Eir leaves reader frazzled with letters to dead brother and contract confusion

The idea that a company would continue to communicate with a person dead for 15 years despite having been told by relatives to desist is shocking but, sadly, happens far too often.

Earlier this week we heard from a reader called Eileen who tried to get eir to stop sending letters to her dead brother and while she was hoping she had finally succeeded in achieving what should have been a simple task she has also had to contend with a flurry of conflicting and confusing correspondence from the company about a new contract and a new phone even though she has stressed on many occasions that she would quite like to keep her current number.

“I have been receiving correspondence addressed jointly to me and my dead brother, Francis, in spite of requests to address bills etc to me only. Bills are paid from my current account by direct debit,” she says.

But instead of listening to her, Eir continued to include his name in the letters. Shortly before Christmas, a circular letter arrived from Eir addressed only to her brother. The letter was about a new contract.

On the Money: the personal finance newsletter from The Irish Times

---

Buffett won’t heed Musk’s suggestion to buy Tesla shares

---

Passing up the chance for a risk-free return on your savings is madness

---

Companies looking to sidestep auto-enrolment by using existing pension schemes

---

“I straight away wrote to them, asking that any contract must be in my name only, again emphasising that Francis has been dead since 2009. My present ‘bundle’ includes landline and broadband. My mobile phone is a separate item. Both are paid by direct debit from my bank account.”

You might think that would be the end of it.

It was not.

In early February, a letter addressed to Francis arrived requesting verification of his direct debit details.

Eileen then got two follow-up phone calls days later telling her that she was getting a better new deal. “I have poor hearing and said that I couldn’t hear and that I would require the details of the deal in writing. I wrote to Eir saying that I wanted the details in writing as I couldn’t hear their official and anyway in order for an agreement to be legal it must have my signature.”

Instead of getting details of the new contract she received a Sim card with a new mobile number.

“I immediately returned it saying that I was not changing my phone number. Then twice on March 15th, I received texts requesting confirmation of “installation”. In the meantime, I had received a phone call saying that my brother’s name had been removed from correspondence.”

On March 25th she confirmed cancellation of installation and a day later she received a text requesting cancellation of installation.

“On the most recent (unrecorded) date, I spoke to a male official who seemed to better understand that I required details of the new agreement either by letter or email. I await such! I received the first monthly bill (changed from bi-monthly) dated March 20th which had a new account number, and included my landline, my broadband and the new mobile number. On March 27th, I wrote once more saying I had not and was not changing my mobile number and was considering changing phone company.”

She says that she is effectively being “forced into a new agreement. I am a victim of severe arthritis, immobile and dependent on my mobile phone and broadband. The whole saga has given me a fear of losing them. Maybe you can help.”

We could certainly try.

We sent details of this issue to Eir and within 24 hours were told both by Eileen and by Eir that that the issue had been resolved to her satisfaction.

“The customer reported a bereavement in December of 2023 and in mid-February requested an account name change in writing,” said the spokeswoman. “We are currently investigating why this process took longer than usual to prevent future occurrences. The subsequent correspondence to the customer was sent during the time that the account updates were being finalised. In March the customer spoke with the sales team who offered upgrades to her current package, but ultimately opted not to proceed with the new mobile package, which was subsequently returned. We have since worked directly with the customer to confirm her service package aligns with her needs and reassured her that her preferred mobile number remains unchanged.”