Sale of Goods act vs Vodafone

Notmyrealname

eefee wrote: »

.

A warning would have been nice. Thanks a lot

If you're stupid enough not to follow Apples instructions on firmware and use a modified unapproved route/firmware that bricks your phone then thats your problem.

Maybe you should have done your homework before diving in feet first.

eefee

eefee wrote: »

You could have warned me about this Falko, just tried to restore it back to iOS5 and got this message-

"The iPhone could not be restored. This device isn't eligible for the requested build"

Looked up the error and got this-

Downgrading to a previous version of iOS is not supported. If you have installed software to perform unauthorized modifications to your iOS device, that software may have redirected connections to the update server (gs.apple.com) within the Hosts file. First you must uninstall the unauthorized modification software from the computer, then edit out the "gs.apple.com" redirect from the hosts file, and then restart the computer for the host file changes to take affect. For steps to edit the Hosts file and allow iTunes to communicate with the update server, see iTunes: Troubleshooting iTunes Store on your computer, iPhone, iPad, or iPod—follow steps under the heading Blocked by configuration (Mac OS X / Windows) > Rebuild network information > The hosts file may also be blocking the iTunes Store. If you do not uninstall the unauthorized modification software prior to editing the hosts file, that software may automatically modify the hosts file again on restart. Also, using an older or modified .ipsw file can cause this issue. Try moving the current .ipsw file, or try restoring in a new user to ensure that iTunes downloads a new .ipsw.

A warning would have been nice. Thanks a lot

Presumably, any claim I might have had is gone now because I tried falko89s suggestion?

Will Applestore still fix it for £120? Or has that option suddenly disappeared too?

NFH

Notmyrealname wrote: »

I, like every engineer who do these reports don't care. The OP would be the one who pays the bill. How they get reimbursed is their problem.

Indeed. I wasn't suggesting that Vodafone would be liable to pay you directly; I meant that Vodafone would have to reimburse the OP as you say.

eefee

Notmyrealname wrote: »

If you're stupid enough not to follow Apples instructions on firmware and use a modified unapproved route/firmware that bricks your phone then thats your problem.

Maybe you should have done your homework before diving in feet first.

Yes and yes.
Thanks for the timely warning.

gjchester

NFH wrote: »

It doesn't need to be tested in court because the legislation is already very clear.

Until tested in a court it's unclear.

The networks define the phone as an gift as an inducement to take a contract so not part of the service, you don't agree and say it is, its an unclear area until legally tested.

Anyone's opinion (mine your or a lawyer) is just an interpritation of the rules until a judge decides.

thegoodman

NFH wrote: »

It doesn't need to be tested in court because the legislation is already very clear.

A supplier may not describe a product as ‘gratis’, ‘free’, ‘without charge’ or similar if the consumer has to pay anything other than the unavoidable cost of responding to the commercial practice and collecting or paying for delivery of the item. The handset is supplied on condition of buying a service from the supplier. This is fact, and nothing in any T&Cs can override this fact. Because the goods are supplied as part of a service, their supply is governed by the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, not the Sale of Goods Act 1979 because there is no distinct sale of goods. If you still don't believe me, ask a consumer laywer. I have done so; clearly you have not.

The handset is not a part of the airtime agreement, so it comes under the sale of goods act. When you buy the airtime the phone is either given free or at reduced price. Same as if you buy something from the Tesco eg buy one get 2nd item at 1/2 price or buy one and get 2nd item free. Buy the airtime and get the phone at £x amount, the amount can be zero. When you buy the airtime the phone is sold to you not on loan. You can sell it or do whatever you like. You don't have to use the airtime with the same phone, you can use any phone.

NFH

thegoodman wrote: »

The handset is not a part of the airtime agreement, so it comes under the sale of goods act. When you buy the airtime the phone is either given free or at reduced price. Same as if you buy something from the Tesco eg buy one get 2nd item at 1/2 price or buy one and get 2nd item free. Buy the airtime and get the phone at £x amount, the amount can be zero.

See Schedule 1 Regulation 20 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. The phone cannot be free. It is supplied on condition of buying a service. Regardless of what the supplier may state in the T&Cs, both the service and the conditionally supplied goods fall under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. Where do you get this drivel from anyway? Have you asked a solicitor? I think not.

thegoodman wrote: »

When you buy the airtime the phone is sold to you not on loan.

Incorrect; the phone is not sold to you but transferred to you. You are however correct that it is not lent to you.

NFH

gjchester wrote: »

The networks define the phone as an gift as an inducement to take a contract so not part of the service, you don't agree and say it is, its an unclear area until legally tested.

They do not define the phone as a gift, and to do so would breach Schedule 1 Regulation 20 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 which defines the following as an unfair commercial practice:

Describing a product as ‘gratis’, ‘free’, ‘without charge’ or similar if the consumer has to pay anything other than the unavoidable cost of responding to the commercial practice and collecting or paying for delivery of the item.

If the phone is supplied on condition or buying a service, then it is not a gift, but forms a part of the contract for the supply of goods and service.

Have you asked a solicitor or are you just making this up based on your own assumptions?

grumbler

thegoodman wrote: »

The handset is not a part of the airtime agreement, so it comes under the sale of goods act.

Well, if you say so then it certainly is the case.

When you buy the airtime the phone is either given free or at reduced price. Same as if you buy something from the Tesco eg buy one get 2nd item at 1/2 price or buy one and get 2nd item free. Buy the airtime and get the phone at £x amount, the amount can be zero.

Unlike at Tesco, you usually buy the airtime at the inflated price when it comes with a phone. This can be easily proven in court by a simple comparison with sim-only contracts.

When you buy the airtime the phone is sold to you not on loan. You can sell it or do whatever you like. You don't have to use the airtime with the same phone, you can use any phone.

And this perfectly explains why the networks normally lock the handsets.

gjchester

NFH wrote: »

They do not define the phone as a gift, and to do so would breach Schedule 1 Regulation 20 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 which defines the following as an unfair commercial practice:

Describing a product as ‘gratis’, ‘free’, ‘without charge’ or similar if the consumer has to pay anything other than the unavoidable cost of responding to the commercial practice and collecting or paying for delivery of the item.

If the phone is supplied on condition or buying a service, then it is not a gift, but forms a part of the contract for the supply of goods and service.

Have you asked a solicitor or are you just making this up based on your own assumptions?

Again thats your opinion until a Judge makes a decision it's all assumption on everyones part, even soliciters.

If it's that clear cut who are there not lots of cases where people take that course of actions.