misleading advertising of mobile deals

mobilejunkie

This is all quite simple. The company is terrible through normal channels, with little customer services and few promises honoured. When they need to resort to appearing on here to "help" they don't deserve the "benefit of the doubt"; it's up to them to show that they are not as bad as numerous customers have found them to (in fact) be. They should not go unchallenged or fail to be held to account. The smoke and mirrors are a clear ploy throughout and as soon as they started to be used ANY benefit of the doubt is definitely a no-no. Two or three people on here seem to be prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt no matter how much evidence there is to the contrary. If left to make statements and promises the rep might persuade the uninitiated (and there will always be some of those who have NOT followed any of this) that all is well in the garden. People who know otherwise (as opposed to those who actually do not apart from what they read on here) should counter the propoganda with the facts, as opposed to theories justifying mistake after mistake and false promise after false promise (that alone the plain untruths) which eminate from the Mouthpiece. If they did not the forum would become the medium for PR rather than consumer feedback. As to people's outcomes, whilst a few have been sorted the majority on here come back and say that their problems were not resolved as promised. Vodafone threads show the opposite tendency. However, in both cases the basic and substantial failures of the organisations in the first place should not mean people should use them merely because of damage limitation exercises on here.

Thus far there has been very little evidence of a serious attempt to turn things round. Should that day ever arrive I would be the first to encourage it (despite what a handful of people think). I would love nothing more than a good, reliable and fair dealer offering competitive (cashback in my case) deals. There are far too few now and this company still has one major advantage - it's unlikely to go bust and (like Phones4u) it should be possible to obtain your money by suing them if needbe. IF Phones4U were not at the complete opposite end of the spectrum as far as their attitude and service were concerned (internet, not shops!) I would be just as critical of them. However, even though the few seem to want to make them appear similar in most cases, the difference could not be more stark.

Come on Mobiles.co.uk - change your attitude and start treating your customers properly.

Guys_Dad

Silk wrote: »

I'm pleased you admit it !

I notice you have failed to mention the lies or do you now agree that he is ???

I am not as convinced of his "lies" as you state. I can go with his bad following up of issues, the company's bad customer services, failure of courtesy but differences of opinion do not equal lies. Saying that "I will ring you back" and then not following it up is bad manners, bad customer relations, but not necessarily lies.

You mention your help and advice to MSE members. Well I spent a bit of time looking through your mobiles.co.uk posts and the ratio of help to members -v- attacks on Ben and mobiles.co.uk are about 1 in 11 or less - at least by the time I got bored. Now that may help you get even, but not sure it actually helps members.

MJ has started a positive thread on a new charter for them, and that was helpful, but within 3 posts was wanting the company to give up their basic rights under English law! They are by no means an exemplary company at present, but neither are they the nest of lying vipers that they are accused of being either.

mobilejunkie

Guys_Dad wrote: »

I am not as convinced of his "lies" as you state. I can go with his bad following up of issues, the company's bad customer services, failure of courtesy but differences of opinion do not equal lies. Saying that "I will ring you back" and then not following it up is bad manners, bad customer relations, but not necessarily lies.

You mention your help and advice to MSE members. Well I spent a bit of time looking through your mobiles.co.uk posts and the ratio of help to members -v- attacks on Ben and mobiles.co.uk are about 1 in 11 or less - at least by the time I got bored. Now that may help you get even, but not sure it actually helps members.

MJ has started a positive thread on a new charter for them, and that was helpful, but within 3 posts was wanting the company to give up their basic rights under English law! They are by no means an exemplary company at present, but neither are they the nest of lying vipers that they are accused of being either.

I suppose this wasn't a lie then (considering the rep was the one who instigated the change in wording about two months ago, before which it was never stated as he claimed):-

Originally Posted by Mobiles.co.uk company representative
Hiya,

The web page that explains how to claim always stated that the date in question is the one on the invoice sent with the phone, and since then I've had an image of said invoice with the date circled put on there to make it even easier.

Regards,

instaunt

skipsmum wrote: »

There are a lot of anti mobiles.co.uk threads. To redress the balance a bit, Ive had two contract phones and 1 pay as you go and theyve all been fine.

I hate being on a company's side but I thought I should mention that my Mobiles.co.uk purchase went without a hitch too.

... sorry!

Silk

Guys_Dad wrote: »

I am not as convinced of his "lies" as you state. I can go with his bad following up of issues, the company's bad customer services, failure of courtesy but differences of opinion do not equal lies. Saying that "I will ring you back" and then not following it up is bad manners, bad customer relations, but not necessarily lies.

For some unexplainable reason even though you read several times the lies you choose to ignore them ???? is that deliberate or do you have problems understanding the difference ????
When Ben says something like .."we will ring you back" its a broken promise when it doesn't happen
When Ben says and I quote
"Either myself or the Operations Manager will be emailing you with a fuller explanation, a detailed apology and we shall also of course be considering how we can make it up to you."
When that doesn't happen it's a broken promise

However when Ben says things like "We rang you" and I know for an absolute fact the phone didn't ring then that is a LIE

However when Ben swears black is blue the contract was cancelled and it transpires it never was that is a LIE

Now I am prepared to accept that you have no proof other than my word that this is the case however if needs be I could arrange for the invoice from O2 to be copied for you should you not believe it.
Perhaps you may understand however when ben says and agian I quote from him on the very first day I posted on the subject ....
.Email us and we reply within 30 minutes generally, and certainly within our 4h deadline.
We're not understaffed, other than suffering at the hands of flu currently

That is a LIE and I'm sure as you have read time and time and time again by posts from many people they don't reply to emails so you don't have to take just my word for it

Again I'm prepared to accept that you may choose not to accept the word of other people when they tell you this so lets look at something which you actualy know about as a fact ........

You may have seen I posted a link to another post eleswhere a few days ago http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?p=14985790 He says quite clearly "I still visit MSE, I just don't get publicly involved - any customer I spot in trouble gets a PM"
Now you know as well as I do his PM facility was removed months and months ago but he is using a LIE to assure people on there !!!!
Whilst we are on the subject of that post lets look at another aspect on it regarding what I call spin
" that customer was refunded to her card and compensated for the trouble, but in the meantime there was about 17 pages of uninformed commentary"

The post was referance to this thread here ...
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=25123921
You will see quite clearly it was only 3 and 1/2 pages not the 17 pages Ben claims
Read it yourself and judge the actual events rather than the spin ....Gerties scenario started 7th Sept usual many emails and phone calls on hold so posted here 15th
Ben's responce email me ...fair enough
Gertie emails Ben as told
16th Gertie posts again still waiting for reply
Gertie finaly gets a reply promising to resolve within an hour
Gertie posts late that day they have promised to credit card and compensate £25
22nd Gertie posts still no refund or compensation
Gertie posts rung and usual 45mins on hold etc etc
Gertie lodges formal complaint
23rd Gertie posts still no refund
6th Oct Gertie posts finaly received refund but no compensation
Gertie posts she emailed Ben yet again
9th Oct Gertie posts still no reply and no compensation

Now interperate it how you like but to have the customer to have to wait a month to get the money refunded and spend hours on the phone and keep emailing chasing etc etc does not equate to the simple spin that Ben puts on it

Guys_Dad

I have already agreed with you that their customer services are not good and that Ben's case management leaves something to be desired, as did his promises to ring/mail back that didn't happen, so on that we are as one.

If Ben said - as he did - "we rang you" , then the original thread went on to imply that this is what he had been told by his team. So an incorrect response - a lie if you like - does not make the person who said it a liar if that was said at the time in the belief that it was the truth.

The other point about who actually cancelled your contract - and God knows just how many of your posts went on and on about that - I just don't know what part the company played in this but I suspect it was influential in conjunction with your actions as well.

The point is that there seems to be a growing number of MSE members - see mobilejunkie's closed post on the charter - who are getting sick and tired of the relentless repetitive posts that you and he (maybe Quentin has backed off for good reason or is away) are making and you have done exactly the opposite of what you have intended and are now getting people on their side. Ben just needs to sit back and see your personal support withering away.

It is a shame in mobilejunkie's case as he has offered a great deal of good advice in the past and instead of being a valued oracle, he is turning into a bit of a serial Victor Meldrew. You, however, seem to be a one-issue poster whose own rather small initial problem has given you a platform to relentlessly - and, I am afraid, boringly - personally attack their rep.

I have no defence for this company, as my recent posts show. But I do try to believe in some sort of objective fair play and you guys have overstepped the boundaries of objectivity. It is getting to the point where multiple posts from mobilejunkie and silk result in requests to mods to close the thread which is a shame for those who genuinely want help.

bobstheboy

Guys Dad has hit the nail squarely on the head.

Mobiles Customer Service Dept is either a one man band or whoever is nearest picks up the problem, eventually. They have had several complaints which have taken an age to be resolved. That said, it is the continual sniping and boring rhetoric which makes me step in and want to defend Ben.

Just take a step back and as new complaints are posted (they will), let's see how Ben deals with them without a barrage from the anti brigade.

I have been lucky and my minor problem was resolved. I got a good deal and my promised automatic cashback. I got stung by Coolnewmobile with monthly cashback so never again.

Silk

Guys_Dad wrote: »

If Ben said - as he did - "we rang you" , then the original thread went on to imply that this is what he had been told by his team. So an incorrect response - a lie if you like - does not make the person who said it a liar if that was said at the time in the belief that it was the truth.

Hi GD,
Good effort and one that would have been plausable if it wasn't for one minor post which you obviously missed or forgot about ......
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=24387775&postcount=174

we tried to return the call (I've checked the logs to make sure) but there was no answer.

Now as you will see Ben is saying he has checked the logs which is a total lie because it is impossible for the call to be logged as it was never made

Originally Posted by Guys Dad
The other point about who actually cancelled your contract - and God knows just how many of your posts went on and on about that - I just don't know what part the company played in this but I suspect it was influential in conjunction with your actions as well.

Of course if you are not going to accept O2's word on this as opposed to mobiles.co.uk then theres not much point is there !
As is said on quite a few occasions from when O2 first started trying to contact mobiles.co.uk they were monitoring the situation and up to the final date I contacted them they had received no communication at all to cancel the contract. What was influential was the fact that they had hard copy of my cancelation and return of phone and that was the only influence. All of which is quite well documented on the thread as it was happening.

I notice you didn't refer to Bens other post though was that a lie then ???

Whats all a bit sad about all this is that the community on here gets divided, threads get closed and we go full circle.

Guys_Dad

Silk wrote: »

Hi GD,


Now as you will see Ben is saying he has checked the logs which is a total lie because it is impossible for the call to be logged as it was never made

Was it not the case that the contract was in your girlfriend's name and is it not possible that the number they called was either hers or the mobile itself, which you were not using? I don't think Ben specified which number was on the log. I also don't know what log he is referring to - a telephone log from the logger or an internal log from their CRM system - assuming they have one.

On the other point about O2, the thread had two points of view as to who cancelled the contract. I don't think O2 would have cancelled the contract without some reference to mobiles.co.uk who, if they had said "No way", O2 would probably stepped back and said "Your contract is with mobiles.co.uk. Sort it out with them as we are in the middle". And again, I can't see that it was ben's job in the company to liaise with the networks on individual cases.

Still not proven that he was a liar, I am afraid.

But I do agree with your last sentence. And perhaps you, if not MJ, can see that it is not half the community FOR mobiles.co.uk - it is half the community AGAINST your relentless attacks on them that are actually promoting the British culture of defending the underdog. You guys should be the underdogs as they are part of a big group. How has it all gone wrong?

Silk

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Was it not the case that the contract was in your girlfriend's name and is it not possible that the number they called was either hers or the mobile itself, which you were not using? I don't think Ben specified which number was on the log. I also don't know what log he is referring to - a telephone log from the logger or an internal log from their CRM system - assuming they have one.

For goodness sake GD how many times do we have to go over it before you can follow it
It's all there on the thread in black and white and I'm not going to go over it again but will just stick to the relavent point ....It's all well documented
David rang my partner at 09.43 whilst in an important meeting she couldn't talk and told him to ring ME at 10.45 ...he never did.
It started on the thread here http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=24315135&postcount=158

You will see in the thread we all waited and waited and waited
There was no confusion with numbers ...we all agree they rang the mobile and spoke to my partner.
What they didn't do was ring ME on the landline which again is not in dispute as we live together and have done for 15 years.
To say they did is a LIE ...they said there was no answer which is a LIE

I was live on the thread and posted this at 10.33am and we all waited for the phone call as you can see it never happened ..I was sat by the phone all day and updated at 11.47am, 1.54pm and 11.11pm ...NO PHONE CALL.
My phone system logs all calls missed and otherwise it takes a message if anyone rings and flashes any missed calls, if the landline is busy it automaticaly diverts to my mobile so I never miss any calls because even the diverted number shows up.
There was no missed calls so the Parrot is dead I'm afraid
You will also see another LIE regarding this in so far as Ben said the call to my partner was logged at 9.20am which was totaly impossible due to her location untill 9.35am

Originally Posted by Guys Dad
On the other point about O2, the thread had two points of view as to who cancelled the contract. I don't think O2 would have cancelled the contract without some reference to mobiles.co.uk who, if they had said "No way", O2 would probably stepped back and said "Your contract is with mobiles.co.uk. Sort it out with them as we are in the middle". And again, I can't see that it was ben's job in the company to liaise with the networks on individual cases

I realise you are trying your best for Ben here GD but sadly your wrong I'm afraid ....O2 did not step back far from it in fact
It's all well documented in the thread they were even trying to phone at the same time on my behalf if you remember or have you forgotten ???
Who said anything about Ben job to liaise with networks on individual basis ???
Mobiles.co.uk were supposed to cancel the contract ...they never did ...we got the bill to prove it ....we were told by O2 they never cancelled it ...The account/contract was under close scrutiny by them from Day 2 on the thread again all well documented from this post
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=24150827&postcount=84

I'm quite confident they would have know whether the contract was cancelled or not :cool:

Originally Posted by Guys Dad
Still not proven that he was a liar, I am afraid.

I think you find it does GD and I notice you still haven't disputed the other one I put the link to ????