for any information in particular or are they obligated to tell me everything they have on me?

[dx100uk]

they are obliged to send everything of a personal nature they hold on you.

 

go get 'em!

 

dx

[Conniff]

I believe I have been wrongly charged for a service I haven't received for a great many years

 

Keep in mind that not using the service isn't the same as cancelling it.

Edited June 23, 2013 by Conniff

[aragonite]

Hi Conniff.

 

I think AOL have been charging me for a broadband service but I've never even had a broadband connection with them so I couldn't have used it even if I wanted to.

[san_d]

He also claimed that the £31.99 per month currently being charged was the cost of a narrowband service - something I highly doubt.

It is perfectly possible that they charge dial up more than broadband, mainly to push people away from dial up. Narrowband costs the ISP more that ADSL. It looks to me you never cancelled your dialup contract. Opening a broadband contract with another provider doesn't automatically cancel a narrowband contract because they use two different services.

[dx100uk]

never the less

 

they should have a record that the service has not been used for XXXX date.

 

they should refund it, not BLINDLY continue to spoof money out of people without them checking.

 

dx

[san_d]

never the less

 

they should have a record that the service has not been used for XXXX date.

 

they should refund it, not BLINDLY continue to spoof money out of people without them checking.

 

dx

I don't see why they should do that. Besides I think it's negligence on the OP's side not to check their bank statements.

[FlameLilyFX]

aragonite

 

This is what I discovered too today with AOL - overcharging me for years for dial-up.

 

I phoned them and they said I was responsible to cancel the dial up service.

I did not know that I was being charged for this as I have been with Virgin broadband for years.

They have never sent me any communication offering me broadband alternatives etc.

 

However, I was still not happy and pressed on to speak to a supervisor.

They try and fob you off at all counts.

 

I still insisted I was not happy and said I would continue to pursue my enquiry regarding being overcharged for a service I had not used for some 7+ years.

I was then offered 6 months refund and agreed they could close complaint. However, on reflection, I am still not happy.

 

I have since done some research on the internet regarding our plight and found this similar situation:-

 

"When I signed up to AOL Broadband in 2007 I was told the existing email address that I had, which I set up through a dial-up account about four years before,

would cease unless I paid a fee in addition to my monthly broadband cost.

I reluctantly agreed to the £9.99 quoted to retain this email, which I used for freelance and consultancy work. This was set up as a monthly debit card payment.

 

It was only after I cancelled my broadband in August 2011, and subsequently realised that I was still paying AOL each month, that I contacted them.

 

I admit I hadn't been keeping an eye on how much AOL had been charging me to retain my existing email but on closer scrutiny it was considerably more than £9.99.

 

It was at this point that I was told by an AOL representative that I didn't need to pay to keep this email address and they weren't sure why I had been paying so much for so long.

 

After several weeks, I was eventually told that AOL had stopped charging for email addresses four years ago

but it says it has no obligation to stop taking monies or refund monies when policies change. LM, London

 

This case had us banging our heads against a wall and we are still none the wiser as to why you were being charged at all – let alone for fluctuating amounts.

 

It seems the £9.99 was a continuing payment for your dial-up account, which you were told you needed to keep open in order to retain the email address when you switched to broadband.

 

At first TalkTalk told us that, shortly after it took over AOL, it reversed this policy of charging for a dial-up account in order to retain an email address.

It said this policy was made clear on its website at the time of the change.

 

The fact it didn't contact customers directly to tell them seemed unfair but at least started to make sense as to why you were continuing to be charged.

 

However, on further questioning, TalkTalk changed its tune and said AOL had stopped charging to retain an email address in 2006.

This makes no sense, given that you were charged after this.

 

TalkTalk cannot explain why arbitrary amounts of money then continued to be taken from your account each month, sometimes for the agreed £9.99, sometimes for as much as £40.99.

It does maintain that you should have kept a closer eye on your direct debits, something even you admit you should have done.

 

It then said, as a gesture of goodwill, it would repay you six months of charges, which it says total £167.94.

 

You are not happy as you feel you have been overcharged for years and that this amount only goes a small way towards addressing this.

We agree that there are questions still to be answered about the fluctuating size of the charges so we went back to TalkTalk to try and get further clarification

– but it stopped responding to our requests.

 

You are now taking your case to the telecoms ombudsman to see if you can get a more thorough answer.

 

We welcome letters but cannot answer individually.

 

Email us at xxxxx] or write to Bachelor & Brignall, Money, the Guardian, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU. Please include a daytime phone number."

 

I think we have been [problem]med somewhat.

 

AOL do not detail any of my billing details online either so I would still be ignorant as to what their charges are for.

 

Have you had any further success with your complaint with AOL?

[dx100uk]

it is DISGUSTING that they pull these stunts!!

 

send no statements

no letters the 'price is going up'

no invitation to switch to a cheaper and better service.

 

pers i'd have them In COURT

 

so me any paperwork at all AOL that shows you informed the customer

year after year after years of taking it WHAT actual SERVICE you provided me.

 

as for the comment of its the OP's fault for not checking bank accounts...I wont answer

this is CAG this is UNFAIR and poss fraud

 

if a DCA did it...would you say the same?

 

dx

[mattyprice4004]

it is DISGUSTING that they pull these stunts!!

 

send no statements

no letters the 'price is going up'

no invitation to switch to a cheaper and better service.

 

pers i'd have them In COURT

 

so me any paperwork at all AOL that shows you informed the customer

year after year after years of taking it WHAT actual SERVICE you provided me.

 

as for the comment of its the OP's fault for not checking bank accounts...I wont answer

this is CAG this is UNFAIR and poss fraud

 

if a DCA did it...would you say the same?

 

dx

 

How on earth is this fraud?! They signed up for a service, and chose not to use it. If I signed up for my gym and never went they'd still charge me - this is the same.

 

They should be aware what they're signed up to, and keep an eye on their account.

[dx100uk]

no

wherever did you get that from?

 

if you sign a contract

it does not give anyone perm to roll this over for almost 20yrs!!

 

dx

[FlameLilyFX]

Yes, I agree I have responsibility for checking my bank statement each month. However, I knew I paid a subscription to them, but they never ever communicated to me when their charges went up and, even to this day, I cannot view any billing details for my AOL online account. It has been an expensive mistake for me. And that is that! I suppose it's only money!

 

I have another dilemma going on regarding my energy bills with EDF. I shall be leaving them as soon as. I am given to understand that as a French company, they overcharge the British to subsidise the French. Silly fool me!