Grounds to Cancel 3G Contract? (Poor Signal)

[MasterSimit]

Hello all.

I wondered if you could help me out with abit of a situation I am in.

I have an 18 month contract out with 3G, of which I am approx 3 months into. Since signing up I have been having problems with poor signal, particularly at my home address and my girlfriends. On some occassions I have had to call friends back upto 6 times due to constantly being disconnected. I thought these issues would iron out after awhile but this has not been the case.
I have been tempted to raise the matter with 3G customer services, but having been with 3G before for 2 years (where I didnt nearly have as must problems with reception) I know they are useless. Initially I wanted to just downgrade my tariff as I am not using my units as I just can't hold a successful conversation when at home/girlfriends. But CS claim I have to have been with them for 6 months before I can do this. So now I just want out if I can.

So basically I want to know is this a good enough reason to request to have my contract cancelled? And if yes, how should I go about it?

- Bring this to the attention of customer services by phone
or
- Write to their office in Glasgow?


Any advice would be appreaciated.

C

[jacktheband]

Originally Posted by MasterSimit

So basically I want to know is this a good enough reason to request to have my contract cancelled?

Unfortunately it's a quick answer: no.

If you are trying to use their services outside of their range of their transmitters then either no or fluxuating signal will occur which will result in poor call quality/dropped calls/not being able to make calls. Obviously very infuriating to the end-user but it's not grounds for not fulfilling your contractral agreement to 3. They seem to cover it clearly in their Ts+Cs which you would have agreed to when taking out the contract.

That said, make sure that it is 100% a signal/network issue before you desair. If you have anyone at your or your girlfriend's address with a 3 phone, ask them what their signal is like or if they have any problems. Some phones are more sensitive to signal than others and so you might find that a change of handset model could help. It's worth looking at least.

Good luck, hope it improves!

[MasterSimit]

Thanks for the quick reply.

So i'm doomed then yeah?.....

If I lived in a remote part of the country then I'd expect it but I live in Manchester, near the city centre at that. I have numerous friends on 3G who have the same problem. Although I dont think it is as bad as mine. So yeah, it could possibly be the handset.

I think i'm going to call CS in the morning, it can't hurt. In the mean time I'm going to look for the contract terms and conditions .

[buzby]

Huh! I live 3 miles from a major city centre and Orange is the only network that has no signal! All the rest blow my windows out. Guess which network I was with, until I cancelled?

[Tinkerbell786]

I have a 3g contract, get hardly any signal or no signal. 3 have acknowledged through their technical department that its not my phone ( nokia N95 8gb) as they tried to get me to change settings and a whole load of other rubbish but still insist that i have good signal. Ive been on the phone to customers service for ages trying to get to a manager or supervisor but the automated foreign customer service advisors dont understand a word of english. They even suggested to me to leave my house to use the phone, aint that funny!

Ive been meaning to pursue it further to try and find a way to cancel it but just dont find the time. I do know that being patient or understanding with them does not wrk and it is very difficult to get past their customer service. I think you need to find contact details for someone really high there to even stand a chance of being heard.

Good luck and keep the thread updated.

Tinks

[buzby]

Just to reiterate - NO mobile network will guarantee 100% coverage, and cannot do so. Customers are expected to treat the technology with some common sense, and decide for themselves which network will provide them with the best coverage for the locations they plan to use it most. For this reason any new contract will be able to be cancelled within 14 days for this very reason. (This doesn't apply to upgrades).

The T&C will specifically state they do not warrant service coverage, but WILL be responsible if there is a technical failing of the network due to a variety of issues, except lack of coverage. 'Someone high up' will explain as much, but it is not a reason for a contract to be terminated. Sorry.

[MasterSimit]

After all that it turned out to be a combination of Three and the phone's reception problem. Once I put my sim in another phone my reception was better and even more so when I turned off the UMTS (3G mode) and set it to GSM (2G mode).

Nevertheless, I have another Three battle on my hands now - to get rid of a satisfied default from 2006. But that's another topic......

[Cattolica]

Mobile phone customers with poor network coverage could win compensation after landmark ruling

It is one of modern life's bugbears - hearing a cackle of interference then being cut off mid-sentence while chatting on a mobile phone.
Now customers who get consistently poor mobile coverage could be in line for payouts. It follows a court ruling that has opened the door to mobile owners to cancel their contracts, claim refunds and even compensation if their service is not up to scratch.
Tom Prescott, 32, took Orange to court after signing an 18-month contract, only to find he could neither receive nor make calls in and around his home. When he tried to cancel the deal, he was rebuffed.
He said: 'As soon as I realised I could not get a signal, I tried to cancel it. But the phone networks are using bullying tactics and would not let me off the contract.
'Dealing with Orange was awful. I would ring them and it would take 15 minutes to get through then my phone would cut off and I'd be at the back of the queue.'
Mr Prescott, of Richmond, Surrey, turned to his local county court in Brentford where he was awarded £500 and the right to cancel his contract.
Although county court rulings are not binding, the case will serve as a useful precedent.
Mr Prescott argued that having been sold an 18-month contract by the mobile phone operators there ought to be a reasonable expectation of service.
'I started an 18-month contract and the phone never really worked as I couldn’t get any reception,' he said.
Mr Prescott, aged 32, was so fed up by the gap between the services promised by Orange and the reality of the reception that he tried to cancel the contract, but they would not let him.
'As soon as I realised I could not get a signal, I tried to cancel it. But the phone networks are using bullying tactics and would not let me off the contract,' he said.
Eventually, Mr Prescott was so exasperated that he turned to the courts for help.
Following his successful hearing, he urged others to follow his example.
'I hope people who have the same problem now realise they can do something about it,' he said.
'I didn’t take them to court to try to get the money. It annoyed me that you have this huge great company that advertised this great image, but when you deal with them they take you nearer and nearer the edge.'
A spokesman for Orange said it could not comment on the case as it was awaiting details.
However, a spokesman said the company provides high quality coverage to 99 per cent of the UK population and continues to invest in its network.
She added: 'As with all mobile operators, it is worth noting that continuous network coverage cannot be guaranteed and network coverage can be affected by factors outside of our control.'

[buzby]

It would ber nice to think this was the light at the end of the tunnel, but it isn't. Not only does Orange have the right of appeal, but this is a case of a s Small Claims Action attempting to overturn Contract Law, which would be a nice trick if it could be pulled off.

The second paragraph is just nonsensical - and it then goes on to say;

"Although county court rulings are not binding, the case will serve as a useful precedent."

Jeez - come again? This must be a Sun or Daily Mail story - never let facts spoil the story! Who'se next for mobile phone radiation exposure death scares....

[Cattolica]

Originally Posted by Cattolica

Mobile phone customers with poor network coverage could win compensation after landmark ruling


Mr Prescott, of Richmond, Surrey, turned to his local county court in Brentford where he was awarded £500 and the right to cancel his contract.

Quote: 'He was awarded £500 and the right to cancel his contract'

[buzby]

And....?

Be as selective in your quoting as you like. The chances are Orange didn't defend - which is their problem. Wanna bet they'll appeal and have it overturned?

[installspark]

Buzby, you were right, the article was published by the Mail.

That article is vague about certain details.

Was the claimant trying to cancel under the DSR? Was he within any cooling off period? How "soon" did he realise that he couldn't get a usable signal, and was that indoors or outdoors? Did Orange defend the claim or was it judgement by default?

[buzby]

What would have been ideal for consumers, is that mobile companies have to provide service guarantees (that include network downtime and lack of access). This would provide all the protection a customer would need to ensure they were never financially disadvantaged due to these issues.

I don't see this as a valid method to 'break' a contract, because this does offer a number of advantages ('free' phone for a commitment) but the consumer can then hold them accountable when the service is not up to scratch - they cannot do this under the current regulations.

This particular action is fine for the person that brought it, but it isn't a precedent and swings the fairness too much in the other direction. It won't help anyone in the same predicament and it will be the cause of much misunderstandings that if you want out of your contract you can just 'take them to court' - which isn't going to be the solution for all.

[installspark]

Nor does this county court case set any legal precedent. For that to happen the case would have had to be heard at the High Court

[Tinkerbell786]

Hi all just to advise i put a complaint into watchdog about 3G and their reception along with the non existant customer service.

Received a call on friday but unfortunately the woman ran out of time on my answer messaging service when leaving a number for me to call back on. Anyway i am thinking they have alot of 3G customers complaining for them to contact us so maybe its worth contacting watchdog for those of you who havent.

[buzby]

Which 'watchdog' and whose '3G' network?

Non existent customer service is not an issue - you just move off and use someone else with better customer care. Also, regarding no signal, these are MOBILE networks. They can in no way guarantee coverage (or even claim to do so). Networks are constrained by where they ave their local base stations in your area, and id one or two don;t manage it, there are at least another two networks to might provide a better service.

Customers are expected to realise that service levels cannot be the same as for a fixed land-line, and even their terms and conditions point this out, so I'm not sure what you expect a 'watchdog' to do about it.

[Tinkerbell786]

Well buzby if your in a contract you cant just move off! Watchdog as in BBC watchdog and my mistake i meant 3 (three) the service provider. Also '3' on their website allow you to check what coverage you would get from them and in my area state i would have full access to to the 3G network including video calling and internet which i dont.

[jacktheband]

I've just checked 3's website and had a look at the coverage checker tool. There is a clear notice just under the map (it's not even in small print so they're not trying to hide it):

"Although we try to make our maps as accurate as possible, the information is only a guide, and is not a guarantee of service availability in a particular location."

As for their service being poor, Buzby couldn't have put it better. If you don't like it then vote with your feet and change provider once you have seen out your contractual obligations.

[buzby]

My point exactly. Your coverage is what you get when you turn your phone on. These computer predictions are fine as far as they go, but they are only a guide. Additional variables include handset sensitivity and the type of construction your house is made of. It is also worth remembering that these maps only show anticipated coverage OUTSIDE a building, not in.

Why on earth you would think BBC Watchdog would be interested in stories of 'bad customer service' it would make a fairly boring programme, and if you've seen it of late, the only stories that get a look in are those they can dramatise to good effect or have a laugh. This is no serious attempt at consumer television, just pure and simple 'entertainment'.

YOUR dealings are what matter, if they don't cut it as far as you're concerned, then move to another that can meet those expectations. That's what competition is all about.