Stolen phone racked up charges. Why do I have to pay?

wantmemoney

grumbler wrote:

No, the thief used the stolen card with a PIN written on it (mobile phone with a sim without any protection) to buy goods/services (airtime) from some companies (networks). Why do the suppliers of the services have to suffer consequences of the card (mobile) owner negligence?

A mobile phone is not a credit card and has almost nothing in common with a credit card.
It really does not help the OP or anybody by continually confusing the two.

macman wrote:

Why did your son wait 48 hours? It's the first few hours when the damage is usually done.

yes but how long do you Moneysaving mobile experts advice before a customer reports their apparent misplaced phone as a possible lost or stolen phone?

and how long should they wait before reporting it to the police that their 'misplaced' phone may be lost or stolen?

Tony5101

If I was out somewhere and noticed that my phone had been lost or stolen..then I would call my network immediately.
If its subsequently found, the network can always unblock it for you.
You can always call the police afterwards, however unless youre planning on making an insurance claim, there's no real urgency on the police side of things (compared with contacting your network)
If property is handed in to a police station you would generally have a minimum of 28 days to claim your property back.

grumbler

wantmemoney wrote: »

A mobile phone is not a credit card and has almost nothing in common with a credit card.

In fact a contract sim card and a credit/debit card have loads in common. That's why both get reported to CRAs (a debit card with overdraft if its a debit card).

The only difference is that for a credit card you cannot disable PIN, but for a sim card you have to enable it. IMO, all contract sims have to be PIN-protected by default, but this is slightly OOT.

wantmemoney wrote: »

...
and how long should they wait before reporting it to the police that their 'misplaced' phone may be lost or stolen?

Unless it's insured I wouldn't bother reporting to the police.

System

spokeswoman wrote: »

I have passed the case to CISAS now and await developments.

CISAS will not normally consider the case unless you have it writing from Orange that you have reached deadlock in your dispute with Orange.
The formal position is that a thief has used your phone to steal, from Orange, calls to Pakistan. Orange claims that, under their contract with you, you are liable to compensate them for their loss. This loss is the cost to them of the calls (apparently, they say, £2400), not the retail price they would have charged you for the calls if you had made them (over £5000).
However, in Ofcom's view, mobile operators should do more to protect themselves from losses of this kind, for example by making it easy for their customers to set a cap on monthly use.
http://consumers.ofcom.org.uk/2012/03/tackling-unexpectedly-high-phone-bills/
Orange probably has a mindless procedure which will bill you the £2400, and then harass you for payment, and threaten to report you to credit reference agencies as defaulting if you do not pay. Orange could also attempt to get a County Court Judgment against you.
I again recommend that (if you haven't done so already) you write to Orange, putting it on record that you dispute that you are liable for this £2400, because Orange have failed to follow Ofcom's behests. You can add that any attempt to report you to credit reference agencies as a defaulter will be libel. You can offer a reasonable amount, based on the loss Orange would have suffered even if they had taken the reasonable precautions Ofcom has strongly suggested, and threatens to formally require.

wantmemoney

grumbler wrote:

In fact a contract sim card and a credit/debit card have loads in common.

good.....then you will be able to list 'half a dozen'........won't you?

grumbler wrote:

That's why both get reported to CRAs

a CRA is a Credit rating agency.....these are used by lots of various companies to check on the credit worthiness of potential customers....the fact that a mobile phone shop and a credit card company both use them does not mean a mobile phone is like a credit card.........

grumbler wrote:

The only difference is that for a credit card you cannot disable PIN, but for a sim card you have to enable it.

grumbler my TV can be PIN enabled to stop children accessing some of the channels but that doesn't mean my TV is like a credit card.

some differences Moneysavingexperts continually overlook

phones

1/ a phone is used connecting you to the public communications Network....they are used for talking.

2/ the communications Network is regulated by Ofcom.

3/ it's not a criminal offence to talk on a stolen phone.


credit cards

1/ a credit card is used for connecting to a finance Network....they are used for transferring cash.

2/ the finance network is regulated by the FSA(mostly).

3/ it is a criminal offence to use a stolen/lost credit card.

grumbler

wantmemoney wrote: »

good.....then you will be able to list 'half a dozen'........won't you?

Well, the term 'loads' isn't supposed to be used only for countable values.
You are welcome to post half a dozen of essential differences though.

a CRA is a Credit rating agency.....these are used by lots of various companies to check on the credit worthiness of potential customers....the fact that a mobile phone shop and a credit card company both use them does not mean a mobile phone is like a credit card.........

It means that both are credit facilities in the first place.
Both can be used for buying goods and services on credit. The main difference is that a sim card can be used mainly for buying very specific services and needs specific devices for this. However, from the financial point of view this difference is not important.

grumbler my TV can be PIN enabled to stop children accessing some of the channels but that doesn't mean my TV is like a credit card.

Your logic is flawed. The fact that PIN is used in TVs doesn't invalidate the fact that it is used in credit cards and sim cards to prevent unauthorised usage. If there were no this protection for a sim card this would be an essential difference, but this is not the case. Both have adequate protection in place and it's up to the owner either to use it or not.

some differences Moneysavingexperts continually overlook

phones

1/ a phone is used connecting you to the public communications Network....they are used for talking.

2/ the communications Network is regulated by Ofcom.

3/ it's not a criminal offence to talk on a stolen phone.


credit cards

1/ a credit card is used for connecting to a finance Network....they are used for transferring cash.

2/ the finance network is regulated by the FSA(mostly).

3/ it is a criminal offence to use a stolen/lost credit card.

IMO, none is essential.
Credit card can be used in a payphone for talking too.
It is used for buying goods/services on credit in the first place, not for transferring cash, although you can get cash involved in this process.
It doesn't necessarily have to be physically connected to to the network, but this is irrelevant.
If some financial product isn't regulated by FSA, this makes it more risky to use and customers are less protected. Hence, the customers have to be more cautious, not less.

Of course, status quo is far from being perfect and can be improved. This doesn't mean that it has to be ignored - like you seem to suggest.

wantmemoney

good grief!

I really don't think the above post is going to help anybody who is unfortunate enough to have a huge bill run up on a lost or stolen phone.

For future reference I suggest any body who encounters this problem should examine this thread for constructive suggestions.
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?352355-Stolen-phone-charges-is-goodwill-the-only-way-to-reduce-my-bill-**RESOLVED**