Taking BT to court for its faulty phone....

Consumer1970

My BT phone has begun to malfunction and has not lasted for a reasonable time period under the Supply of Goods & Services Act (1982) and related legislation. BT Customer Services have simply dismissed my complaint saying that as the phone was older than 1 year and "out of warranty" there is nothing that BT is obliged to do. BT also categorically refuse to investigate the fault on the phone to attribute what the cause of the fault is which is again completely contrary to the legal responsibilites of a law abiding trader.

The law actually says that products should last for a reasonable time period and that a product guarantee will not affect your statutory rights as a consumer. So it seems that I have no choice other than to take BT to the Small Claims Court over this faulty phone. The company already has a very poor reputation with the consumer protection bodies for its appalling level of customer services. I wasted three hours of my time with BT Customer Services on this issue which is also clearly not "fit for purpose".

Subsequently, I emailed Ian Livingston - BT Chief Executive with my email also copied to Gavin Patterson - BT Chief Executive of Retail and Warren Buckley - BT Director of Retail Customer Services on 9 September 2012 who have the full particulars of my complaint. It is noted that I have received no acknowledgment whatsoever to this e-mail. I am about to issue civil legal proceedings against BT in the Small Claims Court for its failure to take its legal responsibilities towards consumers seriously under the Supply of Goods & Services Act (1982) and related legislation. My concerns regarding BT have already been forwarded to BBC's "Wathdog" and a letter of complaint is being prepared for the Chief Executive of the Office of Fair Trading in complaint of BT Unfair Business Practices and its appalling customer services.

Thankfully, my expensive Gold Package contract with BT for Phone Calls, Broadband and Vision recently came to an end and its clearly time to take my custom elsewhere rather than put up with the nonsense that BT expects its customers to put up with.

What view should the public take of BT when even its senior management staff cannot be bothered to deal with customer complaints? After all, the final buck clearly rests with BT Senior Management.

Buzby

You must be joking right? Absolutely no way!!!

They've dealt with it. They've told you you are out of warranty, so any SOGA claim is irrelevant, this was also explained in the duplicate thread you started a couple of days ago.

Perhaps purchasing a better quality product is the best way to go.

societys_child

What kind of phone?
How much did it cost?
How much use has it had?
What environment has it been used in?
What's the fault?

>>> so many questions . .

Consumer1970

You must be joking right? Absolutely no way!!!

I am afraid you simply misunderstand the SOGA which states that goods must last for a reasonable period. A warranty period does not determine the length of time a product should last. It simply provides additional protection under the law. Have a look at the OFT, Trading Standards and Citizens Advice Bureaux websites for further information.

Buzby wrote: »

They've dealt with it. They've told you you are out of warranty, so any SOGA claim is irrelevant, this was also explained in the duplicate thread you started a couple of days ago.

Perhaps purchasing a better quality product is the best way to go.

societys_child

But a reasonable period can depend on initial cost, how and where the product is used etc etc.

Should a £4.99 kettle, used in a busy staff canteen be expected to even see out a 12 month warranty?

You've totally ignored the questions I asked.

Buzby

You must be joking right? Absolutely no way!!!

As a newbie, perhaps you should note that we're pretty hot on what our rights actually are. Why ask for an opinion, then dismiss it because it does not agree with your misconception?

SOGA does not mean what you believe it to be - and as Society's Child notes above, a crap product remains one irrespective of SOGA. Perhaps you should beat yourself up over such a bad product choice? I have yet to find a majority who feel BT's branded items are anything other than low-range budget offerings, trading only on the brand name for recognition and sales.

Chalk it up to experience, then buy a decent product with a little more money. I'm still using a 10 year old Panasonic - sure, it cost twice the price of a BT unit but you do get what yo pay for.

Consumer1970

You must be joking right? Absolutely no way!!!

Thanks Buzby. Did I mention that I do come from the consumer protection bodies and also have the benefit of a legal background? You have a personal right to consider that BT treats its consumers fairly. I simply do not agree with that view having now had over 6 years experience with BT.

Which? actually publishes guidance as to how long popular household goods should last. And what makes you so sure that I had purchased a "cheap phone" from BT? BT is saying that it will do nothing about any of its phones regardless of price after the 1 year guarantee period has expired so this is fundamentally wrong and not compliant with the law. If consumers typically enter into 2 year contracts over "pay-monthly" mobile phones, then how long can a consumer expect a home telephone to last?

Buzby wrote: »

As a newbie, perhaps you should note that we're pretty hot on what our rights actually are. Why ask for an opinion, then dismiss it because it does not agree with your misconception?

SOGA does not mean what you believe it to be - and as Society's Child notes above, a crap product remains one irrespective of SOGA. Perhaps you should beat yourself up over such a bad product choice? I have yet to find a majority who feel BT's branded items are anything other than low-range budget offerings, trading only on the brand name for recognition and sales.

Chalk it up to experience, then buy a decent product with a little more money. I'm still using a 10 year old Panasonic - sure, it cost twice the price of a BT unit but you do get what yo pay for.

societys_child

Did I mention that I do come from the consumer protection bodies and also have the benefit of a legal background?

Confused, what's the point of starting multiple rants, you know the answers, shouldn't you just get on with issuing your claim?

Consumer1970

You must be joking right? Absolutely no way!!!

One simply wishes to get the views of other consumers on such matters: BT fans and non-BT fans alike. I take it that so far I have only heard from BT fans.

societys_child wrote: »

Confused, what's the point of starting multiple rants, you know the answers, shouldn't you just get on with issuing your claim?

societys_child

I'm no BT fan, I have no thoughts either way.

I'd have thought with your "legal background" you'd have just got on with it.

You've told us nothing about your problem so it's not possible to offer any help, seems like you don't need it anyway as you have all the answers.

Buzby

You must be joking right? Absolutely no way!!!

Consumer1970 wrote: »

Thanks Buzby. Did I mention that I do come from the consumer protection bodies and also have the benefit of a legal background? You have a personal right to consider that BT treats its consumers fairly. I simply do not agree with that view having now had over 6 years experience with BT.

Which? actually publishes guidance as to how long popular household goods should last. And what makes you so sure that I had purchased a "cheap phone" from BT? BT is saying that it will do nothing about any of its phones regardless of price after the 1 year guarantee period has expired so this is fundamentally wrong and not compliant with the law. If consumers typically enter into 2 year contracts over "pay-monthly" mobile phones, then how long can a consumer expect a home telephone to last?

Some observations: I come from a 'legal background' too - so why are our viewpoints at variance? Consumer Protection 'bodies' are well-meaning, but if I had £1 for every carp piece of advice I recieved from Citizen's Advice, I would be extremely rich.

Your misunderstanding continues - perhaps on purpose? BT's position is correct as far as it goes, they do not make any distinction between their products. IMHO, they've all been carp since the Wren answering machine, and have been made by second tier manufacturers (who will, if you buy enough from them, will stick a logo on them and provide any firm with a 'product range'). My point was that is you bought a decent and respected brand, it would outlast anything that a BT brand would do, and not leave you in the situation you find yourself in.

For example, Panasonic take so much priude in their kit, if something goes wrong they'll do their utmost to resolve the issue even if it was not their problem. (in my case, a power surge took out the power supply of my cordless - they replaced it at no cost). You DO get what you deserve.

Your last paragraph makes on sense - contract telephone can stop working at the end of the second week due to abuse, and the contract is unaffected - because the contract is for the SIM only, NOT the handset, or have you overlooked this?

Finally, I've had 40 years experience with BT and their predecessors (Post Office Telephones and the GPO), When BT switched to a retail model rather than rental, equipment became disposable - it hasn't changed.