“No Evidence of Wrongdoing”

In responses to consumers the regulators frequently claims that there is “no evidence of wrongdoing,” so here in black and white is the current position.

• Consumers are complaining that they have been charged by Mobitrans for a service which they did not consent to and have not even heard of.
• EE, and Mobitrans, both claim that these charges were accepted by those complaining, but neither company has been able to provide any valid evidence of this consent.
• Even without evidence, EE and Mobitrans are refusing to refund consumers, simply insisting that they must have agreed to the charges at some point. The burden of proof is being placed on the consumer to somehow prove that they didn’t authorize the charges, rather than on the operator to prove that the consumer did authorize the charge.

Does that sound like there’s no evidence of wrongdoing, and that nothing needs investigating? Of course not.

If the consumers consented to these charges, where is the evidence? And if there is no evidence, how on earth can EE justify taking money from consumers’ bank accounts on the mere say-so of a third party, despite objections from the customer? Would banks be allowed to simply pay customers’ money to any company that asked for it, and demand that the account holder prove that they hadn’t agreed to this? Of course not.

If EE or Mobitrans can’t provide any evidence to back up their claims and yet refuse to refund customer then that is theft.