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.
just making a not so pointless post to let you in on some of the forum
FAQ since you didn't bother to read:
FAQ Wrote:
> A trash or junk post is one that is of no use to the forum. Some
> examples might be random keystrokes, a post that has nothing to do with
> the thread or forum you've placed it in, series of smilies, or posts
> that say little more than "Thank you" or "Cool tone.
> 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?
Not helpful to you but no signal at home *isn't* an acceptable reason to
return a phone according to their T&Cs, they disclaim any guaranteed
coverage anywhere specifically.
You don't have to use that as the reason to return it though - if you
*have* to give a reason, pick another
> 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 had a PAYG Skypephone (twice) which I tried, had no signal at home,
and returned (the second to check that the first wasn't faulty and that
there really *was* no signal here). I bought the first via the website
and the second from a 3 store in London. Both were accepted as a return
without any problems - so easily in fact that I wrote to them afterwards
to congratulate them.
Perhaps it's more to do with the person you're speaking with than it is
the company's policy? Maybe try going back when it isn't busy and the
people in the shop don't see dealing with you as time lost selling new
phones to others and lost commission?
> I haven't yet ever been able to use this phone at all.
That may put you in a better position - certainly with PAYG they were
far more willing to accept the phones' return if they'd not been used.
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 07:32:54 -0600, Jesurgislac
<Jesurgislac.32kc0g@nospam.cellphoneforums.net> wrote:
>
>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.
They insisted they didn't have to ? What sort of crap is that they
were telling you .Of course they do .That's the least they should do .
>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.
If you want to be absolutely sure of your ground contact Trading
Standards ..Probably the Consumer Direct website will have info on
what to do .
In message <477bb696$0$21098$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk>, Thunderbug
<thunderbug33@googlemail.com> writes
>
>> Surely it's still the law that if a company sells faulty goods they
>> have to replace it or refund within 30 days?
<>
Absolutely - contact your local trading standards.
>
>Perhaps it's more to do with the person you're speaking with than it is
>the company's policy? Maybe try going back when it isn't busy and the
>people in the shop don't see dealing with you as time lost selling new
>phones to others and lost commission?
I disagree. The absolutely best time to go in and discuss the issue of
them supplying a faulty charger and then phone and then refusing to
replace is on a busy Saturday. Ask to speak to the manager and then
discuss at high volume in front of as many potential customers as
possible.
Thunderbug;1234199 Wrote:[color=blue]
>
> Not helpful to you but no signal at home *isn't* an acceptable reason
> to
> return a phone according to their T&Cs, they disclaim any guaranteed
> coverage anywhere specifically.
>
> You don't have to use that as the reason to return it though - if you
> *have* to give a reason, pick another
Now that's annoying, but helpful to know. OK. (The odd thing is, I seem
to be able to receive signals: I can see all the signal bars. I just
can't dial out on any non-emergency number, not even 333.)
> > 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 had a PAYG Skypephone (twice) which I tried, had no signal at home,
> and returned (the second to check that the first wasn't faulty and that
>
> there really *was* no signal here). I bought the first via the website
>
> and the second from a 3 store in London. Both were accepted as a
> return
> without any problems - so easily in fact that I wrote to them
> afterwards
> to congratulate them.
Problem is, I didn't get a PAYG phone - I signed a monthly contract,
and as far as I can tell, their company policy adds up to: "You can't
get out of the contract, so we don't have be nice to you."
> Perhaps it's more to do with the person you're speaking with than it is
>
> the company's policy? Maybe try going back when it isn't busy and the
>
> people in the shop don't see dealing with you as time lost selling new
>
> phones to others and lost commission?
I don't think so. The shop hasn't ever been busy any of the times I've
been in - in fact once, I was the only customer in it, with six sales
staff! The last time I was in, the member of staff I spoke to went off
to talk to her manager, and came back to say that the manager's word was
that it was company policy not to replace faulty phones they'd sold: I
had to have them send it off to be repaired.
>
> > I haven't yet ever been able to use this phone at all.
>
> That may put you in a better position - certainly with PAYG they were
> far more willing to accept the phones' return if they'd not been used.
Stuart B;1234201 Wrote:
> They insisted they didn't have to ? What sort of crap is that they
> were telling you .Of course they do .That's the least they should do .
Thank for you that response! That was exactly my reaction - they tried
to claim that the charger wasn't covered by the phone's warranty (which
I suppose <I>could</I> be true if the charger is not actually
manufactured by Sony - but it was certainly <I>sold to me</I> by Three.)
The member of staff gave me the new charger with a very stiff "The
manager says we don't have to, it's a goodwill gesture" message.
> just making a not so pointless post to let you in on some of the forum
> FAQ since you didn't bother to read:
> FAQ Wrote:
>> A trash or junk post is one that is of no use to the forum. Some
>> examples might be random keystrokes, a post that has nothing to do
>> with the thread or forum you've placed it in, series of smilies, or
>> posts that say little more than "Thank you" or "Cool tone.
Under which of that list is his post trash or junk then?
--
Regards,
Chris.
(Remove Elvis's shoes to email me)
> I disagree. The absolutely best time to go in and discuss the issue of
> them supplying a faulty charger and then phone and then refusing to
> replace is on a busy Saturday. Ask to speak to the manager and then
> discuss at high volume in front of as many potential customers as
> possible.
>
> --
> dave @ stejonda
ChrisM;1234218 Wrote:
> Under which of that list is his post trash or junk then?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Chris.
> (Remove Elvis's shoes to email me)
He is probably referring to the 10 posts I made on for newbie forum
"Getting-started-new-member-help" which WERE all pretty much trash or
junk - I just wanted to make 10 posts in order to be able to ask this
question HERE, where I thought I would get helpful replies. (Which I
have, thank you all.)
>Now that's annoying, but helpful to know. OK. (The odd thing is, I seem
>to be able to receive signals: I can see all the signal bars. I just
>can't dial out on any non-emergency number, not even 333.)
Note that if you have signal bars but "emergency calls only" displayed then
those signal bars are referring to another network that is potentially
available should you need to make an emergency call. They don't represent 3
coverage.
xj911 wrote:
> just making a not so pointless post to let you in on some of the forum
> FAQ since you didn't bother to read:
> FAQ Wrote:
>> A trash or junk post is one that is of no use to the forum. Some
>> examples might be random keystrokes, a post that has nothing to do with
>> the thread or forum you've placed it in, series of smilies, or posts
>> that say little more than "Thank you" or "Cool tone.
> My questions are:
>
> Surely it's still the law that if a company sells faulty goods they
> have to replace it or refund
Yes
> within 30 days?
No
> Surely it's still the law that I have 14 days to change my mind about a
> mobile phone supplier,
No, it never was. The Distance Selling Regulations allow you to return a
mail ordered item in resaleable condition within 5 working days. Not 14
days, and not if you bought it in a shop, which is what you said you
did. You buy it in a shop and that's that. Mail order is safer.
> and one of the valid reasons for rejecting a
> contract is that I can't get a signal at home?
Very definitely not, but it's the reason for some networks choosing to
offer the 14 day cancellation period. I guess 3 don't.
> 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.
He is right. The contract stands regardless of the functioning of the
handset.
(The shop's attitude
> has been that I'm stuck - the phone is faulty, too bad, I should send it
> off for repair.)
I think you can expect it to be replaced, but legally they could choose
to repair it instead
> I haven't yet ever been able to use this phone at all.
I'd have a word with your local Trading Standards. It may take some time
to persuade them to help you, but as soon as they are on the case, the
dealer will change their attitude.
> Now that's annoying, but helpful to know. OK. (The odd thing is, I seem
> to be able to receive signals: I can see all the signal bars. I just
> can't dial out on any non-emergency number, not even 333.)
In that case I'm not so convinced it is the handset at fault. Have you
tried it in areas of good coverage? If so (and it didn't work), ask the
shop to try a working sim card in it (and maybe trying your sim card in
one of their phones)
In article <Jesurgislac.32kc0g@nospam.cellphoneforums.net>, Jesurgislac.32kc0g@nospam.cellphoneforums.net says...
> Surely it's still the law that if a company sells faulty goods they
> have to replace it or refund within 30 days?
They certainly should be replacing that if it's faulty.
> 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?
No, you are wrong there. You have no automatic right of cancellation. If
coverage is an issue then you must research before buying. There will
even be clauses in the contract that state "we do not gaurantee
coverage" or similar.
> 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.
Trading standards, explain situation, they will give you a call
reference number. Go back to shop or phone, speak with manager. If still
no joy then cancel direct debit and shop elsewhere. If they sue you,
defend it in court and any districy judge would rule in your favour in
about 30 seconds flat.
--
Regards
Jon
In article <Jesurgislac.32kn4a@nospam.cellphoneforums.net>, Jesurgislac.32kn4a@nospam.cellphoneforums.net says...
> He is probably referring to the 10 posts I made on for newbie forum
> "Getting-started-new-member-help" which WERE all pretty much trash or
> junk - I just wanted to make 10 posts in order to be able to ask this
> question HERE, where I thought I would get helpful replies. (Which I
> have, thank you all.)
Why just use the newsgroup directly, instead of some joke forum site?
--
Regards
Jon
In article <Jesurgislac.32kkc2@nospam.cellphoneforums.net>, Jesurgislac.32kkc2@nospam.cellphoneforums.net says...
> Now that's annoying, but helpful to know. OK. (The odd thing is, I seem
> to be able to receive signals: I can see all the signal bars. I just
> can't dial out on any non-emergency number, not even 333.)
The phone is receiveing a signal, but of a different network.
--
Regards
Jon
In article <Jesurgislac.32kkc3@nospam.cellphoneforums.net>, Jesurgislac.32kkc3@nospam.cellphoneforums.net says...
> Thank for you that response! That was exactly my reaction - they tried
> to claim that the charger wasn't covered by the phone's warranty (which
> I suppose <I>could</I> be true if the charger is not actually
> manufactured by Sony - but it was certainly <I>sold to me</I> by Three.)
> The member of staff gave me the new charger with a very stiff "The
> manager says we don't have to, it's a goodwill gesture" message.
The charger is warranted for 6 months. However, warranty or no warranty
the law is on your side on this one.
This manager needs some retail law training methinks!
--
Regards
Jon
> In article <Jesurgislac.32kn4a@nospam.cellphoneforums.net>,
> Jesurgislac.32kn4a@nospam.cellphoneforums.net says...
>> He is probably referring to the 10 posts I made on for newbie forum
>> "Getting-started-new-member-help" which WERE all pretty much trash or
>> junk - I just wanted to make 10 posts in order to be able to ask this
>> question HERE, where I thought I would get helpful replies. (Which I
>> have, thank you all.)
>
> Why just use the newsgroup directly, instead of some joke forum site?
My thoughts exactly!
OP - Look into Outlook Express (or many other NewReader programs - But you
might well already have OE installed on your computer). It's a much easier
(and IMO nicer) way of using NewsGroups.
--
Regards,
Chris.
(Remove Elvis's shoes to email me)
In message <1199306755.80349.0@iris.uk.clara.net>, Iain
<no-one@hairydog.co.uk> writes
>Very definitely not, but it's the reason for some networks choosing to
>offer the 14 day cancellation period. I guess 3 don't.
When I signed up to 3 they certainly *did* make a big show of offering a
cancellation period just like other more honest networks. However, the
small print read that the option to cancel was only valid as long as the
phone itself had not been used to connect to the 3 network - so useless!
"Jesurgislac" <Jesurgislac.32kc0g@nospam.cellphoneforums.net> wrote in
message news:Jesurgislac.32kc0g@nospam.cellphoneforums.net ...
>
> 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.
>
>
> --
> Jesurgisla
sale of goods act does not limit to 30 days - depends on what would be
reasonable (eg milk a few days). The cooling off periods do not apply if
you go to a shop, only for mail order or 'doorstep' sales.
Try Citizens Advice Bureau - probably fix you over the phone.
Does it work outside the house?
Regards
Phil Brady
Three sells faulty phone, refuses to exchange 
Linear Mode
