Three leaving default

hickers31

hi can somone help ?


my husband got a new phone 2 yrs ago with 3 network over the internet the phone come he charged the handset and left it did not activate it that night he was searching and got a lot better deal with vodafone so he sent the 3 phone back but for some reason they didnt receive it untill the 15th day (so they say ) he has a letter claiming he owed £660 for the contract ? he has just recently found out that they have put a default on his experian credit report for the £660 can they do that ? he never signed no agreament and the handset was returned so whats the problem he has tryed contacting 3 several times with no effect this is the only thing on his credit in default and he will not pay it is there anything that can be done about this ?

grumbler

hickers31 wrote: »

my husband got a new phone 2 yrs ago with 3 network over the internet the phone come he charged the handset and left it did not activate it that night he was searching and got a lot better deal with vodafone so he sent the 3 phone back

Just 'sent'? Any proofs? Recorded mail cost just about 76p extra.

but for some reason they didnt receive it untill the 15th day (so they say )

Under the DSR it doesn't matter when they received it. What matters is that he had to inform them within 7 working days that he cancelled the contract and was going to send it back. Did he? If he didn't then '3' internal policy comes into force and it does say to return within 14 days.

he has a letter claiming he owed £660 for the contract ? he has just recently found out that they have put a default on his experian credit report for the £660 can they do that ?

Any bills? What about the DD?

he never signed no agreament

This is of no importance. Contracts don't have to be signed.

and the handset was returned so whats the problem

The problem seems to be that he didn't bother to inform '3' within 7 working days or had not made sure that they received it within 14 days.

he has tryed contacting 3 several times with no effect this is the only thing on his credit in default

One default means a lot nowdays.

hickers31

hi grumbler

yes this was sent recorded delivery and as there was no dispute over them receiving it he never kept the proof.

as for canceling the contract he is certain he done this over the phone when he contacted them to say he was sending the phone back and get the delivery address

no bills and no direct debit was even set up on his bank acc although he did give his details when he set it up over the internet
and the only bill that was received was about 2/3 months after the phone went back asking for the £660 he then contacted them several times asking why and they said it was because the phone was not sent back within the 14 days.
he has not heard anything from them since, untill recently another debt collection agency is claiming the money on behalf of 3 , as for his credit report he checked and its on there as default ,he knows this one could cause a problem and he likes to make sure everything is paid up to date and keep his credit rating good thats why hes annoyed about this and was was asking if there is anything that can be done as he realy dont want to pay for something he never had .

grumbler

hickers31 wrote: »

yes this was sent recorded delivery and as there was no dispute over them receiving it he never kept the proof.

Bad news.

as for canceling the contract he is certain he done this over the phone when he contacted them to say he was sending the phone back and get the delivery address

Good that he had done this. Bad that he had not made any notes about the phone call and cannot prove anything.
BTW, I have cancelled a contract with '3' within the cooling off period recently and asked them to send me a confirmation. They sent it without any problems.

no bills and no direct debit was even set up on his bank acc although he did give his details when he set it up over the internet

Not bad. I think this fact can be used as an indirect proof that he called to cancel.

and the only bill that was received was about 2/3 months after the phone went back asking for the £660 he then contacted them several times asking why and they said it was because the phone was not sent back within the 14 days.

As I said above, under the DSR he has to cancel within 7 days, not to send it back. However, it was stupid to bury his hand in the sand and to ignore them for almost 2 yeas. What did he hope for and what did he expect? Two years ago he could have got some proof of his call to '3'.

he has not heard anything from them since, untill recently another debt collection agency is claiming the money on behalf of 3 , as for his credit report he checked and its on there as default ,he knows this one could cause a problem and he likes to make sure everything is paid up to date and keep his credit rating good thats why hes annoyed about this and was was asking if there is anything that can be done as he realy dont want to pay for something he never had .

I'd build the complaint in the following way:

1. Check with the bank that no DD was set by '3' at that time.
2. Normally 15 days is more than sufficient time for setting a DD. '3' had not set it because you called them within 7 working days to cancel.
3. As you called them, 14 days limit set by their internal policy is irrelevant because the internal policy cannot override DSR.

Demand the default to be removed from the credit file(s). If they refuse complain to the ombudsman.

Buzby

Don't get too excited over the DD (or lack of). Even if one was set up, and never claimed the onus remains with the customer to pay any debt owed. The courts refuse to accept that no debt could have existed because the vendor did not 'collect'.

As such, I disagree with grumbler, as you are in no position to demand - only seek fair play. Mobile contracts and liabilities are a complex business, as you really cannot afford to change your mind as this complicated proceedure gets even more complex. DSR is fine for normal goods, but tied in with a contract can be a recipe for disaster.

The fact they are wanting to charge £600 sounds as though they have not rebated the cost of the returned handset, which is why I believe you should take the non confrontational approach in order to discover this. ONce there is an error detected at their end, THAT'S the time to seek the credit report retraction.

grumbler

Buzby wrote: »

Don't get too excited over the DD (or lack of). Even if one was set up, and never claimed the onus remains with the customer to pay any debt owed.

Was the suggestion not to check that no DD was set and to use this fact it as an indirect proof of cancellation within 7 days?

If it was set, it's a different story and it is unclear why '3' have not just collected ETC by DD.

gjchester

hickers31 wrote: »

the phone come he charged the handset and left it did not activate it that night he was searching and got a lot better deal with vodafone so he sent the 3 phone back but for some reason they didnt receive it untill the 15th day (so they say ) he has a letter claiming he owed £660 for the contract ?

Three have a strict returns policy. Handsets cannot even be turned on. If you do so it's deemed as being used and the DSR voided.

It's a very narrow view that the phone contains software and by turning it on you "break the shrink wrap" as you would with a CD of software, and the DSR does allow companies to refuse returns if software seals are broken to prevent piracy.

If it was charged then most likely it turned on, and could be that was the reason the return never was recognised.

I know it's a very narrow view but one Three take...

grumbler

gjchester wrote: »

Three have a strict returns policy. Handsets cannot even be turned on.

I think this is incorrect. They are very specific instead of just disallowing switching on.
Code of practice:

Returning phones purchased online or by phone – 'distance sales'

If you’re a Three customer who purchased your phone at three.co.uk or from Three's own telephone sales team and you wish to return it, provided you have not used your phone, you can return it with its original boxed accessories to us in “as new” or “as sold” condition in its original box, along with your proof of purchase (or delivery note), within 14 days of delivery.
This policy doesn't apply: 1. to customers who did not purchase their phone via Three’s own telesales team or via three.co.uk, or 2. to customers who have used their phone (this means that you may not personalise your phone in any way, or use any of the Three Services, or take photos or videos or load any data onto the phone).

Buzby

Grumbler, the fact that a DD was not set up might suggest cancellation was received, but not proof of same (incompetence, mis-transcription of a single DD digit would mean a referral and no appear on the customer's file. One could certainly assume that because it was not registered, the process was-short stopped, but invariably the machine rumbles on regardless.

As for 'not turning a handset on' to ensure compliance with a DSR return - this may well be the policy of the networks, but the DSR makes no such exemption, so is irrelevant as it would affect the users statutory rights. How would a customer know of carp service coverage if he hadn;t turned it on? I know P4u try this often, but back down when challenged.

grumbler

Buzby wrote: »

Grumbler, the fact that a DD was not set up might suggest cancellation was received, but not proof of same (incompetence, mis-transcription of a single DD digit would mean a referral and no appear on the customer's file.

I agree. This is the reason why I use the word 'indirect'.

As for 'not turning a handset on' to ensure compliance with a DSR return - this may well be the policy of the networks, but the DSR makes no such exemption, so is irrelevant as it would affect the users statutory rights. How would a customer know of carp service coverage if he hadn;t turned it on? I know P4u try this often, but back down when challenged.

I am aware of this small inconsistency. However, if '3' (or the ombudsman) finally admit that the contract was cancelled within 7 days it is very unlikely that after 2 years they will be able to find out whether the handset was switched on or was not.

Buzby

Agreed - however, if they have already had the goods back, their rigfht to claim the balance is seriously suspect, and if not correctly credited, creates a liability for them. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out, as providing they're not disputing getting the goods back, their default marker is disingenuous.

Has everyone noticed how the networks are no longer pursuing people through the courts for the majority of cases, preferring the simpler appeoach of avoiding an independent arbiter, preferring to sell the debt on for a discount, and wreck the credit file without a moment's consideration.

Yet people still thing nothing of taking out a contract.