Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark B
In my case, at the time I had no password, so I hadn't got a leg to stand on.
|
Presumbaly NTL told you this - you being the named subscriber. The burden of proof would almost certainly have been with NTL to prove that the variation of contract existed, not with you to prove that it didn't.
If the information was on your file, then NTL would have to have proven that:
1) It was positively you that made the variation (without a password, this would be difficult);
2) There was very little possiblity of error on their part, for instance, a mis-interpretation of a call from you, or it should have been put onto someone else's account (with their record ....).
3) There was very little possibility of error on your part, for instance, if you suffer from memory lapses!
My feeling is that, based on the above, you should have stood a good chance of getting your money back.