Re: Meteor Phone Issue

ballyrhy86

I'm having a problem trying to get anywhere with a phone issue with Meteor.

This is the basics of a letter I sent Meteor last Friday 2 weeks and sums up the problem:

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to you because after about 6 months of normal use the phone I purchased would suddenly die during calls despite the battery reading full and would only last a day of very light use provided no calls were received/made. This rendered the phone unfit for its purpose as a mobile phone and represented a serious fault in the phone.

I then brought the phone to (a Meteor shop) who offered a repair of the phone. I accepted this offer, and they sent the phone to Sigma Telecom for repair. I received the phone back and the same issue reoccurred with the phone. At that point I had a series of phone calls with Meteor Customer Care and visits to (the same meteor shop) where I got conflicting advice on whether to return the phone again or pursue other means of redress.

After this time I then contacted the National Consumer Agency where they informed me that under law, because the repair failed and the same fault occurred, I was entitled to other means of redress, namely a replacement or refund.

On 20/7/2009, I rang Meteor Customer Care once again and spoke to ***** *****, a Team Leader at Meteor Customer Service. I informed her of my rights as a consumer but was told that Meteor operates a policy where three returns are required before other forms of redress are considered. However, I could find no mention of this policy. I then rang Meteor Customer Care and spoke to **** again. I asked for her assistance in finding this policy and was eventually told by her that she could not find said policy. I believe she has now forwarded my complaint onto the Meteor Legal Department and she also gave me an address to make a formal complaint.

I would appreciate a response to my complaint within 10 working days.

Yours sincerely,

Me

The letter also included details of the purchase and exactly what I wanted as form off redress, along with more details, but i shortened it so someone might actually read it!

The 10 working days is up, I think my claim is justified, what do ye think?

Where do I go from here with my complaint because it doesn't look like I'll be getting a response?

Elmo

They should just replace the phone, its faulty and it is preventing you from using their service.

ballyrhy86

Hopefully I will get a replacement, if I don't get any response by tomorrow (that would be the ten working days up that I told to allow) should I try customer care and see if the complaint went through or just try another letter?

Its hard to get anywhere with customer care as they seem pretty restricted in what they can do for you.

I can't see why I'm getting nowhere with this, its seems pretty straightforward to me!

skippy09

I work for meteor and your best bet is to ring customer care to see if your letter was recieved, if you get nowhere with them ask for the number of head office to make a formal compalint.

Elmo

I really think the shop needs to give you a new phone. Isn't that part of the Consumers act that goods that are faulty must be either replaced or a credit note given.

I am not sure if they have to give you a refund.

ballyrhy86

skippy09 wrote: »

I work for meteor and your best bet is to ring customer care to see if your letter was recieved, if you get nowhere with them ask for the number of head office to make a formal compalint.

I tried the new forum on the Meteor website, at the suggestion of a poster on a different thread here. That seems to be getting me someplace, but If that don't work another phonecall will be in line alright!

jor el

Their 3 return policy doesn't mean squat, it's illegal and in breech of your statutory rights. Even if they could find it, it's unenforceable and they cannot make you send it for repair of the same error a 2nd time.

If your complaint goes nowhere, submit it to Comreg. As regulator, they should be making sure that Meteor (and the other operators) don't have illegal policies like this in place.

A situation like this is exactly why the Small Claims Court exists. I would also move my business to another provider. They others may not be any better, but you shouldn't keep paying the ones who are currently ignoring your statutory rights with carefree impunity.

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

jor el

Captain Morgan wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Hmm, strange. Maybe illegal is the wrong word, but they can't legally enforce it. You are entitled to seek alternate redress is a repair fails, and they can't force (but maybe only ask) you to send for a repair again.

Elmo

Really it makes no sense to them since mobile phone companies rely on their customers making phone calls, the phones are all subsidised by the Mobile phone company. If you can't use the phone you can't use their service and then surely your not liable for the bill at the end of the month.

Meteor should have a policy of returning the mobile phone to their suppliers if faulty and giving their customers a new phone.

litup

jor el wrote: »

Hmm, strange. Maybe illegal is the wrong word, but they can't legally enforce it. You are entitled to seek alternate redress is a repair fails, and they can't force (but maybe only ask) you to send for a repair again.

They can't force you to send it for repair again, but they can refuse to do anything else for you. This leaves you with the option of going for the repair or the small claims court.

ballyrhy86

Looks like it's all working out, got a call there and they're going replacing the phone for me.

Thanks for all the help, I'd recommend the Meteor forums as a place to highlight any you issue you feel is being ignored, it seems to have worked for me anyway!

Ballyrhy86

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

Rhymenocerous

Captain Morgan wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The money you spend on their network in that period is gonna be less than the cost of a replacement handset.

Also, anyone who sends a phone off for repair is going to either get a loan phone, or use a spare phone in the mean time, so they still get their money from airtime.

One of the major reasons why phones are sent away for repair is that they are quite costly. Their cost is far more than what you pay to the shop, as they are subsidised by the network. For the shop to replace the phone for you, they replace at cost price, not the subsidised price that you paid for the phone. You may have paid the shop €50 for the phone, but the replacement cost is far greater, most likely in the region of €150-200 or more depending on the handset and whether you're pay as you go or bill pay (as bill pay have a far greater subsidy.

Elmo

Rhymenocerous wrote: »

One of the major reasons why phones are sent away for repair is that they are quite costly. Their cost is far more than what you pay to the shop, as they are subsidised by the network. For the shop to replace the phone for you, they replace at cost price, not the subsidised price that you paid for the phone. You may have paid the shop €50 for the phone, but the replacement cost is far greater, most likely in the region of €150-200 or more depending on the handset and whether you're pay as you go or bill pay (as bill pay have a far greater subsidy.

Replace phone if only just bought, fix old phone (remove old uses content) and give to next customer. It is just wasting one customers time.

Would they fix an older phone?

Rhymenocerous

Elmo wrote: »

Replace phone if only just bought, fix old phone (remove old uses content) and give to next customer. It is just wasting one customers time.

Would they fix an older phone?

Not exactly sure what you're gettin at.

If you're referring to the 28 day faulty exchange period, well that has to be in place and is backed up by the manufacturer. I.E. You buy a phone and two days later it stops working. You bring it back in to the shop you bought it from, and they can get an RMA and return it to the supplier for credit. Shop does not lose out, as there is no replacement cost. After 28 days, the manufacture will no longer accept an RMA and with not credit for a replacement unit. Therefore the cost is completely on the retailer.

If you're refering to fixing old phones, and then selling them on as new to the next customer, then that's not a policy any retailer will have. It's probably against trading standards, and not moral at all (selling used items as new).

Elmo

Rhymenocerous wrote: »

Not exactly sure what you're gettin at.

If you're referring to the 28 day faulty exchange period, well that has to be in place and is backed up by the manufacturer. I.E. You buy a phone and two days later it stops working. You bring it back in to the shop you bought it from, and they can get an RMA and return it to the supplier for credit. Shop does not lose out, as there is no replacement cost. After 28 days, the manufacture will no longer accept an RMA and with not credit for a replacement unit. Therefore the cost is completely on the retailer.

If you're refering to fixing old phones, and then selling them on as new to the next customer, then that's not a policy any retailer will have. It's probably against trading standards, and not moral at all (selling used items as new).

Well then the retailer and mobile phone company have put themselves into a bad situation. Surely they can also return faulty goods and get a free replacement the phone is broken it is broken the shop, mobile phone company and the consumer all have some comeback.

What kind of phone do you get as a replacement?

the_syco

Elmo wrote: »

Replace phone if only just bought, fix old phone (remove old uses content) and give to next customer. It is just wasting one customers time.

Would they fix an older phone?

Cheaper to fix a phone with a €5 part than give them a new phone.

Rhymenocerous

Elmo wrote: »

Well then the retailer and mobile phone company have put themselves into a bad situation. Surely they can also return faulty goods and get a free replacement the phone is broken it is broken the shop, mobile phone company and the consumer all have some comeback.

A mobile phone retailer can only get an RMA from the suppliers if the phone has been sold within 28 days and the phone that was sold was packaged by the supplier within 60 days. There is no leeway on this for the retailer. The only difference is 3, where you get the returns authorisation from the network themselves.

maglite

Small claims, Its will cost you a couple of quid but at least you cut out all the BS

Elessar

Rhymenocerous wrote: »

A mobile phone retailer can only get an RMA from the suppliers if the phone has been sold within 28 days and the phone that was sold was packaged by the supplier within 60 days. There is no leeway on this for the retailer. The only difference is 3, where you get the returns authorisation from the network themselves.

But as far as the consumer is concerned, this point is irrelevant. The retailer who sold the product is responsible for making sure it is of merchantable quality. The fact that they won't make an exchange/refund after 28 days because of supplier policies is a non-argument. Under the right conditions, they have to, and if they don't, the Small Claims Court can force them to. If the supplier won't take the faulty product back, they will just have to take the hit - or take them to court.

Elmo

Rhymenocerous wrote: »

A mobile phone retailer can only get an RMA from the suppliers if the phone has been sold within 28 days and the phone that was sold was packaged by the supplier within 60 days. There is no leeway on this for the retailer. The only difference is 3, where you get the returns authorisation from the network themselves.

Sorry re-read your previous post, I understand the 28day policy (work days?). How long before this phone stopped working?