Three are utterly useless (Do I have a case)...

jameslhart

So I purchased a Samsung/Google Nexus from Three in November. Everything was the fine with the phone until Feb when the screen kept locking up. It eventually stopped working, and nothing would get it working again, the screen was completely unresponsive. Knowing that I had caused no damage to the phone, I took it into my local Three store and they sent it off for repair. A few weeks later I receive a letter telling me that the phone cannot be repaired under warranty as it had water damage.

Now I knew that this phone had been nowhere near water and there was no way in hell I was going to pay the £76 for the cost of the repair. I said I wished to dispute the water damage, as I knew that water damage wasn't too blame.


I explained to the gentleman on the phone there was no way this 'water damage' was possible, and that I refuse to pay the £76 to repair damage I had not caused. I told him either the phone was to repaired for free or I would cancel my contract, he told me there was nothing he could do, but he would put me through to customer service.

After being connected to the other side of the world, I spoke to a gentleman about what had happened, he told me that water damage can be caused by a number of things for example; humidity, spillage, etc. I told him that none of these had occurred and he had the audacity to suggest it could be due to excessive sweating. After insulting me the gentleman told me that he could do nothing about this issue, and that he would refer it to 'higher management' and they would return my call within 48 hours. I also informed the agent that under no circumstances do I want my Samsung Nexus returned to me until this issue had be resolved, as I did not want to pay the extortionate amount of £19.99 for 'Admin fees', the gentleman said that this wouldn't be a problem and that the phone would not be returned.

Over 48 hours pass and no return calls. I call back the customer service number (2nd April), give me reference number only to be told that the previous gentleman was incorrect and that the call back from 'higher management' could actually take up to 10 working days. Clearly the customer service team at Three doesn't know whether it should be 48 hours or 10 working days, and quite frankly doesn't seem to care either way.

I wait 10 working days from the call on the 2nd of April, giving the customer service team an additional 48 Hours, as I didn't count the 10 working days from the 30th March. You would think by this time somebody; who sole job is to assist the customer, would have been able to assist me. But of course, you would have thought wrong.

So I call the customer service number again (13th April), once again I speak to a gentleman who says that my case has been referred to upper management, I tell him that I am well aware of this fact and that I called originally two weeks ago. He informs me that it should not take this long, and he will flag my case on the system and I will and I quote "definitely get a call back within 48 hours". 48 Hours pass, and guess what... I get a call back (15th April). Finally after waiting so long I have a call back, I get one. But much to my dismay it's one of the customer service asking me if I'd like my phone returned. It seems Three's customer service team is so stupid, so incompetent, that the gentleman calling didn't even check my records to see the issue. I told him in no uncertain terms, that no I did not want the phone back, as the case was still being disputed, and that I was waiting for a call back from the 'higher management' team, which at this point I don't even believe exist.

Come the 16th of April, I still had no call back, so in one last attempt to sort this issue, I call customer services. And once again I get promises of a call back in 48 hours, and that the agent would forward the issue to his manager via email. And to top it all off, I get a call from my local Three store to inform me, that my phone has been returned and is available for collection. After telling the Three staff rep not to send the phone back, what happens? They prove without a doubt that they are incompetent, moronic and absolutely incapable of doing their job by sending the phone back. Some weeks later I eventually get a call back saying from the mysterious 'High Management' only to be told, that they don't deal with any complaints relating to phone repairs, but he would refund me a months line rental - big ****in woop!


Also on the 16th after sick of being messed around, I made a call to the repair centre and asked for proof of the water damage, after much fumbling I was told this would be sent out to me, but in true Three style didn't receive that either.

Sick of dealing with idiots over the phone, I decided to send a letter to Three in Glasgow explaining this whole mess. I sent one letter just before heading across to the states for a month, thinking by the time I get back I might receive a reply... do I even need to tell you the outcome?

There was no outcome, so I had enough and decided to pay my local Three store a visit (they wanted their crappy replacement phone back), I explaining to the store manager the problem. He got my phone out the back and had a look at it, and he couldn't see anything wrong with it. He even told me "It doesn't look like water damage to me".

I explained to him that I knew my rights and that under the Sales Of Goods act, that Three had to provide proof that the phone wasn't defect when they sold it to me (and that I had cause the damage). He immediately starting taking me a lot more seriously and said that he'd sort the issue for me and it would be sent into repair again.

With the repair consignment he added a note which said "please record photograph if handset is deemed as OOW so we can prove to customer evidence of liquid damage".

On the Three website you can track the repair process, and it seems the phone has been repaired and will be sent back to me tomorrow. Also on the repair tracking website, you can also view images of your phone if they deem it to be OOW (out of warranty). Guess what... they are no pictures and the phone has been repaired.

This leads me to believe that they couldn't find any water damage, because there never was any! Now what I want to know is do I have case for either A) Getting them to refund all of the months I was without the phone. Or Getting out of my contract and keeping my phone?


Sorry this has been so long winded, but I think people need to know how awful Three's customer service is!

jameslhart

Bump! Bump! Bump! Bump! Bump!

Moneybox

Thanks for bumping! Also any other readers search three court action. There must be a lot of three users who do not challenge or want the hassle but they need to be challenged. All minor complaints but together they all add up to paint a pretty dull picture for customer service.

I forgot to add on my thread. They actually wanted me to extend my contract to have the phone repaired!, you can imagine what I said. Three will lose my custom as soon as the contract ends and I will be taking a lot of family and friends with me. Also will be sending internal email at work to approx 2000 employees advising to avoid three.

Watchdog?

Others may remember In future to look after customers.

jameslhart

I was thinking about Watchdog!

What phone did you have BTW?

For anybody with the same problem, I'd give this advice:

Main thing is to ask for photo evidence of the water damage. They will tell you that they do not take photos of Water Damage phones. Quote the Sales of Goods act to them, and tell them that they have to provide proof that the phone wasn't faulty to begin with. They should comply and send the phone away again, at this point the phone will be fixed for free of charge because they will actually take it apart and realise the phone was faulty to begin with. You will get the phone repaired free of charge and sent back.

If they refuse to send it away again, tell them that you will contact the communications ombudsman and if need be take them to a small claims court.

gjchester

There are effectivly two contrcts with a mobile, one for supply of hardware, the other for supply of airtime.

The hardware side says you have a right to a working phone and any repairs should be made under warranty subject to any damage not being user caused (be that water damage, dropping it and so forth).

The Airtime is a different contract, you had / have the ability to use the airtime independant of the handset, and you said you had a loan one, so it would be hard to say they owe anything for any loss of airtime when you had used it (or at least part of it).

So do you have a case for a refund of line rental or cancellation of the contract due to a handset fault (regardless of cause ot time to repair), unfortuantly not. You may get somethign as a goodwill gesture, but you did have the ability to use the contract in another handset.

Sale of goods is most relevent but Three have tried to make repairs, albeit not very well, Sale of goods is more relevent if the retailer refuses to repair it.

Given they claim it's user damaged your only real recourse is to get the phone back and pay for an independant assesment, if the assesment agrees with you it's not water damage you could sue for the cost of a new handset, and the cost of the technical report.

To be honest all networks have bad customer service, last month Vodafone could do not right, now it's switched to three, they are all as bad as each other.

The Ombudsmen will probbaly reject any complaints until you have been through the networks complaint porocess and reached a deadlock, until they they will point you back to the network.

jameslhart

gjchester wrote: »

There are effectivly two contrcts with a mobile, one for supply of hardware, the other for supply of airtime.

The hardware side says you have a right to a working phone and any repairs should be made under warranty subject to any damage not being user caused (be that water damage, dropping it and so forth).

Ok, completely understand the airtime bit, that makes sense. But surely I signed the contract for that specific phone (Samsung Nexus) and the phone I have been using for the past 3/4 months has been a crap £30 phone. And if the the repair centre had done their job correctly in the first place, I wouldn't of been waiting months for a repair.

Do I not have a case on the basis of the phone, not being the one I took out the contract for? Cause if I don't have a case, wouldn't that infer that I could sign a contract with Three, and they could give me a Nokia 3210 if they wished.

visidigi

jameslhart wrote: »

Ok, completely understand the airtime bit, that makes sense. But surely I signed the contract for that specific phone (Samsung Nexus) and the phone I have been using for the past 3/4 months has been a crap £30 phone. And if the the repair centre had done their job correctly in the first place, I wouldn't of been waiting months for a repair.

Do I not have a case on the basis of the phone, not being the one I took out the contract for? Cause if I don't have a case, wouldn't that infer that I could sign a contract with Three, and they could give me a Nokia 3210 if they wished.

Does your contract stop working if you use a different phone? No, therefore the contract applies to whatever phone you choose to use.

Now, your issue with the handset is down to either warranty from the manufacturer, or user damage. There are water sensors inside the casing, usually behind the battery too, and sometimes in the headphone port.

If these are activated this can lead to handset repairs being declined. Water damage doesn't need to be dunked in water, it could be condensation, rain water etc etc.

There's very little chance of you being successful here.

gjchester

jameslhart wrote: »

Ok, completely understand the airtime bit, that makes sense. But surely I signed the contract for that specific phone (Samsung Nexus) and the phone I have been using for the past 3/4 months has been a crap £30 phone. And if the the repair centre had done their job correctly in the first place, I wouldn't of been waiting months for a repair.

Do I not have a case on the basis of the phone, not being the one I took out the contract for? Cause if I don't have a case, wouldn't that infer that I could sign a contract with Three, and they could give me a Nokia 3210 if they wished.

Unlikely, the airtime service was available to you, and you could have used it, think of it like allowances, I get 250 mins a month but I rarely use 50, I can't get a refund on unused allowance.

I appreciate the issue has been the phone not working but you could have borrowed a friends or bought another, you can ask for a goodwill refund but thats all it woule be a good will gesture.

Good Luck

jameslhart

visidigi wrote: »

Now, your issue with the handset is down to either warranty from the manufacturer, or user damage. There are water sensors inside the casing, usually behind the battery too, and sometimes in the headphone port.

If these are activated this can lead to handset repairs being declined. Water damage doesn't need to be dunked in water, it could be condensation, rain water etc etc.

There's very little chance of you being successful here.

I get those points, it's the same bull**** the Three idiots told me. Now I'm sorry but if I phone breaks from condensation, or from going from a hot room to a cold room (like another Three moron suggested), then the phone is of poor build quality.

If I can take the £30 piece of crap brick phone, over to Miami, FL and go from cool air conditioned room outside into 35 Degree heat (90 Humidity) constantly with no problems, then I should be able to use a £400 phone in the UK with no problems. And the phone was never used in rain, left anywhere that would cause condensation, etc, etc.

And finally, I'm not sure why you're saying I have little chance of being successful. I've had the phone fixed for free because they actually properly inspected this time and found that the problem wasn't water damage. I'd say that's a success, sure the bull**** in between wasn't great, but I fought Three and I've won. And I'm going to try get some compensation for the incompetency of their repair team the first time around. Because if they had investigated the phone properly the would of found there wasn't any water damage in the first place.

gjchester:

I understand what you're saying, but surely I got the contract for that specific phone. Otherwise I would of got a SIM Only contract and probably paid about £10-15 a month. Instead of the £35 I'm paying now. I pay the extra amount of money on the contract for the phone, not for the airtime.

Cheers for your help anyway.

gjchester

jameslhart wrote: »

gjchester:

I understand what you're saying, but surely I got the contract for that specific phone. Otherwise I would of got a SIM Only contract and probably paid about £10-15 a month. Instead of the £35 I'm paying now. I pay the extra amount of money on the contract for the phone, not for the airtime.

Cheers for your help anyway.

I do understand what you mean, but the networks have already got it covered.

Specific phones are not tied to services, if they did you chould cancel a contract if the phone was stolen.

In the real world the effect is as you say, you pay more for a phone with a contract than SIM only as the contract subsidises the phone, but contractually you are paying for the airtime not the phone, and thats where the key lies.

The only time there is a link is at singing where the aitrime contract provides the subsidy to pay for the handset, after that they are seperate.

jameslhart

gjchester wrote: »

I do understand what you mean, but the networks have already got it covered.

Specific phones are not tied to services, if they did you chould cancel a contract if the phone was stolen.

In the real world the effect is as you say, you pay more for a phone with a contract than SIM only as the contract subsidises the phone, but contractually you are paying for the airtime not the phone, and thats where the key lies.

The only time there is a link is at singing where the aitrime contract provides the subsidy to pay for the handset, after that they are seperate.

Ah I see! Thanks for the help understanding that!