Fave 3 broken there contract?

donny909

Think I might have complicated the issue posted elsewere (either that or that section there is not to active at the moment) so trying to simplify the issue here and ask for an opinion.

The gf gets a phone off 3 14 months ago on a 18 month contract 6 months into the contact she starts to have problems with the reception and not being able to use her net add-on. Been on the phone to three about 14 times or more in the last several months.

Each time she has been told the same reason that it's down to transmitter work being carried out. Funny that as on 2 or 3 occasions the problem has been in different parts of the country. Now this explanation is a lie and can prove that on the basis that I'm also on 3 and have never had a reception problem to memory and certainly never on any of the times my partner has.

Each time she is asked to do this that and the other to the setting to "reset the phone to factory default" from which she has never changed them in the foirst place. And each time she has called them she is asked to go through the same steps again.

This was explained to 3 yesterday and today, where they evertually admitted it's a fault with the phone. But refused to comment of why they have been saying it's down to transmitter work when we have told them all wekend it never has been down to transmitter work because the other phone on three has always remained fine.

The result is in the last several months she has had a sub standard service on her phone and they have obviously told her in effect go away because it's only down to transmitter work. And has not been able to use the phone for the last 4 days solid now.

3 have refused to replace the phone and want her to pay for a loan set while they examine her's. This I dont think will be repaired or returned as she only has 5 months left on her contract and would qualify for a free replacement as early as the end of march anyways. Besides she rightfully has refused to pay for the loan phone while they examine hers.

Have 3 therefor broken there contract by not providing the service sold and lied about the reason behind the faulty phone for 7 months?. And can she therefor cancell the direct debit without penalty and go elsewere as she needs a working phone?.

By the way they will over her a new model now but only if she moves to a more expensive tariff and wont do it a couple of months early as a good will gesture (as if they did she would stay with them) for the trouble and lies she has had to put up with.

Any advice at all?.

gjchester

donny909 wrote: »

Have 3 therefor broken there contract by not providing the service sold and lied about the reason behind the faulty phone for 7 months?. And can she therefor cancell the direct debit without penalty and go elsewere as she needs a working phone?.

A phone contract is really two contracts. One is the supply of hardware (the phone) conditional on you the second which is the provision of airtime services (the voice and data).

On starting the airtime contract you are given the phone (at a free or subsidised rate) and at that point it yours, what happens to it after that is nothing to do with the airtime contract. It's done this way so if it's lsot or damaged the mobile company does not have to repair or replace it unlike if it was a rental agreement

If the phone is faulty and is in warranty, (bearing in mind a lot of phones have a 12 month warranty) then you have the right to a repair or replacement as chosen by the retailer. They don't have to give you a loan phone if it goes for repair, and if it's beyond the warranty then they don't even have to repair it for free it may be chargeable.

By your own admission you've not had issues so three have correctly provided the airtime services, it's just a faulty handset that has prevented your partner using them.

As such you've no grounds for cancelling the contract. As for being told the mast were down, pass probably a standard reply to a transient intermittant error on the system.


Sorry it's not more posative.

donny909

Thanks for the reply, strikes me as funny that they only admitted it was a phone fault when they were called again a little over the first 12 monts of contract, therefor just out of the 12 month warrenty.

To have been given the same answer for each time where it would have certainly been a different person spoke to each time seems strange. On what basis could they claim the issue to have ever been work on the masts. Surely the staff cant have had this information to had as knowledge or have it on there screen as my reception comfirmed otherwise eact time?. They only admitted it being the phone for the first time saturday afternoon.

Not once was it seemingly investigated by the call centre of offered the option of it being examined\repaint untill after the first 12 months. But if they are refusing to replace it where they now admit it was or must be a fault with the phone due to my confirming my phone has been receiving reception for several months they surely by that basis they are admitting they were at fault in the service an lack of contract they supply?.

Is there a higher up department or english call centre we can call is no offence, it's impossable to talk properly or get the point accross to the standard call centre?.

JJ_Egan

Trading Standards would be by next step .

jje

Buzby

Only if you have time to waste, it won't change anything. Kit goes faulty all the time - the fact an airtime contract bills you for the time you cannot use it is an irrewlevance, as you could take out the SIM and put it in anotheru unlocked handset until your original device is repaired. To get the service you require, you'd need to take out additional insurance to cover for this, which is some cases costs around £7pm additional to the monthly contract..

donny909

Buzby wrote: »

Only if you have time to waste, it won't change anything. Kit goes faulty all the time - the fact an airtime contract bills you for the time you cannot use it is an irrewlevance, as you could take out the SIM and put it in anotheru unlocked handset until your original device is repaired. To get the service you require, you'd need to take out additional insurance to cover for this, which is some cases costs around £7pm additional to the monthly contract..

Well she took it into the local 3 store today, and what do you know, the Huwai (or how ever it's spelt lol) is covered by a 2 year manufactures warranty. I always find the pushed warranty things with phones funny as that £7 odd per month does very little more than the manufactures liability warrenty. And certainly not worth the £7 in my opinion for the period a phone is covered by manufactures warranty. Btw, she never did take out the "extra" warranty as she is not stupid or accidental enough to "accidently" drop if to get a new 1 for which seems to be the only reason why anyone would "need" the extra cover.

Result is three have sent it off for repair (well examination first) and had a loan set given for a returnable £30 deposit.

But in thinking, three for several months have claimed and assuming they keep the calls this can be proven that due to several months of seemingly solid "mast works" have not provided the service they are contracted to. If they stand by that claim (not that they likely would) then have they not in effect broken the contract by not providing the contracted service by having work done on the local mast that has taken several months to complete by there own explanation?. So at the very least she should rightfully receive either a full refund or a very good percentage of refund for each and every effected month (7 in total now)?.

I mean, if you had problems with your BT line and that went down for several months with very little service you'd have a right to reclaim monies then would'nt you?. I know this is now a phone fault but it was a service fault for 7 months according to three.

But even now they have confirmed that after several months of "lies" that the problem was with the phone then they have surely still failed on there side by not providing the service she has been paying for and both sides are contracted to?. And is not giving the wrong information for several months a failing of service and thus a breach of contract?.