O2 continues to collect - No peace of mind for customers even after termination!

When you switch to a new mobile provider, you usually expect a quick and easy solution - but not if O2 is anything to go by. The M.s, a married couple from Germany, only wanted to change their provider, but instead they spent months battling unauthorized charges and unclear contract terminations. What at first glance looked like a simple case of "termination and billing" turned out to be a real fiasco. A case that should be a warning not only for the M.s, but also for all other customers.

The nightmare begins: dismissal is not recognized

Hagen M. terminated his mobile phone contract with O2 via the app at the beginning of September after he and his wife switched to the new provider and took their phone numbers with them. But when he received a letter from O2 shortly afterwards, he was astonished: "The termination did not come from the contract holder," it said - and therefore the contract still had to be confirmed. Since his wife, who had originally signed the contract, also canceled it, the problem seemed to be solved. But this is where the trouble really started.

Soon after the termination, O2 continued to charge money - even though the contract had long been terminated and the phone numbers had been transferred. First 89.97 euros, then 76.97 euros, without any service having been provided. The M.s complained to O2, but the company was slow to respond.

Hidden hurdles and the madness of communication

When the charges continued even after several months, O2 responded to the M.s' repeated complaints with standard replies and refused to refund them. Finally, the M.s were asked to "prove" that they had actually terminated their contract in September - even though all contract data was available at O2 and all phone numbers had long since been switched to the new provider. However, O2 did not bother to check these simple facts in their system.

And when the company finally decided to credit an amount of EUR 5.20 "as a gesture of goodwill", the M.s were understandably very annoyed. To make matters worse, direct debits continued to be made while O2 declared the notices of termination to be non-existent - a prime example of poor service and opaque business practices.

O2's convoluted excuses and the misbehavior of "customer friendliness"

O2 justified the continuous debits by claiming that only one contract from 2017 had been terminated and the other contracts were only listed later. The problem: O2 knew exactly which phone numbers had been transferred and that they had not provided any services for the M.s since October 11, 2023. Even if the notice of termination was not in exactly the right form, the customers' "real intention" was clear: terminate all contracts, take their phone numbers with them and never pay a cent to O2 again. But O2 ignored these facts.

The M.s eventually even had to take their case to the Federal Network Agency and the Data Protection Commissioner to get justice. A tough battle that resulted in a delayed response and weak compensation from O2 - while continuing to give the impression that the company conducts little more than a business relationship with its customers without any regard for their time and money.

What can you do to protect yourself?

The case of the M.s clearly shows how important it is to be particularly careful when terminating mobile phone contracts. It is advisable not only to send the termination notice by app or email, but also to explicitly list all contracts and phone numbers. You should also revoke the direct debit mandate immediately so that the provider cannot continue to debit your account. Continuous billing without a service being provided is not only annoying, but can also be legally problematic in many cases.

If your provider refuses to give you an appropriate response, you should not hesitate to lodge a complaint with the Federal Network Agency or another competent body. Taking legal action may also be necessary in some cases.

How to protect yourself from the tricks of providers

"Goodwill" from large mobile phone providers such as O2 should probably be put in quotation marks. The true "will" of a customer, as understood by law, is clearly ignored here, and instead of a customer-oriented solution, the matter is blocked with obscure excuses and opaque communication. If you don't want to struggle through months of back and forth like the M.s, make sure you use clear wording and take immediate action from the outset, such as reversing unauthorized debits. Otherwise, you will quickly find yourself on the losing side again - even though your only offense was to switch providers!