Jump to content

Jesurgislac

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

  1. You have a right under the 1979 Act I mentioned in my post to be supplied with working goods or with a full refund or with a working replacement. I eventually got Three to admit I was in the right, by writing letters a lot - to their CEO and their PR director, plus their big multi-corporate CEO in Hong Kong (I looked up their company structure on Wikipedia). I listed all the people I was writing letters to at the end of each letter. It took three months and 17 letters, but they eventually cancelled my contract with them. (I had to mail the non-working phone back to them, recorded delivery, twice, and refuse acceptance of it the third time they tried to post it to me.) I can only advise you to be stubborn and to make sure Three, not you, keeps possession of the faulty phone you do not want.
  2. Dear 3, In 23rd December, I signed a contract with you for 18 months mobile phone service: as part of that contract, you supplied me with a Sony Ericsson W660i Black. This transaction took place at the Three shop at 74/75 Princes St, Edinburgh, EH2 2DF. On 27th December, I took the phone back to the shop, as I had been unable to fit a SIM card. The shop fitted the SIM card. I took it home and attempted to charge the battery. The charger did not work. I returned to the shop the next day. The shop manager claimed that as the charger was not covered by warranty, 3 were not required to replace it: however, I did get a new charger that day - the one which the shop had been using to charge the W660i phones. When the phone was plugged in and the battery was charging, the phone would do nothing but display a "charging" message: I tried several times, switching it on and off, and was unable to get any other response. When the battery was fully charged, the phone would not connect to the network. I rang your helpline (on my old mobile, and then on my landline) and got a very helpful guy (Ethan) who ran some troubleshooting checks for me and said it looked like that I had was a faulty phone. I took it back to the shop on 31st December, and they claimed they didn't have to replace it even though what I was asking for was a like-for-like exchange within the 14-day cooling off period. They offered to send it away to be repaired after the New Year holidays (1st and 2nd January in Scotland). The helpline guy (Ethan) called me back as promised on 2nd January, listened to what I had to say, and went into bland "no comment" mode, which didn't surprise me: I had started quoting the Sale of Goods Act 1979. I am cancelling my contract with 3, and here are my reasons: 1. Three has advertised a 14-day cooling off period: I am still within that period, even without allowing for 4 non-working days. - When I pointed this out to the shop manager, she claimed that 3 no longer offered the 14-day cooling-off period, and had not since 7th December. However, the 14-day cooling-off period was mentioned on the publicly posted terms and conditions that I read while waiting to buy the phone - on a piece of paper tacked to the wall beside the desk at which I sat. The current T&C were given to me in the sealed box containing the phone, which was not unsealed in the shop. 2. I have owned this phone now for 14 days: during that time, due to various issues, problems, faulty equipment, etc, I have not been able to use it to call anyone or for anyone to call me. I have made no use of the 3 network. I have attempted to return the phone twice during the past 14 days and been denied. 3. The phone as sold is faulty. Both the 3 helpline and a member of staff in the 3 shop, when I described how it was reacting when on a charger or when I tried to call a number from it, agreed that it was not working correctly. I am, according to the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and considerable other legislation and regulation since, entitled to get a replacement or a full refund. I originally asked for a replacement; a member of staff refused on this on 31st December, claiming the manager's authority, and the shop manager refused this directly on 3rd January. I am therefore returning the phone for a refund - or rather, with a cancellation of the network contract, since the phone was supplied free for use with the 3 network. I am deeply unhappy with the shop manager's behaviour throughout this, which has cost me considerable time. I work freelance as a computer consultant and technical writer, and time is money for me. I enclose an invoice for the hours logged. I am concerned at the insistence by the Princes Street 3 shop manager that 3's company policy is to require customers who have been sold faulty phones and equipment to send them away for repair, not to allow them a like-for-like replacement. If this is a true description of 3's company policy, it means that 3 is in violation of the contract between seller and buyer, controlled by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (amended by the Sale & Supply of Goods Act 1994 and the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002). If this is not a true description of 3's company policy, the shop manager is lying to customers. Neither is a good state of affairs. I would appreciate a clear response from 3 what their company policy is, and what action they will take if the shop manager has been wrongly describing their company policy to customers. An earlier draft of this letter was handed to the manager in the 3 shop on 3rd January, when I made my second unsuccessful attempt to return the mobile phone at the shop where I had bought it. Failing to get a satisfactory response, I felt the only solution remaining to me was to post the phone with its original packaging and associated equipment back to 3's mailing address. Yours sincerely, [Jesurgislac]
  3. On 23rd December, I bought a Sony Ericsson W660i from a local Three shop. It turned out to be faulty - the charger didn't work, and when under pressure the Three shop gave me a working charger (they insisted they didn't have to) I didn't seem to be able to do anything with the phone while it was charging - I switched it on several times and got nothing but a "Charging" message. Worst of all, inside my home, I can't use it: although the bars say it is receiving a full signal, the phone screen says "Emerg. calls only". (For obvious reasons, I haven't checked to see if it really *is* emergency calls only.) I rang their helpline (on my old mobile, and then on my landline) and got a very helpful guy who ran some troubleshooting checks for me and said it looked like that I had was a faulty phone. I took it back to the shop on 31st December, and they claimed they didn't have to replace it even though what I was asking for was a like-for-like exchange within the 14-day cooling off period. They offered to send it away to be repaired after New Year, which would mean I'd get it back just after the 14-day cooling off period is over (unless you allow for the non-working days of Christmas and Hogmanay - I'm in Scotland). The helpline guy called me back as promised today, listened to what I had to say, and went into bland "no comment" mode, which didn't surprise me: I had started quoting the Sale of Goods Act 1979. My questions are: Surely it's still the law that if a company sells faulty goods they have to replace it or refund within 30 days? Surely it's still the law that I have 14 days to change my mind about a mobile phone supplier, and one of the valid reasons for rejecting a contract is that I can't get a signal at home? I presented those options to the Three helpline - that if they wouldn't replace the faulty phone, I could certainly still cancel the whole contract, and he claimed promptly that I couldn't. (The shop's attitude has been that I'm stuck - the phone is faulty, too bad, I should send it off for repair.) I haven't yet ever been able to use this phone at all.
×
×
  • Create New...