A Charter for Mobiles.co.uk

mobilejunkie

How about a new approach to customers? Let's see how far we get when I make the following suggestions which this dealer COULD choose to adopt should it be genuinely interested in customer service. I will start with

PRINCIPLE 1

Any offer made on the website is honoured exactly as it is made. If there is a valid reason why it can't be fulfilled, then an alternative which is equivalent should be offered. Every attempt should be made to provide a deal of equal value in every respect which the customer will be happy to accept.

Naturally, this should not merely be yet another idle boast or meaningless promise; if it is all bets are off. If this isn't acceptable there will be no point in moving to Principle 2 and the company will show just how much it really thinks of its customers. If adopted and (in fact) implemented (as opposed to lip service) it would prevent one batch of problems customers have reported on here recurring in the future.

Mobiles.co.uk_company_representative

Hi,

As far as I know there's only 2 causes of an offer on the website not being offered, mispricing (as we saw unfortunately last week with a PAYG phone for £19.99 instead of £169.99) which we wouldn't be able to honour commercially, and where a deal is represented in a way that confuses some customers, for instance the Orange Discount tariffs with additional line rental discount that caused some confusion on the "Best Deals" page.

With mispricing we always honour an error if it's commercially viable to do so (and most of the time people won't even be aware there was an error - we just swallow the loss) but where we cannot we have to cancel orders. We couldn't, for instance, send out over 600 phones losing over £100 each, as would have beeb the case with the PAYG last week.

Other than the above, what exactly were you referring to? I think when you say "refuses to honour deals on the site" you're referring to something different maybe, but I do not know - can you share explicit examples please?

Thanks,

mobilejunkie

If there are so few why is it a problem to agree such a principle? If you're the company you constantly proclaim to be, losing a few hundred pounds due to a mistake which you made should be a small price to pay for your error in order to keep your "thousands of customers a week" happy. The deal which "confused" was generally accepted as not only misleading but not honoured as it were offered. I am biting my tongue here and giving you the opportunity to change your approach and warrant some positive feedback for a change. You are now on a stage where the issues and suggestions will be clear and positive if you react in a proper way. If you do not, the attempt will have failed. That is up to you. You have repeatedly suggested I should peruse your new t&c and make suggestions. The reason I haven't is that I have no confidence in the motivation for that suggestion. I am now responding in a constructive manner for you to actually show yourself to be the company which you purport to aspire to. IF you do that I can move on to Principle 2 - if not, there is no point and you would plainly have no intention of changing and showing that you truly ARE a company which cares about its customers.

Yes I can. A 12 month free deal which is a "mistake" and therefore not honoured. That is one you are not aware of, but has happened more than once.

Mobiles.co.uk_company_representative

MJ,

Of course I'm happy to state that all deals on the site (with the exception of obvious pricing errors, as per English law) are honoured, and I'd hope that you see I'm getting involved in this thread because I do recognise this is you trying to offer constructive criticism.

I'm not aware of ever having published a 12m free deal that we were unable to fulfill (we only ever offered them a few times anyway, it's just not a sustainable business model), can you recall when and/or on which handset/network/tariff? I do think I remember offering 18m half price on a Samsung of some sort that was waaaaaaaaaaay over the top, like everyone else was offering 2m half price, but this was a while ago and I can't recall specifics (but this is the only pricing error related to discount line rentals I can recall).

Regards,

mobilejunkie

You should know that I watch these deals like a hawk - spotting them days if not weeks before anyone else and never drawing them to peoples' attention. Most never even know they were there (including you, evidently). Yes, I know exactly when and what the offers were. They were rare 12 month free deals on 12 month contracts - quite different to the ones you are suggesting. I have more information but I am not prepared to provide that for good reasons. To be fair, an attempt was actually made to put things right the first time - and the outcome was acceptable. However, the second time half-hearted attempts were made until given the suggestion that I should apply for any of the other offers on your website. THAT was totally UNacceptable. Your response on another thread relating to the issue of deals not honoured also has a bearing on what would be the basis of my suggested Principle 2; you have said it was quite right to refuse cancelllation under such circumstances because it was outside the 14 days. That is unacceptable and raises a few separate issues. My concern on Principle 1 is that deals DO appear and the response is not what it should be. I am not searching for you to honour the deal I am now raising; that is not the issue. The issue is the opportunity for you to respond differently. If you are not able to change then things will obvioulsy remain the same. Up until now there is little evidence that change is your intent. If it is not, then whatever you do will be fire-fighting at best and portray the organisation in a more unfavourable light at worse. So far it has been the worse rather than the best. You can break out of this if you choose.

Mobiles.co.uk_company_representative

MJ,

I'm confused - you managed to buy a 12m free deal that was a pricing error (which we honoured), then returned for a second one and were refused? I can only respond to accusations of not honouring deals if I know what the deal was, and what we did when it was ordered.

The response to a pricing error on the site is what it should be, in that we send an email explaining it was a pricing error and that we won't be fulfilling it (orders are legally an offer to trade, and we are within our rights to decline them - see numerous "pricing error" stories online). The offer is then removed from the site as quickly as is possible.

Regards,

mobilejunkie

Your summary is incorrect on a number of points. The deals were several months apart. There was no such email. In fact, after immediate acceptance by the network the an email stating it was now being passed to YOUR "quality control" department was as far as it got - until several days later I had to contact you to find out what was happening with my order. Hardly what you are now describing/assuming. I am not accusing, merely answering your request to tell you about other deals which weren't honoured. The offer was NOT removed for at least a week on the first occasion. There is also something else which I have not told you about in relation to the second occassion, but it would not reflect well on either the response at the time or your comments now. I am not at all sure that the other examples from people on here included emails stating that there were pricing errors either. Falling back on English law in any case is hardly a portrayal of a company which really cares about its customers. Customer service is quite different from legal rules. You seem to prefer the latter.

I am making an attempt to change things; you seem to be concerned with justifying what you do rather than changing it. Both my (increasingly few) and your (increasing number of) critics are leaving us alone on this thread, which is giving you the oppoortunity to actually come to the table and make some changes. Thus far you seem only intent on justfiying rather than so doing. Rather than do that you STILL have the opportunity to change your approach, which in the past has been singularly unsuccessful.

mobilejunkie

It seems that the opportunity has been a waste of time. No response despite the rep making another post an hour after my last one. There has been no attempt whatsover to change anything; merely the usual attempts to justify bad service and deflect attention. Perhaps the company would prefer this thread to disappear like so many others.

Well, you can't say I didn't try! Methinks they are a lost cause.

Guys_Dad

mobilejunkie wrote: »

It seems that the opportunity has been a waste of time. No response despite the rep making another post an hour after my last one. ..............................
Well, you can't say I didn't try! Methinks they are a lost cause.

What started off very promising, has gone in half a dozen posts to another waste of time. The REAL world is that on occasions, companies make a mistake in their sales pricing. English law says that a contract only exists if a deal is done - up to that point a seller need not sell their goods at an OFFERED price if there was an error and can refuse to ACCEPT the buyer's money.

Now no retailer under the sum is going to be tied to accepting each and every mistaken sales price and they have the absolute right to say "sorry - we made a mistake right up to the point where they accept the offer, so to speak. At that point, a contract exists and the thwarted buyer has recourse in law to demand that the contract be honoured.

I think the rep's reply was reasonable - but, unless I have misread your posts, you need to study English Law a bit more and stop trying to make mobiles.co.uk give up their rights under that law. See if your favourite retailer Phones4u would agree to what you are suggesting. I can imagine the reply from their chief!

thommy

mobilejunkie wrote: »

You should know that I watch these deals like a hawk - spotting them days if not weeks before anyone else and never drawing them to peoples' attention.

i'm sorry - this thread, once again, seems to be the result of personal frustrations. the above quote is alarmingly indicative.

mobilejunkie

Didn't take long before the usual suspects appeared to attack me. Actually I have studied English Law to a reasonably high degree, but that is not the point. It is obvious that the two of you will never get the point no matter what this company does; easy when you don't actually use them, of course. But I give up; you are correct, the Rep will never do anything defferent just as the (three) muskateers will always rush in to defend and justify the unjustifiable.

It'll be business as usual then!