What can you do when you come home from work and receive a letter from one company which claims that you have ordered some goods, when in fact you haven't ordered any goods, and at the same time, another company says that you have received these so called goods, when in fact you haven’t received any goods. This is exactly what happened to me after sending out a notice of publication to all parties mentioned on this website.
On 31 July 2013, I received a letter informing me that I have received my first bill with mobile phone company Everything Everywhere (“EE”) which was strange as I never signed up with EE. I immediately telephoned EE to report this mistake with their billing, however, EE claimed that no mistake had been made. EE insisted that I ordered a mobile phone contract on 26 July 2013 by telephone. I stated that this was untrue. EE also stated that delivery of the mobile phone with SIM card was made at 11.59am on 29 July 2013 to my home address and they claimed that I personally signed for these package(s) showing my passport as proof of identity to a courier driver at UK Mail.
One day later, on 1 August 2013, I received a letter from T-Mobile, part of the EE group, claiming that I had ordered a new mobile phone and contract with T-Mobile as well. I was shocked at what I was hearing as this was also completely untrue. I had not placed any order with EE and T-Mobile and I had not received any order from EE & T-Mobile and this could be easily proven.
I can prove without any doubt that this was a complete fabrication in an attempt to frame me.
Tape recordings of the order placement disappear at EE
Firstly, I did not make any telephone calls to EE or T-Mobile to order any mobile phone contracts. EE and T-Mobile have a record of every contract they have with their customers. If a customer orders in store, the customer will sign a contract. If a customer orders by telephone, the contract is verbal and this telephone call is recorded by mobile phone companies as proof of a contract.
This is an easy case to solve as all EE need to do is to refer to the telephone recordings (the contract) on 26 July 2013 which will easily prove that I did not place any order with EE.
However, EE claimed in a taped telephone conversation that they do not have copies of the tape recordings (the contracts) on 26 July 2013.
Tape recordings of the order placement disappear at T-Mobile
T-Mobile also claimed in a taped telephone conversation that they do not have the tape recording of the order placement. For one telecommunication company not to hold the telephone recording of the order placement would be unheard of in this day and age, but for two companies which operate independently of each other both claiming that they do not hold the telephone recordings, is a complete joke.
I believe EE & T-Mobile both stated that they do not have copies of the tape recordings because no one actually telephoned on 26 July 2013 as this is an inside job.
Courier driver who EE, T-Mobile & UK Mail all confirmed delivered items to me has now disappeared
I was at work at the same time, EE, T-Mobile & UK Mail all falsely claimed that I was at home showing my passport to a UK Mail Courier driver to sign receipt of the mobile phone packages.
On 29 July 2013, I was at work in Central London (over an hour away from where I live) where I was at work for the whole day from 9.30am until 6pm. Furthermore, at roughly the same time EE, T-Mobile & UK Mail falsely claimed that I showed my passport to UK Mail’s courier driver, I had sent an email from my work desktop.
As I could conclusively prove with hard physical evidence and with witnesses that I was being set up, I wanted to find out why UK Mail were falsely stating that I signed for mobile phone packages with my passport when this was clearly not the case.
A complaint was made to the Chief Executive of UK Mail Mr Guy Buswell. (exhibit)
I was strung along for several days by UK Mail as they stated that they would contact the driver and investigate this matter. On 2nd August 2013, Sandy Geddes of UK Mail wrote to me to confirm that "the driver’s actions will be the subject of enquiry by UKMail." (exhibit)
Four days later, on 6 August 2013, UK Mail emailed to advise that they were unable to investigate this matter as the driver had left the company on 31 July 2013. (exhibit)
As this was a serious matter concerning theft, if the driver had actually left the company on 31 July 2013, Ms Sandy Geddes would have been aware that the driver had left UK Mail prior to writing to me on on 2nd August 2013. Ms Geddes wrote to me on four occasions on 2nd August 2013 and at no time did she mention that the driver had left.
UK Mail were keen to state that the reasons for the driver’s departure was not related to my complaint and that they will refer the matter onto the police to investigate the driver.
EE Would Not Block The Sim Cards Despite Six Reports of Fraud
I notified EE on six separate occasions that a fraud has taken place as I did not order any mobile phones and I had not received any mobile phones. Despite telephone calls and e-mails addressed to EE’s Chief Executive Mr Olaf Swantee, EE would not mark this case as fraud and failed to block the sim cards until after the sixth report of fraud.
When one makes a fraud report, the sim cards are blocked immediately. But in my case, EE would not block the sim card claiming that it is clearly not fraud as I had ordered the mobiles by telephone and I had signed for the mobiles using my passport as identification. Therefore, they refused to block the sim cards.
I am the account holder, therefore, if I am reporting that I had not ordered or received the items in question, the company must put a block on the sim cards immediately and then conduct an investigation. It is the equivalent of a customer reporting to their bank that they instruct the bank to put a block on their bank card due to fraudulent activity and the bank refuses to do so as they do not believe the account holder is telling the truth.
According to EE and T-Mobile's terms and conditions, until the sim card is blocked it is the customer who is responsible for any calls made.
Even after EE claimed that the sim cards were blocked, they were not telling the truth. I telephoned one of the numbers and I was told to "get lost" by the person as he has "lots of calls to make".
Why didn't EE block the sim card on the first report of fraudulent activity? Why didn't they block it on the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth report of fraud? I believe it's because they are fully aware that by not blocking the sim card, I would be liable for all telephone calls made which could accrue into thousands of pounds.
UK Mail failed to investigate my complaints & Caught Out Lying
UK Mail stated that they could not investigate my complaint as the driver has now left the company and that they would refer this matter to the police to investigate. (exhibit) However, there was no police investigation as I have never been contacted by the police to this very day (30.01.2016), some two and half years after the event.
Why would UK Mail state that they will refer this matter to the police when they failed to do so? And why would UK Mail not refer this matter to the police when one of their drivers has allegedly committed theft?
I believe they stated all of this to avoid investigating my complaints and because there was no driver & consignment in the first place. The consignment numbers that UK Mail provided as proof that the mobiles were delivered to my address are not even on UK Mail's system. For example, a UK Mail employee has confirmed that the consignment numbers do not exist on their system. (exhibit)
The facts of the matters are that there is no evidence of the driver at UK Mail existing as they claim he has disappeared. The actual consignment numbers do not exist in UK Mail's system. UK Mail fail to investigate my complaints and instead fob me off that the police are now investigating this matter and therefore cannot discuss this matter any further. However, there has never been a police investigation. If UK Mail's story was correct and this was a case of theft, the matter would have been referred to the police, the driver would have been arrested and I would have had to give a statement to the police, none of which has happened.
EE & T-Mobile failed to investigate my complaints
I have brought this serious matter to the Chief Executive's Mr Olaf Swantee's attention and my complaints have not been investigated to this very day (30.01.2016), around two and half years after the event.
The main complaints are detailed here, here and here and this is the final response (here) I received from EE. As you can see, EE have ignored all my complaints and were only willing to confirm "in this case the EE Fraud department have now accepted the above EE account as fraudulent and closed it with no costs attributed to yourself. Although they cannot give details of the event I trust you accept that this matter is now closed." If this was the case and the account is in fact fraudulent, then why didn't they report this to the police?
This is simply not good enough. EE, T-Mobile and UK Mail's actions could have landed me in prison if I did not have the evidence to prove that I was at work at the time they claimed I was at home showing my passport to a courier driver. It is not good enough that the Chief Executive Mr Olaf Swantee has not investigated my complaints when this serious matter was brought to his attention time and time again.
I believe the reason why EE, T-Mobile and UK Mail have failed to investigate this matter is because it was all an inside job. There is no evidence to suggest someone placed an order for the mobiles as both EE and T-Mobile are unable to produce any tape recordings of the orders. Furthermore, there is no evidence that there was a courier driver and any consignment of mobiles as the courier driver has disappeared and the consignment number is not even valid.
The two most crucial parts of evidence are the tape recordings and the courier driver and all of a sudden both disappeared when they found out that I was work at the time they claimed I was at home showing my passport to the driver.
And this is the reason why I believe this is an inside job in order to try to discredit me and frame me for something I haven’t even done.
Who are the public going to believe, a version of events stated by two independent companies or a version of events described by an individual who has unlawful convictions against his name? How is one supposed to prove their innocence when one independent company is saying that you have ordered mobile phones and another independent company is saying that you have received the mobile phones? Thanks to the grace of God, the co-ordinated plan fell through as EE, T-Mobile and UK Mail were all caught out with their lies.
Still to this day, I do not understand why it took six requests for the sim card to be blocked before EE actually blocked the sim card. Any other person who calls up EE or any telecommunication company to report their phone as stolen would have their sim card blocked immediately, so why did EE refuse to do so in my case?
And still to this day, why haven't EE, T-Mobile and UK Mail referred this matter to the police, when EE and T-Mobile are claiming that the account was in fact fraudulent and UK Mail are claiming that the driver stole the mobiles?
And lastly, EE, T-Mobile and UK Mail have not investigated this matter and have not apologised for their actions even though their actions could have resulted in myself being imprisoned and levied with huge amounts of debt if I could not prove that I was at work at the same time they claimed the handsets were delivered to me. Why have they failed to investigate this matter and provide me with a full explanation?
EE, T-Mobile and UK Mail have put me through an enormous amount of unnecessary stress and strain and hardship through no fault of my own. I hope that when this matter goes public that EE, T-Mobile and UK Mail are finally held accountable for their actions.
A notice of publication was sent to EE, T-Mobile (exhibit) & UK Mail (exhibit) to see if they have any issues or objections to this publication and to provide each party with their right of reply. EE, T-Mobile & UK Mail all chose not to respond.