For what, exactly?
![jake-rayson.png](https://www.zdnet.com/a/img/resize/9c0ec531cfd82490185a8a2627df5d2f36791cba/2014/07/22/2a5985bf-1175-11e4-9732-00505685119a/jake-rayson.png?auto=webp&fit=crop&frame=1&height=192&width=192)
When I moved to the northern Kentish environs, I switched telephone providers to TalkTalk. However, I received a disconnection bill from BT for £70, because I'd switched before my 12 month minimum contract had expired. £70, ow, for a fee I'd never heard of.
So, I wrote to the BT Correspondence Centre (no to ask for a breakdown of the bill, as £70 seemed a lot of money for somebody flicking a switch.
Nobody from BT deigned to write to me, despite my writing to them 4 times; I just received 4 threatening letters from their debt collectors and solicitors. And then finally, after counter-threatening them with legal action, a zero balance bill arrived.
The heavy-handedness of wading in with demands and threats seems to be the first course of action for many large corporations. This isn't a manifesto to bring down capitalism but just a call for BT to play fair and actually communicate with their customers. Seems like plenty of other people are having the same experience…