Tweet
BT Business: £160 Final Balance Became £5,054 Debt Collection Claim
I would be grateful for any thoughts on a dispute I have had with BT Business.
In May 2024, I entered into a BT Business broadband agreement after discussions with a BT Senior Business Development Manager. During those discussions I specifically requested a month-to-month arrangement that could be cancelled on 30 days' notice, as the service was intended to be a temporary solution pending a larger site-wide BT installation in the future.
The contract subsequently supplied by BT was for a 60-month term. I signed it believing it reflected what had been discussed and I have contemporaneous evidence supporting that understanding.
The broadband service was problematic from an early stage. I reported intermittent and faulty broadband on multiple occasions by email and telephone. BT engineers attended following some of these reports. This repeatedly impacted my ability to operate my holiday-let business, with guests affected and day-to-day operations sometimes becoming impossible.
On 5 August 2025 I emailed BT reporting that speeds were "abysmal" and attached speed test evidence. In response, BT's account manager wrote that the service was "not strong enough for your set up" and that "the only other solution is a leased line". In my view, this amounted to an acknowledgement that the broadband solution provided was unsuitable for my business requirements. BT later asserted that no broadband fault had been reported during the contract term, despite my emails, telephone reports and engineer visits.
The contract contained a Stay Fast Guarantee stating:
BT also sold me a Wi-Fi repeater. On 5 August 2025, a BT representative wrote that the repeater should be raised as a "mis sell due to it not working".
I gave written notice to cancel in November 2025.
I complained to BT and escalated the matter through their complaints process without success before referring the dispute to the Communications Ombudsman. BT relied heavily on the signed 60-month contract and the Ombudsman ultimately did not uphold my complaint. I rejected the Ombudsman's decision.
Following the Ombudsman process, BT sent correspondence suggesting a balance of approximately £160 remained outstanding, although I maintained that BT still owed hundreds of pounds in overcharges. I returned all BT equipment and received written confirmation from BT that all equipment had been received and removed from the account.
Shortly afterwards I received a debt collection letter from a firm acting for BT, claiming £5,054.78 under the same account number.
To date, neither BT nor the debt collection firm have provided a reconciliation explaining how the alleged balance increased from approximately £160 to £5,054.78.
My concerns are:
My ideal outcome is simply to resolve the matter fairly, bring the dispute to a close and ensure that neither my personal credit record nor my business is adversely affected by charges that I genuinely dispute.
Any thoughts on the strengths, weaknesses, or potential next steps would be greatly appreciated.
In May 2024, I entered into a BT Business broadband agreement after discussions with a BT Senior Business Development Manager. During those discussions I specifically requested a month-to-month arrangement that could be cancelled on 30 days' notice, as the service was intended to be a temporary solution pending a larger site-wide BT installation in the future.
The contract subsequently supplied by BT was for a 60-month term. I signed it believing it reflected what had been discussed and I have contemporaneous evidence supporting that understanding.
The broadband service was problematic from an early stage. I reported intermittent and faulty broadband on multiple occasions by email and telephone. BT engineers attended following some of these reports. This repeatedly impacted my ability to operate my holiday-let business, with guests affected and day-to-day operations sometimes becoming impossible.
On 5 August 2025 I emailed BT reporting that speeds were "abysmal" and attached speed test evidence. In response, BT's account manager wrote that the service was "not strong enough for your set up" and that "the only other solution is a leased line". In my view, this amounted to an acknowledgement that the broadband solution provided was unsuitable for my business requirements. BT later asserted that no broadband fault had been reported during the contract term, despite my emails, telephone reports and engineer visits.
The contract contained a Stay Fast Guarantee stating:
"If we don't fix that within 30 days, you might have reason to cancel without any termination charges."
Separately, BT repeatedly overcharged the account over several months. BT's own internal records later acknowledged billing errors, but the issue remained unresolved and refunds were not provided as requested.BT also sold me a Wi-Fi repeater. On 5 August 2025, a BT representative wrote that the repeater should be raised as a "mis sell due to it not working".
I gave written notice to cancel in November 2025.
I complained to BT and escalated the matter through their complaints process without success before referring the dispute to the Communications Ombudsman. BT relied heavily on the signed 60-month contract and the Ombudsman ultimately did not uphold my complaint. I rejected the Ombudsman's decision.
Following the Ombudsman process, BT sent correspondence suggesting a balance of approximately £160 remained outstanding, although I maintained that BT still owed hundreds of pounds in overcharges. I returned all BT equipment and received written confirmation from BT that all equipment had been received and removed from the account.
Shortly afterwards I received a debt collection letter from a firm acting for BT, claiming £5,054.78 under the same account number.
To date, neither BT nor the debt collection firm have provided a reconciliation explaining how the alleged balance increased from approximately £160 to £5,054.78.
My concerns are:
- The significant discrepancy between the earlier BT balance and the £5,054.78 now claimed.
- Whether BT can properly rely on Early Termination Charges given the reported service issues, the acknowledged repeater mis-sale, the admitted billing errors, the statement that the service was not strong enough for our setup, and the contractual Stay Fast provisions.
- Whether the contract was misrepresented at the point of sale, given my request for a month-to-month arrangement and contemporaneous evidence supporting my understanding.
- Whether BT's admitted billing errors and repeater mis-sale affect the enforceability of the charges now being pursued.
My ideal outcome is simply to resolve the matter fairly, bring the dispute to a close and ensure that neither my personal credit record nor my business is adversely affected by charges that I genuinely dispute.
Any thoughts on the strengths, weaknesses, or potential next steps would be greatly appreciated.
Comment