VIRGIN Media customer Darren Franklin had “sleepless nights” after being chased for £238 in fees for a phone SIM card and broadband that didn't even work.

In 2022, he was sold a Volt package by Virgin Media O2, which was supposed to offer him a cheaper mobile SIM card and faster broadband.

1

But instead it led to a stressful ordeal that lasted more than a year as he fought with the company to have him terminate his contract.

Months after buying the new Virgin Volt package for £95 a month – £10 more than his previous package, Darren, 53, discovered his SIM card was still not working and he had never used faster broadband.

“Eventually Virgin and O2 agreed the SIM wasn't working and they couldn't understand why, so I had to go back to my old provider,” the retired project manager from Glasgow told The Sun.

In January 2023, during an engineer's visit, Darren discovered he had never upgraded to the faster broadband he had paid for.

Since he was not getting service from the company for either his phone or broadband, he decided to cancel his contract and look for a better deal.

However, as several months had passed since he first tried to resolve the issue, Darren had missed the free cancellation period.

This meant he faced early cancellation fees totaling £238.99.

He refused to pay the charges because he had never received any service from Virgin Media O2.

But as a result, his debt was transferred to a debt collection agency and he was threatened with a County Court Judgment (CCJ).

Darren said: “The debts were causing me and my wife sleepless nights and unprecedented stress.”

Darren's wife, Louise, 55, is a retired teacher and was so worried she was afraid to open the door when she was home alone.

Darren added: “We had done nothing wrong and were harassed by a debt agency and threatened with CCJs.

“My wife became afraid to open the door when I was not at home.”

In a CCJ, a court has formally decided that you owe money and requires you to pay the money back.

Receiving a CCJ can have devastating consequences for your credit score and failure to pay could also leave you with bailiffs knocking on your door.

After a year of experiencing this “nightmare”, Darren decided to contact The Sun's Squeeze Team to see if we could help.

When we contacted Virgin Media O2 on Darren's behalf, a spokesperson said: “We apologize to Mr Franklin for the difficulties he has experienced.

“We have now waived the £238.99 and offered to send him £136.44 as a gesture of goodwill, which he has accepted.”

Our Squeeze Team has recovered a total of over £159,657 for our readers.

What should I do if I find myself in a similar situation?

If you believe you have been unfairly charged for a service you did not receive, you can take steps to receive compensation.

The first thing you should do is contact your carrier's customer service and explain what the problem is.

If, as in Mr. Franklin's case, this does not solve the problem, you should file a formal complaint with the company.

Details on how to do this can be found on the back of your invoice, or you can also ask customer service.

Make sure you use the words 'formal complaint' when contacting them so that it is taken seriously.

Phone and broadband companies are regulated by Ofcom and there are rules in place to ensure they treat customers fairly.

Make sure you keep all correspondence with the company in case you need to use it as evidence later.

While they may not always be able to give you the result you're looking for, everyone benefits from letting them know about any issues, so it's still worth making a complaint.

Another way to complain is through social media. Most companies have teams that answer questions on X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook during business hours.

Plus, The Sun's Squeeze team is always ready to fight for you and make sure you're heard.

To contact us, please email squeezeteam@thesun.co.uk.

Or you can read our full guide on how to complain like a pro.

Do you have a money problem that needs to be solved? Get in touch by emailing money@the-sun.co.uk.

Moreover, you can join us Sun Money chats and tips Facebook group to share your tips and stories.

The former State Department employee and national security official who was filmed harassing a halal food vendor in Manhattan and calling him a “terrorist” was arrested Wednesday and charged with a hate crime.

The former official, Stuart Seldowitz, 64, faces charges including aggravated intimidation and several counts of stalking, according to police.

The charges were filed after the salesperson, who police did not name but identified as a 24-year-old man, told police that someone had approached him several times while he was at work and made Islamophobic comments, causing him to feel “ Scared and irritated.”

In various videos posted on social mediaMr Seldowitz was shown photographing the seller, threatening to send his photo to “friends in immigration” and making Islamophobic comments.

In one clip, Mr. Seldowitz calls the salesman “ignorant” because he does not speak English, then makes derisive comments about Islam’s founder, the Prophet Muhammad. In another, after a brief interaction about the murder of children, Mr. Seldowitz says: “If we killed 4,000 Palestinian children, you know what? It wasn’t enough.”

Police say Mr. Seldowitz lives a few blocks from the halal cart’s usual location on the Upper East Side. Attempts to reach him Wednesday evening were unsuccessful.

In a telephone interview on Tuesday, Mr. Seldowitz said he was not Islamophobic and that he had targeted the seller only after he expressed support for Hamas. The videos do not show any comment from the seller other than asking Mr. Seldowitz to leave and saying he would call the police.

“At that point I got quite upset and I said things to him that in retrospect I probably regret — that I do regret,” Seldowitz said Tuesday. “Instead of focusing on him and what he was saying, I started insulting his religion and so on.”

Mr. Seldowitz said he had served in various positions in both Democratic and Republican administrations, including acting director of the National Security Council’s South Asia Directorate and a position in the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Israeli and Palestinian Affairs . He no longer holds government positions, he said.

The incident came as tensions between pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli groups have escalated in the weeks since the war between Israel and Hamas began on October 7. -Islamic and anti-Semitic hate crimes and some angry encounters have gone viral.

In social media posts on Tuesday, both Mayor Eric Adams And Gov. Kathy Hochul denounced Mr. Seldowitz’s behavior, calling his comments “despicable.”

Mr Adams wrote: “Islamophobia is hatred. Simply. This vile, disrespectful rhetoric has no home in our city.”

Julie Menin, a city council member representing the Upper East Side, said in an interview on Wednesday that the incident was “completely and totally unacceptable” and had upset the local community and that she was pleased to hear that Mr. Seldowitz was in custody.

“This individual targeted this street vendor day in and day out, threatened the vendor, clearly committed hate speech that was violent in nature and contained threats,” she said.

Hurubie Meko reporting contributed.

More than 50 female students of the government school in Jind district had accused the principal of sexual harassment, the Haryana State Commission for Women had said earlier.

Chandigarh: A government school principal in Haryana’s Jind district has been arrested for allegedly sexually harassing more than 50 girl students, police said on Sunday. “The accused director was arrested on Saturday,” Deputy Superintendent of Police Amit Kumar Bhatia, who heads a five-member special investigation team probing the case, said over telephone. “He had been on the run for five days, but our teams arrested him. He will appear before a court (in Jind) and we will apply for his police remand to conduct further investigations,” he said.

More than 50 female students of the government school in Jind district had accused the principal of sexual harassment, the Haryana State Commission for Women had said earlier. Haryana Police had arrested the school principal on Monday, days after he was suspended by the Jind government over sexual harassment allegations.

State Commission for Women chairperson Renu Bhatia had earlier told reporters in Panchkula, “We have received 60 written complaints against the headmaster of the girl students. Of these, 50 complaints were from girls who stated physical abuse by the suspect. Ten other girls said in their complaints that they knew the director was doing such things.’

Police in Jind district on Monday registered a case against the director under Sections 354-A (sexual harassment), 341 (wrongful deprivation of liberty) and 342 (wrongful confinement) of the Indian Penal Code and under the protection provisions of children against sexual harassment. Offenses (POCSO) Act, the police had earlier said.

Bhatia had said that all the complainants were minors. The victims alleged that the accused called them to his office and “indulged in obscene acts,” she had said. A group of girl students from the school also reportedly sent letters to the Prime Minister’s Office and the National Commission for Women recently, detailing their ordeal, sources said. On the nature of the female students’ allegations, Jind Deputy Commissioner Mohd Imran Raza had said a week ago that they alleged that the principal “indulged in obscene acts” along with them.

Lidia Thorpe has sensationally accused Liberal Senator David Van of sexually assaulting her in a scathing attack on him under parliamentary privilege while giving a speech reflecting on the handling of Brittany Higgins’ allegations.

In extraordinary scenes in federal parliament on Wednesday, Senator Thorpe claimed the Victorian senator was “moved” from his office by the prime minister after she made a formal complaint about his conduct.

Senator Thorpe did not reveal when the alleged attack took place or even which prime minister allegedly acted on the claims, former prime minister Scott Morrison or current leader Anthony Albanese.

Mr Van was visibly shocked and vehemently denied Ms Thorpe’s allegations, insisting that ‘it just isn’t true’ – prompting Senator Thorpe to leave the Senate.

“I’ll wait outside while he talks,” she said.

Ms Thorpe made the allegations just before 3.30pm as Mr Van made a statement about the handling of Ms Higgins’ allegations of sexual abuse by MPs this week.

Mr Van has since told Daily Mail Australia that the allegations are ‘baseless and completely untrue’.

“I immediately and unequivocally denied and continue to deny. These outrageous and reprehensible remarks have been made by Senator Thorpe who has used parliamentary privileges in the most malicious and despicable way,” he said.

“My lawyers have already written to her to make my position clear in the strongest possible terms.”

She stood up and said to the Senate under parliamentary privilege, “I just want to pass on that I feel really uncomfortable when a perpetrator talks about violence…”

“This person harassed me, sexually assaulted me and the Prime Minister should remove him from office.

And for him to talk about it today is an absolute disgrace! To the whole party.’

Senate Deputy Speaker Andrew McLachlan then asked Ms. Thorpe to retract the comments. Mrs. Thorpe refused to do so.

He then agreed, with the agreement of Senate Labor leader Penny Wong and Liberal leader Simon Birmingham, to take the matter to the President of the Senate.

Mrs. Thorpe was heard to say ‘please’.

Mr Van then said: ‘I reject that statement, that disgusting statement outright.

“It’s just a lie and I reject it.”

He was forced to retract the word “lie,” but doubled down on his denial. “It’s just not true.”

Parliamentary privilege protects politicians from libel prosecution for comments made within the chamber.

Mrs. Thorpe was joined outside by Labor Senator Jana Stewart while Mr. Van finished speaking, and the duo returned when he had finished.

Senate Opposition Leader Simon Birmingham approached Mr Van after the altercation, before both men left.

Daily Mail Australia has reached out to both Senators Thorpe and Van for comment.

The altercation came after an intense question hour focused primarily on Treasury Secretary Katy Gallagher.

Ms Gallagher said she had forgotten she had received an invitation to David Sharaz’s wedding as she was inundated with invitations to random events at that point in her career.

The Treasury Secretary also criticized leaked text messages in which Sharaz described her as a “boyfriend” of then-girlfriend, now-fiance Brittany Higgins.

‘May I start by saying that I am not responsible for how people describe their relationship with me,’ said the under fire cabinet minister during question time in the Senate on Wednesday.

Daily Mail Australia revealed last month that Ms Gallagher was invited to Mr Sharaz’s wedding to ex-wife Alexandra Craig in 2018. She addressed the invitation publicly for the first time today and revealed she only remembered [she] heard it report’.

“I had to ask the people I worked with at the time, I think I was prime minister. I got a lot of invitations to a lot of things, some I could visit and some I couldn’t.

“The one I didn’t go to. It was refused.’

She has maintained that it would be inappropriate and a breach of Ms Higgins’ trust to give details beyond what she has already said on the matter.

Ms Gallagher admitted that it was Mr Sharaz who first discussed Ms Higgins’ allegations with her – in the week leading up to the story’s publication via a television interview with Lisa Wilkinson and The Project, and an online interview with news.com.au.

But she told the Senate on Wednesday that her relationship with Mr Sharaz was not unusual – and likely similar to relationships he had with many other politicians.

“I had a professional relationship with Mr. Sharaz, as do many here, as he worked here for a while,” she said.

“It’s a professional relationship with a journalist I knew in the ACT and I ran into him again when I rose to the Senate. I expect that relationship to exist for a number of senators.’

Ms Gallagher again urged the opposition to consider the broader ramifications of their questions, revealing that she had been ‘flooded’ with calls from women’s organizations and women themselves about the impact of the continued reporting.

“If you can live with that on your conscience . . . I can’t live with mine,” she said.