Do not buy a second hand phone-ever

z.n

I just want to advise anyone who is thinking of buying a second hand phone-don't risk it. I purchased a pristine iphone 4 in May 2011 from Cash Converters online (thinking I could rely on their warranty and promise 'we only sell items that belong to us' phones checked with Checkmend etc). It was with 3 so I simply stuck a payg sim with 3 into the phone and off I went. Phone worked fine, I thought I had been very clever and saved some pennies.

In August 2012 the phone was not connecting and after the usual round of 'who has been messing about with my phone? ' eventually I established that it had been blocked by 3 and could only be unblocked by the original purchaser.

Cash Converters originally offered a replacement but could not say if or indeed when a suitable one would turn up so offered me the option of a full refund which I accepted. I returned the blocked phone to them, bought myself a new one and awaited the refund-which you will have realised by now never came. Essentially, once they received the phone and saw it was indeed blocked and found 3 would not unblock it CC decided they could not refund in full- only 50%. A cross phone call later and one grumpy email and now they simply ignore me. I felt and still feel that a 50% reduction was too much, especially as I relied on the agreement for a full refund in making the decision to purchase my new phone.

It is impossible to identify under what rules etc 3 have the right to block the phone. They will not identify the person who requested or authorised the block. The phone is not reported lost or stolen (police not interested).3 are adamant there has been no error in the IMEI number affected. Trading Standards and OFCOM give contradictory advice-who do I pursue- Cash Converters, 3- what do I get-whatever small sum I can or a full refund? Do I even own the phone-who knows? I feel completely ripped off but have no idea who to blame (except my own stupidity of course.)

If this can happen after 15 months of successful ownership then it really can happen anytime to anyone. I am currently pursuing further information through Checkmend to find out what has happened but it looks increasingly unlikely I will get my money back without a court action- but even then, who should I sue?

grumbler

IMO it's pretty obvious that you should have pursued Cash Converters. Small Claims Court (online) springs to mind and Cash Converters have no leg to stand on providing that you have proofs.

jenniewb

I'd say that not ever second hand phone is a bad one, yes there is the risk of experiencing what you have but not all second hand mobiles result in the mobile being blocked.

I don't know what you could do in this situation and am sure others would have more then my rather basic and unexperienced suggestions of contacting Trading Standards to report Cash Converters and Consumer Rights for advice.
I'd then try to get the money back by asking nicely whilst informing Cash-Converters you are more then willing to take them to court to get the money back and/or a replacement handet. Make sure you go as high as possible within the company, I'd imagine they'd have more power to do something and also more concern for what happens to their company.
Keep dates, names, times and numbers when doing any of the above as they can be useful in any law proceedings.

JethroUK

If your dates are correct you've been using the phone for 15 months ish - you mght not think so but you simply dont get to 'borrow' an iphone for 15 months for free

The courts will value this time even if you dont, and they will consider it (put a £ value on it) when working out your £ damages

+you also have a responsibility to mitigate some of that loss by checking the phone does all you need inside a year - you are basically asking CC to take 100% responsibility for 'both' of you not noticing it was locked - simply aint gonna happen

I expect CC have already done the maths and found you 50/50 liable/responsible and thats without charging you 'rent' for 15 months - so I think you've got as much as you are going to get

grumbler

JethroUK wrote: »

...
+you also have a responsibility to mitigate some of that loss by checking the phone does all you need inside a year - you are basically asking CC to take 100% responsibility for 'both' of you not noticing it was locked

It was blocked by '3', not locked, and it has been blocked in Aug 2013, not for many months.
A phone gets blocked when the owner reports it lost or stolen. If CC resell second hand phones they have to make sure that this won't happen or face the consequences of failing to do this.

Buzby

A sweeping title - just because we're disappointed does not ean all s/h handsets would suffer a similar fate. 3 have the right to block on request of the original owner. You could gave provided them with a bill of sale to confirm you were the legitimate purchaser. CC promised to refund, then did not. Pursue them using MoneyClaim online, for any balance owed.

There is no issue of you having the phone for 15 months first, they offered and you accepted - then they reneged.

Make them pay for it.

migstrike

This usually happens (blocking that is) when someone has had the phone on contract and then simply sell the phone within the contract period and then default on contract payments. The network operator who provided the phone will block the IMEI of the handset making it useless to use on any network in the UK. I've known people who this has happened to. They've bought second hand mobiles off the internet that have worked fine for several months, then boom! They stop.

Rusty!

Complete crap, not paying your contract will not get your phone blocked.

Only reporting a phone lost or stolen will do that. What scammers do is sell the phone, wait a while then report it as one of the above, and collect on their insurance.

robbies_gal

like above could be a scam that they wait then report it not really cc's fault but they should refund as they sold it

Kernel_Sanders

JethroUK wrote: »

If your dates are correct you've been using the phone for 15 months ish - you mght not think so but you simply dont get to 'borrow' an iphone for 15 months for free

The courts will value this time even if you dont, and they will consider it (put a £ value on it) when working out your £ damages

+you also have a responsibility to mitigate some of that loss by checking the phone does all you need inside a year - you are basically asking CC to take 100% responsibility for 'both' of you not noticing it was locked - simply aint gonna happen

I expect CC have already done the maths and found you 50/50 liable/responsible and thats without charging you 'rent' for 15 months - so I think you've got as much as you are going to get

What's this nonsense about 'rent'? The OP didn't buy a contract, he bought a handset. One that he was free to sell on, or use for several more years. CC are the retailer; the responsibility is theirs, and they owe the OP a refund. No doubt they will deduct a substantial sum for depreciation, but any decent retailer would waive that.
I've been considering a 11.6" netbook in my local CC (which I have never set foot in) but now I've ruled out buying from such a disreputable retailer. (Thanks OP.)

migstrike

Rusty! wrote: »

Complete crap, not paying your contract will not get your phone blocked.

Only reporting a phone lost or stolen will do that. What scammers do is sell the phone, wait a while then report it as one of the above, and collect on their insurance.

well the 3 network have done just that to my friends iphone that he had for 12 months, not reported stolen, he just couldn't pay the bill. Now the amount due has been passed to a collection agency and the handset imei is disabled, no other sim works at all in the phone. He's spoken to 3 and they've told him that they have blocked the phone and won't release it until the remainder of the 24month contract has been paid in full. It's common practice for T mobile etc to do this in other countries also, I wish this place would let me post a link as there are a host of forums quoting the same problem, I must point out that this was a new contract and not an upgrade, not sure whether that makes a difference or not.