"New" phone from O2

shaun_from_Africa

The point is most shops skilfully return the product to a brand new condition. This means you have no idea that someone else has already had it.

Quite possibly, but that still doesn't make it right or legal.
I paid £180 for what was expected to be a new phone.
What I was given was a phone that someone else had already used and then returned to the shop.
As I stated earlier, someone in the shop had made an effort to make the packaging look as it it hadn't been opened and had come directly from the manufacturers.
In my eyes, that is a fraudulent action as they were attempting to deceive.

If you buy a pair of jeans, try them on and then return them, they have been used.

But if I had bought a pair of jeans, taken them home then worn them for a week before returning them, would you still be happy buying them for exactly the same price as a pair of jeans that had never been worn outside of the shop?

How about if the previous "owner" had used the phone in a damp area then a couple of months after I bought it, it failed.
I could have returned it under the warranty and had the claim denied as the internal water detector patches showed that the there had been water ingress. (this is a fairly common reason for warranties being denied)

System

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

Quite possibly, but that still doesn't make it right or legal.
I paid £180 for what was expected to be a new phone.
What I was given was a phone that someone else had already used and then returned to the shop.
As I stated earlier, someone in the shop had made an effort to make the packaging look as it it hadn't been opened and had come directly from the manufacturers.
In my eyes, that is a fraudulent action as they were attempting to deceive.



But if I had bought a pair of jeans, taken them home then worn them for a week before returning them, would you still be happy buying them for exactly the same price as a pair of jeans that had never been worn outside of the shop?

How about if the previous "owner" had used the phone in a damp area then a couple of months after I bought it, it failed.
I could have returned it under the warranty and had the claim denied as the internal water detector patches showed that the there had been water ingress. (this is a fairly common reason for warranties being denied)

I can't be bothered anymore as you keep on missing the point. I wouldn't know the jeans had been worn for a week as they would have been refurbed into a new condition. If the O2 shop had done their job properly and cleared down the phone. Plus put the screen guard on properly you wouldn't know someone else had previously bought the phone.

A proper refurb would check for things like water damage.

I've argued with you before and realise you are difficult. Therefore I'm just going to bed now!

shaun_from_Africa

I can't be bothered anymore as you keep on missing the point

Have you considered that I'm not missing the point, simply that I don't agree with the point?

A proper refurb would check for things like water damage.

That make my point.
This phone hadn't been taken apart to check for water ingress so there is no way that O2 could have known what the previous owner did to the phone. (It was an HTC One V, which doesn't have a removable battery cover or removable back).

I've argued with you before and realise you are difficult

By difficult, I assume you mean that I'm not someone who simply bows down to your opinion but have an opinion of my own instead.

George_Michael

The same with an O2 phone. If a phone gets returned straight away then its still classed as a new phone. It will be restored to factory settings, the screen protector will be put on and it will be placed in a box to be resold

You may well class it as new despite the fact that someone else may have been using it for a week, but I know that I wouldn't, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that there are many other people who think that new means unused.

If the O2 shop had done their job properly and cleared down the phone. Plus put the screen guard on properly you wouldn't know someone else had previously bought the phone.

So are you really saying that provided that there is no visible proof that the phone had been sold, used for a week, then returned, you honestly don't see any problem with it being sold as new?
Where would you say the cut-off line should be before it should no longer be sold as new?
Someone using it for 1 week, how about 1 month?

IMO, new means unused apart from possibly being looked at or tried out in a shop or in the case of the jeans, being tried on for size in the shop or at home.

zaksmum

I wouldn't be one bit happy to buy a phone as new then discover it'd been used.

System

George_Michael wrote: »

You may well class it as new despite the fact that someone else may have been using it for a week, but I know that I wouldn't, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that there are many other people who think that new means unused.



So are you really saying that provided that there is no visible proof that the phone had been sold, used for a week, then returned, you honestly don't see any problem with it being sold as new?
Where would you say the cut-off line should be before it should no longer be sold as new?
Someone using it for 1 week, how about 1 month?

IMO, new means unused apart from possibly being looked at or tried out in a shop or in the case of the jeans, being tried on for size in the shop or at home.

Whats the real difference between a product being used for a week and being sat in a box for a week? As long as the phone is in a "new" condition and there are no signs of use or wear then I don't see what the problem is.

With DSR rules being so much in the consumer's favour it is unfair to retailers to say they they have to sell any returned product as 2nd hand.

System

zaksmum wrote: »

I wouldn't be one bit happy to buy a phone as new then discover it'd been used.

I agree 100%. The point is you are not meant to discover it has previously been bought and returned by a customer.

Most people would be rightly annoyed if this happened to them. The fact of the matter is that this probably has happened to you, you just don't realise it!

vyle

I can see both sides to the argument really. I've been in positions at work where somebody has bought an Ipad, opened it, then decided "aww, yknow, I do prefer the black one." and bam, I have to give them a refund and knock the ipad down by 10% because it's been "used" in that the cellophane has come off.

That's up to £69 we've lost right there. Sadly the sticker can only say "used," it can't say, "incecisive !!!!!."

I've seen some people open up brand new stock without buying it, trying it out and whatnot, and they get arsey when we ask them not to, because people who are genuine buyers will think we're trying to palm off used items.

These peopel sometimes then refuse to buy the one they opened because it's not new any more, but they will hapilly take a sealed one. That's why we have display units. I kinda wish we could fine them for every penny we lose on the stock they ruin, because our profit from the sale won't cover it.

So I can see why some shops will smooth over the creases to make something that's only been touched look new again, because it isn't fair that the shops should lose huge amounts of money because of indecisive idiots, and those losses are only going to be covered by increased prices to all of us.

But at the same time, I wouldn't initially want to buy something that's been used when I'm expecting something completely brand new... but you never know how used it would be. If it's just been looked at, I'd be fine with it. If they've had it for a week, no chance.

mazza111

I totally understand where you're coming from Shaun and totally agree with you 100%. Shops cannot sell something as new that's been used by someone else. They could sell it as refurbished, but not as new. I would have been peed off too.

And agree with you about the HTC One V. It's rather a weird design. I was rather baffled when I opened mine and tried to remove the battery cover :rotfl:

I think there's a difference between someone opening an item and deciding they don't like the colour, than someone using the product and then it being sold as new.