Although it’s unfortunate, your claim BT are responsible for your relative continuing to pay Sky for TV after joining BT because BT said they would do ‘all the work’ in switching , is not really fair, that statement only ever applies to broadband and telephone, your suggestion that it was deliberately stated that it included TV begs the question, why ? , in what way would BT or the BT agent possibly benefit ? , the organisation that benefited, if any , is Sky .
You can only speculate what was actually said ( you were not on the call ) and TBH , even putting the tiniest amount of thought into it should have identified a big problem, if your relative has Sky TV , either delivered via a satellite dish or over the internet , how could ‘BT’ possibly stop a direct debit to Sky from your relatives bank account ? …..broadband and phone are different in that they both ( in your relatives case ) are delivered over the same Openreach infrastructure, so in switching to BT , Sky are notified that BT are taking ‘control’ of the Openreach ‘line’ , and doubtless Sky will have sent a communication along the lines of ‘sorry to see you leave’ to your relative , including instructions if they didn’t want the migration to proceed, Sky send this when they were notified of the migration by Openreach , this is only ever the broadband and phone , TV has nothing to do with Openreach.
If your relative has paid £1100 in around 8 -9 months , that presumably is quite a comprehensive TV package including sport and movies , as it’s well over £100 a month , didn’t they notice that the Sky TV continued delivering all the channels they had previously, if anything depending on how Sky originally billed for three services ( phone , broadband and TV ) reducing to one service ( TV ) then the payment to Sky reduced, why wasn’t it noticed that it didn’t reduce to zero rather than reducing from presumably something like £130 a month to £100 a month .
