My mobile's been fraudulently barred, 3 don't care

jennyjj

I've bought a replacement off eBay. :rotfl:

Lol. After all that. I take my hat off to you. No actually, i do: You retained your faith in human nature and the law of the land which sees problems resolved in the fullness of time if we just see it through.

It occurs to me that the reason the likes of Three don't chase up and resolve fraud cases is just down to their business model: They bump up prices and snip at back office costs to make enough extra profit so that they can just ignore the odd bit of fraud. It's a business decision that pays off while the fraud is less than the extra payoff of their pricing. But somewhere down the road, someone needs to take a stand, even if they just take the easy wins and nail the kind of criminal you identified for them. It's immoral for big companies to let crime continue and just push up prices for innocent customers.

JJ

Techhead_2

Surely Three have all the information they need to chase the fraudster. I don't see what else you are expecting them to do.

They have the IMEI and the fact it has been sold then reported lost. They know who the original owner was. That's all they need to Chase them up.

They can't tell you what they are doing to investigate the fraud, for obvious reasons, but that doesn't mean they aren't doing it.

grayme-m

Techhead wrote: »

Surely Three have all the information they need to chase the fraudster. I don't see what else you are expecting them to do.

I was expecting them to do something!

Techhead wrote: »

They have the IMEI and the fact it has been sold then reported lost. They know who the original owner was. That's all they need to Chase them up.

Indeed, but they were not going to do that.

Techhead wrote: »

They can't tell you what they are doing to investigate the fraud, for obvious reasons, but that doesn't mean they aren't doing it.

What are the obvious reasons? Seriously, all this Data Protection Act nonsense? They cannot tell me who the original owner is, where they live, their age, their inside leg measurement, etc. but they can thank me for letting them know that I have a phone reported as lost and that they will investigate. I've read the DPA, a good fact when someone tries to use it against me.


There is an update to this, the phone is back with my seller who has gone quiet on me (sent back special delivery). My credit card company have the chargeback form and info so are dealing with it (slowly).

3 have continually emailed me or left messages to call them following my complaint. They admit they should have done something and are now investigating (alongside the police as initiated by my seller going to them), however it is really odd as the insurance claim is for a phone with a different IMEI! All I can think is that the fraudster does this a lot and has mixed up his IMEIs.

jennyjj, I have bought a few phones now and this was the first time this has happened. Two phones back I bought from someone selling on a car enthusiasts forum and paid by bank transfer. More risky than ebay, but I was able to do some research up front to confirm he was a regular poster (so less likely to disappear) and from the details track him to his address.

Also, I have sold all my old phones on eBay, and never tried an insurance job. :rotfl:

robbies_gal

i think your seller is telling fibs hes gone quiet coz its probably him thats done all this

grayme-m

gabbyevs wrote: »

i think your seller is telling fibs hes gone quiet coz its probably him thats done all this

3 have confirmed that the phone is not in his name and the police are involved following him going to them. I think he's either got something on, or hopes that by going quiet the cc company will pay up and he'll get off not refunding me. I should think in fact the ccc will take it from Paypal and they will go after him.

It's all rather odd though.

grayme-m

An update, I finally got through to my seller, he was a bit off, didn't seem to appreciate that his silence since I sent the phone back to him would seem a bit suspicious to me. He said he was still waiting for the money from his seller, so what more could he do. I did try to point out that if he refunded he would be £40 in eBay/Paypal fees better off, but he wasn't interested and I should continue with the chargeback, so that's that.

Credit Card have done the chargeback, they are happy with all the evidence I sent them.

Paypal have opened up a Dispute now, their comms almost asking me to cancel the chargeback...

I notice that yesterday the status is still 'Being Reviewed by PayPal' but that yesterday they had a 'Phone call with Seller', I don't know if they called him or him them, but I wonder if now my seller has awoken to the fact that my credit card would be taking the money from him?

Techhead_2

grayme-m wrote: »

I was expecting them to do something!



Indeed, but they were not going to do that.



What are the obvious reasons? Seriously, all this Data Protection Act nonsense? They cannot tell me who the original owner is, where they live, their age, their inside leg measurement, etc. but they can thank me for letting them know that I have a phone reported as lost and that they will investigate. I've read the DPA, a good fact when someone tries to use it against me.


There is an update to this, the phone is back with my seller who has gone quiet on me (sent back special delivery). My credit card company have the chargeback form and info so are dealing with it (slowly).

3 have continually emailed me or left messages to call them following my complaint. They admit they should have done something and are now investigating (alongside the police as initiated by my seller going to them), however it is really odd as the insurance claim is for a phone with a different IMEI! All I can think is that the fraudster does this a lot and has mixed up his IMEIs.

jennyjj, I have bought a few phones now and this was the first time this has happened. Two phones back I bought from someone selling on a car enthusiasts forum and paid by bank transfer. More risky than ebay, but I was able to do some research up front to confirm he was a regular poster (so less likely to disappear) and from the details track him to his address.

Also, I have sold all my old phones on eBay, and never tried an insurance job. :rotfl:

Not at all data protection. When There is an investigation into fraud, theft or whatever then the investigators (be it Three, police or insurance) will not publicize their efforts. You just need to be patienr until its complete and not make assumptions. Let them do their job.

grayme-m

Techhead wrote: »

Not at all data protection. When There is an investigation into fraud, theft or whatever then the investigators (be it Three, police or insurance) will not publicize their efforts. You just need to be patienr until its complete and not make assumptions. Let them do their job.

I agree with you, but as I wrote, Three were not going to do an investigation. Patience didn't come into it.

gjchester

grayme-m wrote: »

I agree with you, but as I wrote, Three were not going to do an investigation. Patience didn't come into it.

I understand you are upset but look at it from Three's point of view.

They "sold" the phone to the original purchaser, it was probably sold on and later reported stolen and they barred it (Not sure if it was a legal requirement under tha same law as reprogramming IMEI numbers or a volentary one).

You come alone and say you have the phone, its blocked and you want it unblocking. Not in this case but you could be the person who stole the phone in the first place, hence they are unwilling to help.

Once the insurance is paid the phone belongs to the insurance company, it's the person who's sold the phone and claimed the insurance at fault, and thats whpo you need to chase, Three don't have to help at all it's not their problem.

You've done as much as you can, you need to take it up with your seller, as you have, and he needs to take it up with his seller.

Hope it works out for you..

grayme-m

Hello, hello, is this keyboard on?

gjchester wrote: »

I understand you are upset but look at it from Three's point of view.

They "sold" the phone to the original purchaser, it was probably sold on and later reported stolen and they barred it (Not sure if it was a legal requirement under tha same law as reprogramming IMEI numbers or a volentary one).

I have tried to understand from their POV. The phone was reported lost so they barred it, as anyone would expect them to do so.

gjchester wrote: »

You come alone and say you have the phone, its blocked and you want it unblocking. Not in this case but you could be the person who stole the phone in the first place, hence they are unwilling to help.

Nope, I came along and first asked if they had barred it (they confirmed they had), I never asked them to unblock it but that as I had the phone, would they like to reunite the phone with the owner? I didn't ask for them to help me (I was always comfortable that I would get my money back).

gjchester wrote: »

Once the insurance is paid the phone belongs to the insurance company, it's the person who's sold the phone and claimed the insurance at fault, and thats whpo you need to chase, Three don't have to help at all it's not their problem.

Three had apologised to me and admitted they should have investigated (which they are now doing). Someone (me) came to them with strong evidence of a potential fraud and they ignored it.

gjchester wrote: »

You've done as much as you can, you need to take it up with your seller, as you have, and he needs to take it up with his seller.

Hope it works out for you..

I've got my money back. :j