Three - Court Action

Moneybox

I have issued Three with a deadlock letter. I have also given them 3 pages of notes to respond to if they feel they are inaccurate before publishing in the public domain.

The Customer Services are based in Glasgow (Po Box 333) G2 9AG.

I have issued the store manager the deadlock letter and copied it to Customer Services. Am I correct that I should take the store manager to court over what is in my opinion a failure to repair or replace a phone under warrenty? They are blaming the new contract they have with a repair service - but fail to see how this is my problem to resolve.

This is after dozens of emails and phonecalls! I can not just sit back and let them do this to me (or most likely 100s of others wit genuine warrenty claims).

Thanks

samrw18

What is their excuse for not repairing the phone? Any other reason than the new contract with a repair service?

Moneybox

In short returned phone. Checked in shop. Charging error. No physical damage. We're able to get it charging, but not continuous. Returned for repair by them.

Then contacted by Three saying water damage. Challenged as impossible! Changed it then to corrosion on the charging circuit board?!

Various text messages and phone calls that all seem to contradict one another. Today even said that phone was repaired and ready to collect. Arrived and not repaired and was accompanied by a letter saying they were charging an admin fee. I had already put in writing not to return phone but not to destroy as it may be required later.

The most comical thing was a phone call from Three on my home line when they were already on the one speaking to me on my mobile! They have really proved themselves to be incompetent.

Basically want it repaired for free under warranty.

Anyway having reached deadlock (unless I get a response in the next few days) am I correct in taking the store manager to court. Seems to me I have more hope in dealing directly with the retailer who provided me with the phone. I usually would not pursue these things but this is soooo wrong Three deserve to be challenged.

Moneybox

Just read your cv! , you may well be able to help ?. Thanks :money:

Buzby

Er no. You do not sue in Scotland unless you live there. If you want to take them to court, you raise your action and arrange service at their Registered Office address, nowhere else.

As for their refusal to play ball - you DO have an independent report confirming there is no water damage/rust in the handset? Without corroboration it is your word against theirs, and you'll be wasting your time. You are right insofar as their service arrangements are none of your concern, however if you reject their refusal to repair, you need your own repairers report that will uphold your assertion and reject theirs, you will also need the device as evidence too.

vax2002

Is this damage preventing you from using the sim in another phone to obtain the service provided by the contract ?
And how does the contract refer to the ownership of the handset, is it a gift or part of the contract.

Moneybox

Phone was with contract. There is a warranty for 2 years on the phone, but unsure how it is written in contract.

I guesse no surprise then they base themselves in Scotland then!

They want £19 admin to Be given the phone back!.. If it is "corrosion" I will be challenging why in less than 6 months. This isn't user damage. They have not even after several requests provided me with a written technical report.

Thanks however for the replies. It gives me a warning as to what to expect, but this cannot put people off taking action when they are being done wrong by Three.

grumbler

Buzby wrote: »

As for their refusal to play ball - you DO have an independent report confirming there is no water damage/rust in the handset? Without corroboration it is your word against theirs, and you'll be wasting your time.

This depends. Within the first 6 months it is '3' who have to prove that the phone was damaged by the customer.

Moneybox

Thanks. Yes it was within 6 months, .. At least something positive. Three cannot be so big they can,t be challenged. I am sure they have very clever lawyers to write all these agreements so customers have no way to challenge them for service or products.

Again no surprise 4 weeks later and I am still waiting for a technician report!! Sure it would only cost me £30 to agree to the repair but there are some values in what is right and wrong. This is a warranty repair and I think they are aware of it!

I will let you know the outcome.

grumbler

Warranty is normally provided by the manufacturer.
'Three' have obligations as a supplier under the Sale of the Goods Act that has nothing to do with the warranty.

Quentin

Moneybox wrote: »

.....am I correct in taking the store manager to court.....

No.

Read up on MCOL to learn how to go about it.