THE BBC star accused of paying a teenager for sex images made two panicked calls to them after we revealed the bombshell claims.

The presenter, who was suspended today, allegedly rang last week asking: “What have you done?”

It is claimed he also asked the youngster to ring their mum to get her to “stop the investigation”.

The Government demanded answers from BBC chief Tim Davie as the Met Police were contacted as part of the investigation.

It came as Beeb sources admitted: “The BBC has started to receive calls from the public about the behaviour of the person at the centre of the investigation.”

The family of the teen, now 20, were upset with the wording of the BBC’s statement on the star’s suspension.

Latest on BBC sex probe:

It said “new allegations” came to light on Thursday.

The family say no one from the corporation rang them for a proper interview after the initial complaint.

Most read in The Sun

On Saturday night the family handed a dossier of evidence to the broadcaster’s lead investigator, ex-cop Jeff Brown.

The claims include one that the presenter has given the youngster over £35,000 since they were 17.

In an interview with The Sun on Sunday, the mother said the family complained in May but became frustrated that the star was still on air a month later.

Earlier the mum told how the teenager used the man’s alleged funds to feed a drug addiction.

She said they had gone from a “happy-go-lucky youngster to a ghost-like crack addict” in just three years.

Several BBC stars including ­Jeremy Vine, Nicky Campbell, Gary Lineker and Rylan Clark have publicly said it is not them.

Earlier Culture Secretary Ms Frazer said Mr Davie had reassured her the broadcaster was “investigating swiftly and sensitively”.

She said: “Given the nature of the allegations it is important that the BBC is now given the space to conduct its investigation, establish the facts and take appropriate action. I will be kept updated.”

It is understood that no timeline has been put on the probe. Caroline Dinenage, the Tory chairwoman of the Culture Select Committee, has also spoken with Mr Davie.

Politicians let rip at the lack of answers from the BBC after it failed to publicly address key questions surrounding the probe.

Former Culture Minister Damian Collins said: “I think the concern will be that this was raised by the family in May this year, but what happened when the complaint was initially raised?

“Why didn’t they do something sooner, I think is a fair challenge to the BBC.”

THE SUN SAYS: BBC under fire

THREE days have passed since The Sun first reported harrowing allegations that a top BBC presenter had sent tens of thousands of pounds to a vulnerable teenager, who was supplying him with sex pictures.

The youngster — just 17 when contact was first made between the pair — used the cash to pay for deadly crack cocaine, putting their own health in peril and ripping apart their distressed family.

By its own admission, the BBC has “very serious” questions to answer and its reputation is suffering “serious damage”.

Politicians from all sides, meanwhile, say it is “deeply concerning” that the presenter accused of serious misconduct was not immediately taken off air, and are calling for a full investigation. Yesterday, the presenter was suspended.

At the heart of the scandal is this: The young person’s worried parents first raised the alarm to the BBC on May 19.

Why on earth did its armies of managers not immediately question the presenter, or launch a full inquiry?

Why was it only when The Sun contacted the BBC that any meaningful action was taken, well over a month after the first complaint?

The parents allege that, in the intervening period, the payments to their crack-addicted child continued.

It was only because nothing was happening, and the household name continued appearing on their TV screens, that they reached out to this newspaper in total desperation. They did not seek any payment. They just wanted the payments harming their child to stop.

The BBC has a sorry history of ignoring complaints and rumours about its own presenters, sometimes with appalling consequences.

It must urgently come clean about its actions in this latest case — or risk irreparable damage to public trust.