Is Tesco Mobile playing fair with replacement phones?

Moonlit

I bought a mobile phone for my daughter from Tesco Mobile 30 months ago (Mar 18) specifically so that the phone purchase credit element of the monthly cost would complete about now and coincide with her starting university (when the money could be used to part support her living expenses).  Sadly, she damaged the phone in 2019 and it had to be replaced; this cost £389 and we both assumed that it was a new phone that was provided as the replacement (this assumption came to be tested), but the credit agreement remained unchanged.  That replacement phone recently developed a critical fault with both cameras, this occurred 11 months after it had been provided to us.  Tesco then told us that it was out of warranty as the 2-year warranty period went back to when we had purchased the original phone, and that this was normal with a refurbished phone.  We were surprised that it was a refurbished phone, and the implications for warranty.  Tesco offered us another replacement phone at £389 despite it being just minutes before the end of the credit agreement.  Not wishing to purchase another refurbished phone with no warranty, under protest we elected to enter into a new agreement for a new replacement phone and negating the saving that we had originally planned.  I have complained formally to Tesco who claims that the arrangements surrounding provision of replacement phones is clearly explained in an accompanying letter; but it is unable to furnish me with a replacement letter (despite supposedly continuing to supply these with all replacement phones) and will be providing me with a transcript by e-mail.  Beyond my irritation, this experience poses a couple of consumer issues that I'd appreciate getting guidance on:

·       Tesco charges £389 for a replacement phone (which I now know means refurbished) regardless of the original fault and also of the amount already paid in the credit agreement, can a standard charge apply in circumstances that can be very different?

·       If I were to have bought a refurbished phone in any other manner, I would have expected it to have come with a warranty linked to when I received it.  Tesco links the warranty start date to when the original phone was received, even if this means that the replacement is then delivered with no warranty.  Can such linking of warranty start date be allowable?

I have been very successful using Money Claim Online several times, recently winning against British Gas for overcharging.  The response from Tesco leaves me unsatisfied, despite the trivial £30 goodwill gesture it has now given.  Depending on the advice that I get I am minded to challenge Tesco on its practise in para (2).

 Many thanks to anyone who takes the time to read and reply.

Browntoa

I've always understood that a replacement phone is a refurbished phone , even Apple stores do it , and that the warranty is only for the duration since first purchased .

The warranty has been fulfilled if you have got 2 years overall phone usage in total out of it and then the replacement. You have not been put in a worse position than if the original phone had lasted 2 years 

flashg67

I'd suggest that if you paid for a replacement then it should have been made clear if it was new or refurb - unless it was obvious from the price - ie a £1k iphone for £389.
I don't see where the warranty element comes into it - if the original phone had developed a fault, and was replaced, then the warranty isn't renewed,.
However, you said you bought the phone to replace a damaged one, so 'full' warranty should apply? I think trying to relate it to the original warranty is confusing matters- to me, the original warranty is irrelevant as you haven't claimed on it. Your claim hinges on whatever warranty Tesco give with their paid for replacements?

matelodave

As Browntoa says a phone supplied as a replacement during a contract or under warranty  will usually be refurbished and the warranty will just continue until the end of the original warranty period - you probably need to carefully read all your terms and conditions.Had it not been damaged and it had been faulty you probably still would have got a refurb but you wouldn't have had to contribute towards it's cost

Had you purchase a brand new phone it may have cost quite a bit more but you would have got a full warranty rather than just the residue however you would still have to pay off any outstanding debt on the damaged phone.

If you are going to spend lots of money on a phone then it's probably worth getting it insured against damage and theft especially if she is going o be away from home at university just in case it happens again. However that said I do wonder how much better a phone costing £500+ is than one costing £100-£150