EE tell me they can't unlock my old iPhone 3GS

custardy

smiledotcom wrote: »

I didn't have that knowledge when I started the contract.

That's almost certainly why my iPhone was unlocked by EE without charge.

Personally, I wouldn't enter into a contract with a company who, essentially, "fines" me for leaving it - after I've given them over a thousand pounds in business!

when I give comapnies business on that scale I want good customer service in return. Extorting money out of me does not meet my standards of good customer care and that's why I took my business elsewhere.

It took me a couple of months to get there, but I got there in the end.

Like you, Custardy, I wouldn't buy a contract that tied me into unlocking "fines"

Well you would need to key in the cost at the front end.
There's a reason you didnt buy your iphone sim free.

Anoneemoose

smiledotcom wrote: »

I didn't have that knowledge when I started the contract.

That's almost certainly why my iPhone was unlocked by EE without charge.

Personally, I wouldn't enter into a contract with a company who, essentially, "fines" me for leaving it - after I've given them over a thousand pounds in business!

when I give comapnies business on that scale I want good customer service in return. Extorting money out of me does not meet my standards of good customer care and that's why I took my business elsewhere.

It took me a couple of months to get there, but I got there in the end.

Like you, Custardy, I wouldn't buy a contract that tied me into unlocking "fines"

You did enter into a contract with such a company though. As per your terms and conditions found here: http://ee.co.uk/content/dam/ee-help/Help-PDFs/EE_PAYM_TERMS_2014.pdf

And you could have had that knowledge if you bothered to check what you were signing up for. Another case of not reading t&c's and then complaining about them afterwards.

I am glad you got it sorted though.

AJXX

smiledotcom wrote: »

I didn't have that knowledge when I started the contract.

That's almost certainly why my iPhone was unlocked by EE without charge.

when I give comapnies business on that scale I want good customer service in return. Extorting money out of me does not meet my standards of good customer care and that's why I took my business elsewhere.

It took me a couple of months to get there, but I got there in the end.

I wouldn't buy a contract that tied me into unlocking "fines"

This is the biggest pointless winge I've ever read!

Just pay them the £20 quid and you could have had it unlocked months ago. If you don't want a phone to be locked then buy it directly from the manufacturer and pay higher costs! There is a reason iPhones are 'cheap' when purchased on contract from the networks.

Don't say that you 'didn't have that knowledge' and moan 'does not meet my standards of good customer care', just because you aren't getting your own way.

Everybody these days knows if you buy a mobile directly from the network then it's locked to them. If you don't know that it's your own fault for not researching it fully before committing to buy.

The ONLY reason they've unlocked it without charge is because it's pointless to draw out something so trivial, it's easier for them to unlock it rather than have them spend x amount of wages on their agents arguing with you about their policies. YOU AREN'T RIGHT. If EE had any backbone they'd refuse to waive the fee and still demand you pay it, but they've let it drop - THAT is good customer service, that YOU don't deserve.

I wouldn't buy a contract that tied me into unlocking "fines"

You already did!

jumbojimbo

AJXX wrote: »

If EE had any backbone they'd refuse to waive the fee and still demand you pay it, but they've let it drop - THAT is good customer service, that YOU don't deserve.

EE and good customer service- there are two things that don't belong together in the same sentence! I'm at a loss as to why people keep on defending companies like EE and their anti-competitive business practices. "you signed a contract; it's tough if you don't like their terms", "they haven't got to unlock your phone", "the reason your phone is cheap is because the network subsidies the cost", blah blah blah blah. Sod defending EE's 'rights'

So many of replies offering advice would be more useful had the person simply not written them in the first place. At the very least it's better to say nothing than to simply state an untruth as fact, no matter how well intentioned your advice.

This is a consumer forum meant to help you. It's about time people started defending your rights; more specifically your statutory rights that EE attempt to deny/limit; or the unfair terms they attempt to impose on you.

Well it would be hypocritical of me were I to ignore the above; with that in mind I present the following:

EE's current PAYM T&C’s (Version 02 dated March 2014) specifically state: [certain terms I've highlighted in bold]

3.13 You may get Equipment from Us when you take out a Price Plan. Unless We tell you otherwise, We will own any Equipment provided by Us for the first six months of the Minimum Term. During this time,You: 3.13.1 Cannot sell or otherwise permanently give the Equipment to anyone else.
3.13.2 Must take all reasonable care of the Equipment and keep it in reasonable condition (subject to usual wear and tear) as if You owned it; and
3.13.3 Cannot change or alter the Equipment, other than standard software updates and app purchases.
3.14 After six months of the Minimum Term, and provided You have not broken any condition of this Agreement according to point 3.15 below, You will automatically own the Equipment.
3.15 If during the first six months of the Minimum Term, and before You get ownership of the Equipment provided to You by Us, you break any condition of this Agreement according to points 4.4.5 or 7.3.1, We may give You Written Notice to return the Equipment to Us.

Well that's fair, it's their right. EE are 'subsidising' your phone and they're only protecting their investment. If you find yourself agreeing with that, just stop. Not only would EE have trouble enforcing the above, but the T&C's are in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

The above terms and conditions act as a conditional sales agreement.

What is a conditional sales agreement you ask?

A conditional sale agreement is an agreement which deals with the sale of goods to a consumer, but with a key difference from other completed contracts for the sale of goods. Namely, it involves the situation whereby a seller will sell the goods to a consumer but the title of the goods will be withheld until all of the payments for the goods have been made. You won’t own the goods until you've paid off all the instalments. When you’ve done this, the goods transfer to your ownership. This is called getting good title.

And? So?

Well the problem is the creation of conditional sale agreements in England and Wales are regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
Your agreement must be in writing and contain specific information about the Act in order for it to be valid. Accordingly they must adhere to the following requirements:

• The agreement must be in writing
• The agreement must contain a statement that it is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act
• The agreement must contain prescribed information including the following
• The Annual Percentage Rate of Interest (APR)
• The amount of credit
• The cash price
• The dates and amount of installations
• The agreement must follow a set format
• The agreement must give the debtor cancellation rights where the agreement is signed away from the trade premises of the Creditor. The cancellation rights must be clearly set out in the actual agreement
• The agreement must be in more than one part in order to enable copies of the agreement to be given to the debtor

Also the agreement should contain a section Repossession: your rights telling you how much you need to have paid to stop the creditor taking the goods back without a court order (or your consent). This should be a third of the total amount payable under the agreement.
If you have paid a third or more of the total amount payable, the goods become ‘protected goods’ and the creditor must go to court for an order for the goods to be returned unless you consent to the repossession. They cannot just come round and remove them (‘snatch them back’).
If a creditor ‘snatches back’ goods without a court order and without your consent where a third or more has been paid, you are entitled to a refund of all the money you have paid under the agreement.
Also, even if you have not paid more than a third of the total amount payable under the agreement, the creditor will need an order from the court, or your consent, to remove the goods from ‘any premises’ they are on.

All companies that offer conditional sale agreements must be FCA authorised. If they are not, this is against the law and you should report them to Trading Standards or the FCA.

So there you have it- instead of defending EE, report them to Trading Standards, OFCOM and the FCA for unlawful breach of the CCA regulations