Belligerent T-Mobile / Everything Everywhere

High_Lander

gjchester wrote: »

Had you hit 24 months on the LG Black contract?

No where near, still had 9 months to run - otherwise I'd have just closed the account and walked away without all this hassle.

I don't see how it's the duty of the customer to do all the legwork just because the provider is being a complete !!!. I tried to sort it out with them and they informed me that I was "not allowed" to dispute their handling of my account. Any corporation that does that doesn't give a damn about their customers, and I felt I had no other option other than to exercise me right to withhold payment for a service I wasn't getting.

19lottie82

High_Lander wrote: »

Hey, wow - thanks for all the support sweet heart!

What support do you want? Do you want me to lie and tell you that you're in the right and you did the right thing?

I'm telling the truth, sorry if you don't like it.

You should have handled the situation differently, but you didn't and I'm in no doubt that it will come back to bite you further down the line.

Silk

High_Lander wrote: »

and I felt I had no other option other than to exercise me right to withhold payment for a service I wasn't getting.

Thats part of the problem, you obviously have a "choice" to withold payment but not a "right" which is why you are being chased for it.
As already said no network guarantee's service 100% of the time and assume that the phone was out of warranty if you were 15 months into a 24 month contract or did it have a 2 year guarantee ???

High_Lander

24 month contract and a 24 month warranty which they refused to honour. The conditions of a contract work both ways, they were in breach of contract not me. So yes, I do have the right to withhold payment.

19lottie82

High_Lander wrote: »

24 month contract and a 24 month warranty which they refused to honour. The conditions of a contract work both ways, they were in breach of contract not me. So yes, I do have the right to withhold payment.

No you don't, it doesn't work like that.
Hence why you are getting chased by a debt collection agency.

grumbler

High_Lander wrote: »

24 month contract and a 24 month warranty which they refused to honour.

24 month warranty is with the manufacturer, not the supplier. The supplier does have some obligations under the SOGA, but this has nothing to do with the warranty.

The conditions of a contract work both ways, they were in breach of contract not me.

Does it say anything about the handset and the warranty?

oopsadaisydoddle

Wouldn't OP have needed to provide an independent report to show BOTH the handset was not rooted AND that it was an inherent fault before expecting T-Mob to repair/replace/refund? And if they couldn't, then shouldn't LG deal with it if it is still under warranty?

gjchester

High_Lander wrote: »

I don't see how it's the duty of the customer to do all the legwork just because the provider is being a complete !!!. I tried to sort it out with them and they informed me that I was "not allowed" to dispute their handling of my account.

I understand that but many, many people do try it on, it's not about companies "giving a damn" its because they believed the warranty had been invalidated by rooting. You could have send it to someone independent to check or LG themselves (not sure if T-Mobile had done that already) when the warranty validity was questioned, but if I read you post correctly you didn't chase it up.

I can't explain why you were not allowed to dispute it, if the phone was faulty and not rooted you were in the right, but that may have been something lost in translation to the call centre.

If you had 9 months left then you own 9 months under the contract, it may be worth trying to understand what the £81 covers, I doubt the contract was £9 a month so where has the figure come from?

High_Lander wrote: »

The conditions of a contract work both ways, they were in breach of contract not me. So yes, I do have the right to withhold payment.

Sorry unfortunatly I don't think that's true in this case.

Your monthly charge is for airtime service, they provided that, the issue was the phone hardware. As they were providing the ability for you to service (regardless that your handset could receive it, you could have used another phone) then the monthly airtime cost was still payable. You breeched the contract by not paying not the company.

You DO have a possible breech of contract on the phone hardware but that does not entitle you to stop paying for airtime, I say possible as you'd need to show the handset had not been rooted, and hence establish that the warranty claim was valid, but as it's no longer in your possession so will be hard to prove.

I'm sorry this is not likely to be what you want to hear, but telling you what you want to hear won't make it right.

gjchester

oopsadaisydoddle wrote: »

Wouldn't OP have needed to provide an independent report to show BOTH the handset was not rooted AND that it was an inherent fault before expecting T-Mob to repair/replace/refund? And if they couldn't, then shouldn't LG deal with it if it is still under warranty?

I don't think the fault was in doubt just the fact it was rooted, it sounds like it was rejected regardless for possibly being rooted not because of the fault. However as the OP said

I really couldn't be bothered, so I just put up with the crap phone on the crap network

High_Lander

Things like this make me want to go and live in a tree.

I've contacted Everything Everywhere to try to find some kind of resolution.