HUNDREDS of mobile phone users have been hit by shock charges after an EE billing blunder.

Some customers have been billed as much as £400 on top of their usual bill for calls that should have been included in their contracts.

1

Most mobile phone contracts come with an unlimited allowance for UK calls and texts, which is the industry standard.

However, some EE customers were wrongly charged after the company began moving their accounts to a new billing system.

The issues first started in September, and hundreds of affected customers have complained on EE‘s community forum.

One affected customer said: “I’ve been charged £220 in calls even though I live in [the] UK and only call UK numbers.

“I’m meant to have unlimited calls and texts and data.”

Another said: “I had the same problem and was billed for £240+ for calls that should have been inside my allowance.”

A third said: “I have just found out that the same thing has happened to me.

“Almost had a heart attack when I was charged £268 over 2 weeks.” said a third customer.

The overcharging amounts range from approximately £90 to £400.

Some affected customers have reported that, despite lodging multiple complaints, they have struggled to secure refunds and were initially informed that they would still have to pay the erroneous charges, according to ISPreview, which first reported the issues.

EE told The Sun that you do not need to take any action as it is proactively contacting those affected and automatically issuing refunds.

However, some customers have reported online that they have yet to receive their refunds.

EE told The Sun that a “small number” of customers have been affected by the issue and it apologised for any inconvenience caused.

The network is not actively compensating customers whose bills have been affected.

However, some customers have successfully requested compensation by contacting EE directly.

One customer shared on the EE forum: “They have offered me £30 off my next bill in addition to a refund for £79 worth of extra charges.”

If you have faced substantial extra charges that have impacted your ability to pay your bills or other expenses, we strongly encourage you to contact EE and request compensation.

If EE is unwilling to offer redress and you remain unsatisfied, it’s worth submitting a formal complaint.

You can do this by calling 150 from your EE mobile or 07953 966 150 from any other phone.

If you’d prefer to write, you can send your complaint to resolutions-store@ee.co.uk or post a letter to the following address:

EE Mobile & Broadband
EE Customer Services
6 Camberwell Way
Sunderland
Tyne and Wear
SR3 3XN
United Kingdom

When sending your complaint, be sure to include as much evidence proving that you’ve been financially affected by EE’s billing blunder.

TELECOMS COMPLAINTS PROCESS

If you’re unhappy with the service you’ve received, you’ll first need to contact your provider’s customer services department and explain the problem.

If this doesn’t resolve the issue, you can make a formal complaint to the company.

Details of how to do this will be on the back of your bill and on the company’s website.

Depending on your complaint type, you’ll be able to contact our team by web chat, telephone or by post.

You’ll need to let the company know what has happened and what you want it to do to put things right.

If a formal complaint gets you nowhere, after eight weeks you can ask for a “deadlock letter” and take your dispute to the appropriate Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) scheme.

TAKE YOUR COMPLAINT TO AN ADR

ADR schemes are free to use and will act as an independent middleman between yourself and the service provider when an initial complaint cannot be resolved.

There are two ADR schemes in the UK – Communications Ombudsman and CISAS. 

Your provider is required to be a member of one of these and you can find out which one your provider is covered by on the Ofcom website.

Before you can submit your complaint to it, you must have logged a formal complaint with your provider and worked with the firm to resolve it.

You must also have received a so-called deadlock letter, where the provider refers your complaint to the appropriate ADR.

You can also complain if you haven’t had a satisfactory solution to your problem within eight weeks.

To make a complaint fill in the ADR scheme claims form on its website – or write a letter if you’d prefer.

The ADR scheme then bases its decision on the evidence you and the company submit.

If you choose to accept its decision, your supplier will then have 28 days to comply.

But if an individual chooses not to accept the ADR’s final decision, they lose the right to the resolution offer.

Customers still have the right to take their complaints further through the courts.

But remember this can be a costly and lengthy exercise, so it’s worth thinking carefully before taking this step.

The Guardian Media Group(GMG) chief executive has a decade-long friendship with the man trying to buy the Observer which includes a holiday together aboard a £15m superyacht, i can reveal.

Responding to a list of questions from i, a spokesperson for the newspaper group confirmed its chief executive Anna Bateson had a long-standing friendship with James Harding, co-founder of digital start-up Tortoise Media, which preceded his recent controversial bid to buy the UK’s oldest Sunday newspaper.

GMG confirmed the pair have previously holidayed together on the £15m superyacht owned by telecoms multimillionaire Sir Charles Dunstone. GMG sources said Ms Bateson was on the yacht because her husband worked as a senior director for Sir Charles’s telecoms firm Talk Talk.

Guardian and Observer staff, who are threatening industrial action over the deal, said in the interests of transparency Ms Bateson should have fully declared her relationship with Mr Harding or even recused herself from discussions to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest.

They said bosses must now make a full statement over the extent of the personal relationship between Mr Harding and Ms Bateson and any influence it might have had over the deal.

A GMG source acknowledged the decade-long friendship, which had been the subject of speculation among staff at its London HQ and claimed Ms Bateson “informally” declared her friendship with Mr Harding to the Scott Trust and the GMG board.

The source confirmed Mr Harding and Ms Bateson, along with their spouses, have been guests on Shemara, the 210-ft luxury superyacht owned by Sir Charles, a former Tory party donor who also has close ties to leading Labour figures.

The 1930s-built vessel, which boasts ten staterooms, was refurbished by Sir Charles to resemble a private members’ club mixed with a “luxurious stately home,” according to reports.

Mr Harding and Ms Bateson, appointed Guardian chief executive in 2002 after a number of senior executive roles, journeyed on Shemara in 2017, it was confirmed.

But the newspaper group said the trip and the pair’s ongoing association had no relevance to the sale proposal.

Mr Harding, a former editor of The Times and director of BBC News, declined to comment on both his holiday with Ms Bateson and their friendship. He is set to face questioning over the relationship when he meets Observer journalists next week to set out his vision for the paper, should his bid succeed.

Opponents of the deal question why GMG agreed to enter exclusive talks to sell The Observer to Tortoise, which recorded a £4.6m loss last year and has not revealed how it will finance plans to invest £25m over five years.

One senior journalist at the newspaper group said: “The friendship with Harding is top of the questions the chapel will be asking GMG management. Anna Bateson told staff Tortoise was all ‘good people.’ She didn’t explain she had a prior association with Harding.”

Another said: “This association could have been significant enough for her to recuse herself from the discussions? The question of whether Tortoise is a viable buyer and has the backing for its plans is crucial to the Observer’s future.”

GMG entered into discussions to see the Observer to Tortoise after Mr Harding approached executives with what Ms Bateson called an “exciting strategic proposal for Guardian Media Group.”

A spokesperson for GMG said: “This article states that two people, who had nothing to do with their current roles, before Tortoise Media existed, were both invited on the same holiday almost a decade ago.”

“The proposed sale of the Observer has required months of discussion and due diligence from many, including independent advisers, the Scott Trust board and the Guardian Media Group board.”

“To diminish this to a decision for two people who know each other is a deeply flawed analysis of what is required to undertake such an acquisition.”

Observer staff want bosses to consider a counter-proposal, involving financial support from readers, which they say would allow the paper to thrive within the Scott Trust, the £1.3bn endowment fund created to support The Guardian’s journalism.

They have the support of 70 leading cultural figures including Armando Iannucci and Hugh Grant, who said in a letter that the Tortoise deal was a “betrayal” of The Observer’s liberal traditions.

Mr Harding has been meeting potential investors but has yet to indicate the sources of funding for his planned £25m renewal of the Observer, which sells £100,000 copies.

He has pledged to transfer all of the paper’s 70-strong staff and allies say he would give The Observer the digital platform it currently lacks.

GMG insiders say the Observer’s future is bleak within the Scott Trust, which is obliged to use its resources to preserve the Guardian’s reporting.

However Alan Rusbridger, former Guardian editor-in-chief, questioned the Tortoise business plan.

Speaking on his Prospect media podcast, Mr Rusbridger said: “No-one really knows what James’s Observer would really look like.”

“It’s difficult to imagine a Sunday paper without Sport. He’s going to have to buy that in, either from the Guardian or elsewhere and suddenly that £5m (a year) doesn’t look so comfortable.”

The campaign to halt the sale was boosted by a letter signed by three former Observer editors, Roger Alton, John Mulholland and Will Hutton, who expressed “profound concern” over the move.

The editors wrote: “The entire exercise seems to have scant respect for earlier commitments or ongoing responsibilities to staff, readers and wider stakeholders. Surely our shared aim is as far as possible to protect The Observer’s long-standing tradition of upholding liberal values as a great Sunday paper?”

The trio said they feared that Tortoise’s £5m a-year additional investment would be “significantly eaten up by the costs of underwriting the Observer’s operation as a stand-alone Sunday newspaper – unless it has other undisclosed ambitions for the title. And does Tortoise have the resource to weather unexpected uncertainties – another pandemic or geopolitical tensions?”

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

At least 22 people were killed by a series of Israeli air strikes in the heart of Beirut, stoking fears that Israel’s pursuit of Hizbollah was extending deeper into the Lebanese capital. 

The attack struck more than 5km from the southern suburbs that have been a focus of Israel’s intensifying offensive against the Lebanon-based militant movement. It was the second time that Israeli forces have hit central Beirut in less than two weeks.

Lebanon’s caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati described the strike on Thursday evening as “totally unacceptable” as he renewed his calls for a ceasefire. At least 117 people were wounded in the attack, health authorities said.

Beirut was on edge on Friday as Israeli drones buzzed overhead and warplanes broke the sound barrier. The city is crammed with people fleeing the intense fighting that continued in south Lebanon on Friday. 

One of Thursday’s strikes hit a residential building not far from Lebanon’s national museum in an area filled with small shops and apartment blocks. A family of eight, including three children, were killed in the bombing, said a relative who declined to be named. Israel did not say who it was targeting.

“We’re all from southern Lebanon, and were displaced here in recent weeks due to Israeli aggression,” the relative told the Financial Times. “I don’t understand why they targeted us, these are just families.”

Lebanese are increasingly fearful that Israel is widening the scope of its targets by striking areas such as those hit on Thursday that are not known for having Hizbollah presence.

In the dilapidated Burj Abi Haidar neighbourhood, where the other Israeli strike hit, rescue workers were still recovering bodies on Friday, combing through the rubble of what residents said were at least three collapsed buildings. 

“A lot of the families around here are poor and have nothing to do with anything,” said Abu Ahmad, who lives in a building near the attack site. His grandfather’s apartment was in one of the collapsed buildings.

The Israel Defense Forces did not issue any warning to residents ahead of Thursday night’s bombing.

Israel says it is fighting the Iran-backed militant group to stop it firing rockets into northern Israel, which has displaced 60,000 Israelis.

Hizbollah says its attacks on Israel are in support of Hamas, the Iran-linked militant group that controls Gaza and whose October 7 rampage in Israel triggered the war.

After nearly a year of fire across the border, Israel assassinated Hizbollah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah last month. Its troops have since begun a ground offensive in southern Lebanon.

Speaking after a situation assessment with Israel’s Shin Bet internal security agency in southern Lebanon, the head of Israel’s military, Herzi Halevi, pledged that the fighting would continue “until we ensure that we can safely return the residents”.

He said: “If anyone considers rebuilding these villages again, they will know that it’s not worth constructing terrorist infrastructure because the IDF will neutralise them again.”

The fighting is having a punishing effect on civilians. Lebanese authorities say 1.2mn people have been forced to flee their homes, and more than 2,000 have been killed, mostly in the past two weeks.

On Thursday, Israeli forces fired a tank shell at the UN peacekeepers’ headquarters in south Lebanon, the UN said, injuring two international troops.

The strike on a watchtower within the base in the village of Ras al-Naqoura was the third time in 24 hours that Israeli fire had struck border posts used by Unifil, the UN’s interim force in Lebanon, the peacekeepers said. The peacekeeping mission patrols the UN-drawn Blue Line between northern Israel and southern Lebanon.

The incidents prompted an outcry from countries contributing to the peacekeeping force, including Italy. Rome’s defence minister, Guido Crosetto, said the incidents “may constitute war crimes”, adding: “This is not a mistake and not an accident.”

The injured Unifil soldiers were Indonesian, the country’s foreign minister Retno Marsudi said. Indonesia contributes 1,231 soldiers to the peacekeeping force, the largest number of the 50 participating countries.

The minister condemned the attack in a speech at a summit in Laos on Friday, warning that the credibility of the UN Security Council was being undermined by what she said were “ongoing violations of international law without meaningful consequences”.

Additional reporting by Giuliana Ricozzi in Rome

Cartography by Steven Bernard and Cleve Jones

The U.S. housing market has experienced unprecedented changes since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Just 2.5% of homes changed hands in the first eight months of 2024 — the lowest turnover rate in at least 30 years, according to a recent analysis by Redfin. This stagnation is part of the challenge faced by potential homebuyers and sellers alike, as they grapple with a combination of record-high home prices and elevated mortgage rates.

From January 2020 through August 2022, the price of the typical U.S. home increased by 40%, according to the Zillow Home Value Index, pushing the median sales price of an existing home to $416,700 in August 2024, according to the National Association of Realtors.

While the overall housing market has slowed, some areas have experienced a more pronounced downturn than others. Jarred Kessler, CEO of residential sale-leaseback solutions provider EasyKnock, predicts that these regional disparities will become even more pronounced in the coming years.

“What I actually do have pretty strong conviction of a more pronounced discrepancy between markets that are strong and doing well versus those that are not,” he says.

Regional Disparities Intensify

Kessler’s view aligns with recent data showing that metropolitan statistical areas in the South and the West have experienced the most significant growth in prices since the pandemic started. California appears to be bearing the brunt of the slowdown, with 7 of the 10 metro areas experiencing the lowest turnover levels located in the Golden State. Los Angeles, in particular, has seen the lowest turnover rate of any metro area analyzed by Redfin, with just 15 of every 1,000 homes changing hands — a 32% drop from the same period in 2019.

Jeremiah Vancans, a Los Angeles-based Realtor with Compass, attributes this trend to a combination of factors. “In a place like Los Angeles, wages aren’t keeping up with housing prices,” Vancans explained to CNN. “There is not that much new construction inventory hitting the market, and when it does, it’s not at entry-level prices.”

On the other end of the spectrum, Sunbelt cities and areas within commuting distance of New York City have offered homebuyers a larger pool of options. Phoenix, for instance, saw more homes change hands than any other metro area in Redfin’s analysis.

The regional disparities observed during the pandemic and post-pandemic eras aren’t entirely new. A study of home price data since 2000 reveals that the recent run-up in prices is an acceleration of trends that started in the recovery from the late-2000s housing bust.

For most of the 2010s, home price growth was faster in the West and South than in the Northeast and Midwest. The pandemic accelerated this trend, with the South experiencing the fastest rate of home price growth in the country. Consequently, the South is now closer to the Northeast in terms of home prices than it is to the Midwest, making the Midwest easily the most affordable part of the country.

The Interest Rate Factor

The Federal Reserve’s recent decision to cut interest rates after a prolonged period of increases has injected a new dynamic into the housing market. Mortgage rates have begun to fall in anticipation of further rate cuts, with the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate dropping to 6.08% in the week ending Sept. 26, according to Freddie Mac.

While this represents a significant decrease from the recent peak of 7.79% hit last fall, it remains higher than the average mortgage rates seen in the nearly 14 years between 2008 and 2022. This elevated rate environment has contributed to what experts call the “lock-in effect.”

“There has been very little incentive for people to sell homes,” explained Redfin’s economic research lead, Chen Zhao. “That very low inventory on the market was one of the primary drivers of there being so little turnover.”

According to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, nearly 60% of the 50.8 million active mortgages have interest rates below 4%. This disparity between current and historical rates has made many homeowners reluctant to sell, further constraining inventory and driving up prices.

The Supply Challenge

A shortage of new home construction has exacerbated the issues facing the U.S. housing market. Experts estimate that the country needs to build more than 2 million homes to meet growing demand. This supply-demand imbalance has pushed home prices to record highs in many regions.

Kessler believes that addressing this supply issue will require cooperation between the public and private sectors. “I think the more folks in the government and the private sector partner up, I think the better things can become,” he states. “And I think that’s one of the things that could change the landscape of the housing market.”

However, the EasyKnock CEO also cautions against using the housing market as a political tool. “The biggest problem is the middle class is being used as pawns in these elections,” Kessler argues. “And I think at the end of the day, it’s too much talk. If you want to help these people, you should encourage incentives to help them.”

Alternative Solutions

In response to the challenges facing the housing market, companies like EasyKnock have developed alternative solutions to help homeowners convert the home equity they’ve accumulated. The company’s sale-leaseback model allows homeowners to sell their property to EasyKnock while continuing to live in the home as renters, with the option to repurchase the property in the future.

Kessler sees this approach as particularly beneficial for middle-class homeowners who may be struggling with high levels of personal debt. “I think if people have built up equity and they’re running a lot of personal debt they need a new solution,” he explains.

The sale-leaseback model offers several advantages for homeowners, including the ability to convert their home equity without moving, avoid real estate broker fees, and potentially benefit from future appreciation in home value. EasyKnock has also committed to capping annual rent increases at the greater of 2.5% or the consumer price index, providing some stability for those who choose this option.

Getting to a Healthy Housing Market

The future of the U.S. housing market remains uncertain, with experts predicting a long road to recovery. “Getting to a healthy housing market is very hard from this point,” said Redfin’s Zhao. “I think the answer is either some variation of, you need a huge amount of supply right to come on, whether that’s new construction, or we somehow unlock existing homeowners.”

Zhao estimates that it may take five to 10 years before the housing market begins to resemble its past state. In the meantime, regional disparities are likely to persist, with some markets recovering more quickly than others.

For his part, Kessler remains cautiously optimistic about the potential for innovation in the housing sector. “There should be a demand for innovation and support of innovation and choice,” he says. “I think that’s one of the things that could change the landscape of the housing market.”

Companies in France are bracing for a salvo of tax rises and higher labour costs in a deficit-cutting budget that risks undermining seven years of pro-business policies pushed by President Emmanuel Macron. 

Conservative premier Michel Barnier, who leads an uneasy power-sharing government with Macron’s centrists, on Thursday unveiled budget proposals that include tax increases on business and wealthy individuals in a reversal of the president’s agenda that signals his diminishing political influence.

French companies and foreign investors are bracing for further policy reversals and government belt-tightening that may damage fragile growth. 

One banker who declined to be named said the unstable business climate had already caused them to lose a deal in which a European company was circling a French one.

“The feedback from the board was ‘Is France still business-friendly?’” the banker said. “The real problem is the uncertainty. We’re struggling to tell clients what will happen next.”

For Barnier, the next steps are trying to pass an already unpopular budget despite having no parliamentary majority. Describing France as on the “precipice” of a financial crisis, Barnier said the budget was harsh medicine needed to cure a spiralling deficit that will reach more than 6 per cent of national output by the end of the year, far above the EU ceiling of 3 per cent.

Both Barnier and his finance and budget ministers have repeatedly insisted that they do not want to damage France’s success under Macron in attracting foreign investment, boosting growth and lowering unemployment. 

But their approach of leaning heavily on tax increases to plug the deficit hole is a major break with Macron’s economic strategy. For example, the new budget will delay a long-promised cut in production taxes, which groups pay on their activities regardless of whether they are profitable; experts have long said production taxes dent French competitiveness since they are higher than elsewhere. 

Macron has limited leverage to stop Barnier from picking apart his economic policies since his party lost snap elections he called over the summer. The premier now runs domestic affairs, while the president focuses on foreign diplomacy.

Companies with sales above €1bn will also have to pay a two-year “exceptional” tax that aims to raise €12bn, but groups of all sizes will be affected by eliminating tax incentives for those who employ low-income workers and apprentices.

Another proposal to phase out tax exemptions for employers of low-salary workers will in effect raise labour costs — yet another reversal of Macron’s approach that the Medef employers’ group condemned as “brutal” and ill-conceived.

“In the end, this is going to destroy several hundred thousand jobs in sectors that create a lot of jobs across France like in cleaning services, cafeterias and social aid,” Patrick Martin, the head of Medef, told business newspaper Les Echos.

Beyond taxes, executives and banks in Paris also fear that a shift to downbeat messaging will be enough to damage investment plans after years in which Macron was the cheerleader-in-chief for French business.

Xenia Legendre, a tax specialist and managing partner at Hogan Lovells in Paris, predicted that companies would not close operations in France because of proposals in the new budget, but could curtail future investments. “They might prefer to invest elsewhere in the next couple of years,” she said. 

Since his election in 2017, Macron has pushed through pro-business policies, making it easier for companies to hire and fire workers, abolishing a wealth tax and reducing the corporate tax rate from 33 per cent to 25 per cent. About €60bn in tax cuts were passed, and Macron stuck by a promise that there would be no tax rises on his watch. 

The “Macron effect” has worked particularly well in helping to lure traders to Paris after Brexit, with executives at the likes of JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley saying his overtures had helped beat competition from other financial centres such as Frankfurt. France topped foreign direct investment in Europe for five years running, according to consultancy E&Y, and unemployment has dropped significantly.

Yet Macron’s successive governments paid little attention to curtailing government spending since their bet was that higher growth and labour force participation would solve France’s deficit issues. When the Covid-19 pandemic hit in 2020 followed by the inflationary shock of the energy crisis two years later, the government spent heavily to blunt the impact on companies and households.

One former minister from Macron’s party conceded that some tax rises were needed to narrow the deficit, but said they should be temporary and limited in scope.

“If Michel Barnier unwinds Macron’s business-friendly policies then the president’s legacy will be swept away. All that is left of his original promises in 2017 is the economic progress — without it, nothing is left,” the person said. 

For his part, Macron has no intention of letting his economic record be dismantled, said people familiar with his thinking. On a trip to New York in September, Macron met with Wall Street executives including Blackstone boss Stephen Schwarzman and executives from Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, to convince them that France was still open for business. 

“The goal was to also remind them why France needed fiscal consolidation. These are people who buy our debt too so that can be reassuring,” an Élysées official said of those talks. 

Macron grudgingly backed the idea of a one-off tax on big companies. “But it should be limited — we have not to forget the reality of our economy, the reality of our competitiveness and our position,” the president said.

Macron also still plans to hold his “Choose France” summit at Versailles next year — the eighth one — in which he hosts global chief executives.

Faced with the tax increases in the 2025 budget, France’s corporate leaders have for now kept a low profile.

Some such as shipping billionaire Rodolphe Saadé, head of Marseille-based container shipping giant CMA CGM, have even said they are prepared to do their bit — a sign of a broader mood of resignation among business chiefs who believe they could have had it worse. CMA CGM now faces a new tax on maritime shipping companies designed to raise €500mn.

“French bosses know the past 10 years have been pretty good for them,” said the chair of one company.

Data visualisation by Janina Conboye