Personally, I'd have taken a different path in any complaint to Watchdog

No more than your assumption that there is nowt wrong with the complained bill.

I thought so - you're complaining about assumptions but you're making them.

This whole thread is supposition about something we are not privy to and were only given a glimpse by WD.

All Watchdog is is an advert for the featured company.

In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

This whole thread is supposition about something we are not privy to and were only given a glimpse by WD.

As far as I'm concerned the thread is about, or should be about, the content of the Watchdog show as broadcast, and not about complaints which Watchdog received and didn't broadcast. Those belong in another thread which isn't entitled "Watchdog".

I was auto-migrated from BE and found out yesterday that I am on a minimum term, despite receiving a letter in January which categorically states that I will not be placed on a 12-month contract. It was one of the reasons I decided to do nothing, as suggested. However, everybody at Sky is of the opinion that I am on a contract!

I have a chat transcript from earlier today - which states that anyone joining Sky whether migrated or not will be put on a contract. I did not solicit any offers for new equipment or even suggest otherwise or receive anything to that effect; I just rolled-over based on the limited correspondence.

As you have it in writing, it's irrelevant what livechat says

Yes, I agree in part. Although, it is not just livechat but their main billing team also share/confirm that view. However, I was highlighting the fact that they always seem to have a different view from what was previously provided or agreed and then proceed to play dumb!

I had a similar problem with livechat some time ago.
Someone on TBB advised me not to believe the Skybots..I printed off the erroneous information as you did but doubt if their advice has any legal significance at all!
As the Bat says, it's what is in your contact that matters.