Vodafone lumped me with a crappy phone

robt_2

wattc wrote: »

Personally, I don't understand why you are all defending the corporation Vodafone. This is supposed to be a CONSUMER website. I don't understand how you interpret "Consumer Revenge" as "pat the corporation who take your money and offer you poor service in exchange on the head".

Maybe we should make up some lies about your rights and post them instead? Would that be of better help?

Fire_Fox

stugib wrote: »

That is just not true. Way too late to reject the goods and the six months burden of proof does not entitle you to a full refund.

I did not say six months, that was GJChester. I got slightly confused with two different bits of legislation, however I stand by my assertion that a consumer is entitled to reject goods if they are not fit for purpose for a full refund (caveat as before on gifts/ upgrades) within a "reasonable" period, tho reasonable is not defined in law.
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file25486.pdf
http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1073792524

gjchester

stugib wrote: »

That is just not true. Way too late to reject the goods and the six months burden of proof does not entitle you to a full refund.

I meant that in the first six months any fault is treated as being there at manufacture and the burden of proof is on the maker to say it was not. After six months the burden of proof is on the buyer to say the fault has been there since manufacture not the vendor. As Fire Fox said it's down to a "reasonable time" but that reasonable time is not defined in law, on a phone that will last 1-2 years reasonable time may be a few months, on a TV that should last 10 years it may be a year.

The OP has never stated the timescale of when he got the phone in the posts.

gjchester

wattc wrote: »

Personally, I don't understand why you are all defending the corporation Vodafone. This is supposed to be a CONSUMER website. I don't understand how you interpret "Consumer Revenge" as "pat the corporation who take your money and offer you poor service in exchange on the head".

I'm pointing out the fact that the 7 day returns policy is not fair with complex, multi-feature modern phones.

No-one who offers a trial period of any sort is under any legal obligation to do so (distance selling rules aside). Companies do but it's as a goodwill gesture / company policy. If the item has a fault thats different, but if the item works when you get it you have no legal rights to a refund under the law.

As I've said the seven days under the DSR is so you don't buy a blue widget and when you get it in the post it turns out to be brown and not suitable, it's not a trial period.

Fair and legal are not the same thing...

spiro

wattc wrote: »

I'm pointing out the fact that the 7 day returns policy is not fair with complex, multi-feature modern phones. And if people are saying you don't even get that if you get your phone in a shop, then I think that really shows mobile phone companies attitude to customers. "You bought it and you can't get your money back now - naw naw naw naw naw". .... I think at least 28 days would be fairer with these new phones.

Lots of goods you buy are complex but none give you a 'trial' period let alone a long 'trial' period. Just imagine they did it with say TVs/home cinema systems, everyone would be going into the shop to get the latest most expensive model during the World Cup and returning it weeks later saying its too complex for me.

stugib

Fire_Fox wrote: »

a consumer is entitled to reject goods if they are not fit for purpose for a full refund (caveat as before on gifts/ upgrades) within a "reasonable" period, tho reasonable is not defined in law.

gjchester wrote: »

it's down to a "reasonable time" but that reasonable time is not defined in law, on a phone that will last 1-2 years reasonable time may be a few months, on a TV that should last 10 years it may be a year.

You're confusing 'reasonable time' as it applies to durability, and 'reasonable time' to inspect and accept the goods as working. Once the goods are accepted, you can no longer reject the goods for a full refund. You'd be entitled to repair/replacement or partial refund after acceptance, which is where the burden of proof thing comes in. For a mobile it would be nowhere near a few months to inspect and accept.

Exemplar

Can I just chip in here.... it seems we are all missing the issue here. Someone bought a handset, has now fallen out of bed with it, and wants out.

Well matey boy, aint gonna happen.

Had you had the sense to google HTC Tattoo review you would have come up with a site called GSMARENA which does full, indepth reviews of major handsets.

Had you had the sense to google ANDROID FORUMS before you made your choice you would have gone to one of several forums which offer help, guidance and advice on known and made up issues with Android handsets.

End of

Rusty!

wattc wrote: »

And for those interested, my phone is updated with the latest firmware that Vodafone have released. So these bugs are BUILT-IN. This is what I have been sold.

This is not necessarily true. If this bug was built in as you claim, ever single Tattoo on Voda would have this problem.

They don't.

Android phones are mini computers, and much like a computer, strange things can happen one and not another. One computer does something odd, does that make it Microsoft's fault for building it into Windows? Or is it more likely something has been installed that is in some way causing it?

Simple way to test this, good old fashioned hard reset.

Turn your phone off, hold down the HOME and END buttons, and power it on.

Welcome to recovery!

Hold the BACK and END buttons to bring up the menu, in this you'll find two 'wipe' options.

Use them both and you're phone will be nice and factory fresh. Reboot it and before doing any customisation, see if your problem has gone.

My money is on it being fixed.

Vodafone

Hi everyone!

Firstly, I would like to thank you all for offering some very sound advice and info.

wattc -

I can see that you are very frustrated with the handset at the moment and I know that there is nothing worse than you're alarm failing on you.

Also, the loss of network on your handset could be down to a number of different issues and I would like to take an in-depth look at this for you to ensure that we do everything that we can to make you a happy customer again.

So that I can make sure we have checked everything and resolve any potential issues, could you please contact The Web Relations Team - Vodafone UK.

(When contacting, please quote the code WRT135 in the subject line. In the main message please include a link to this thread and your user name. This will ensure that your message comes directly to our team.)

We will be more than happy to investigate any faults in full and provide a you with a solution.

I look forward to hearing from you.

All the best,

Espi
Web Relations Team
Vodafone UK

thatsean

Have you thought about buying an alarm clock, and then taking your handset into a Vodafone store for a firmware flash? It'll have to be sent away, which will be a pain, but at least yo're getting towards a replacement (andf a trail on their system that you are having problems) - upgrading the firmware yourself wont prove to Vodafone that it's been done

. I've had no end of probelms with the Storm2 on Voda, and you're right, some of the reps are a pain - but there are as many who are not. In my expereince after two repair attempts Vodafone agreed that enough was enough and swapped it for another model. Perhaps try being nice to them? they are just people doing a job.

With regards to it being fit for purpose, if it makes and receives calls and data, sms etc then good luck rejecting it under the sales of goods act, but it's worth a go if you've the time. Otherwise, give them a chance to fix it, and if they can't that's the time to start requesting a replacement. Under the sales of goods act the offer of a repair is deemed to be reasonable, so you need to give them a chance.