O2 won't replace my phone

maglite

The OP allows O2 reasonable chance of repair in that it was away form the OP for X days where a recognized repair center and qualified engineer examined the phone and an attempt at repair was made.

The Store can of course argue that you are unreasonable, But in this instance I belief you have given the shop a reasonable opportunity to repair the item. It is now time to move onto another form of redress. It should be noted post 14 advises another letter giving O2 the opportunity to solve the matter prior to the courts. This will further show you have been reasonable in allow O2 to rectify the situation.

With regard to human error

Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act, 1980 wrote:

PART IV SUPPLY OF SERVICES



39.—Subject to section 40, in every contract for the supply of a service where the supplier is acting in the course of a business, the following terms are implied—
[GA]

( a ) that the supplier has the necessary skill to render the service,
[GA]

( b ) that he will supply the service with due skill, care and diligence,
[GA]

( c ) that, where materials are used, they will be sound and reasonably fit for the purpose for which they are required, and
[GA]

( d ) that, where goods are supplied under the contract, they will be of merchantable quality within the meaning of section 14 (3) of the Act of 1893 (inserted by section 10 of this Act).

nordiestar

Gucky wrote: »

I heard a long and detailed discussion on Gerry Ryans morning show about this.

Apparently, when you buy electronic/electrical goods from ANY business, if the proiduct develops a fault up to 6 months after purchase you are LEGALLY entitled to an exchange, not refurbished, and dont have to settle for the product being sent away to be repaired.

A retailer in Dublin actually rang Gerry Ryan to give out, that he would now be inundated with disgruntled customers turning up to his shop with faulty laptops!

I'm unsure if it was 6 months, before all the feedback starts! It was certainly a very reasonable time frame though!

Call in to o2 and mention the Gerry Ryan discussion, it may "persuade" them to change their minds!

I also heard a guy from consumer Ireland (who had just released a book that week coincidentally enough) discuss this with Gerry.
Cant for the life of me remember the EXACT way it was put, but it did go along the lines of, if the product develops a fault in its first 6 months, it is supposed to be REPLACED.

I may be wrong here, but that does ring a bell

jor el

drunkmonkey wrote: »

We still have no evidence, it hasn't been confirmed if taking out the battery for a minute fixed the phone temporarly.

Read the first post again, I even quoted it for you. Taking out the battery DID NOT FIX THE PROBLEM.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm not advising what's best for the shop i'm advising what's easiest on op, if you read back through the thread i've told op to bypass the shop altogether as she's not being looked after there.

Bypassing the shop would certainly be easy for them. It is the shops responsibility to solve this issue, and they should not be let away with not fulfilling their obligations.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You can not gurantee that taking the shop to court over this will result in a win, it's not fair on posters to give out false expectations in relation to legal matters.

He has a repair certificate for a phone that was not repaired, he has a very good case. No one can ever guarantee anything in court, except for the judge, but it certainly is a very good option at this point. As I said though, the next step is to talk directly to the manager and give him an ultimatum. After that, court is the way to go.

diamondtooth

Thanks guys for all the help on this. Isn't it crazy in this day and age the O2 will treat people like this. Madness. Hopefully it will get sorted soon. I would prefer not to have to go the court route but will if I have to.
Cheers!

Davy

nordiestar wrote: »

I also heard a guy from consumer Ireland (who had just released a book that week coincidentally enough) discuss this with Gerry.
Cant for the life of me remember the EXACT way it was put, but it did go along the lines of, if the product develops a fault in its first 6 months, it is supposed to be REPLACED.

I may be wrong here, but that does ring a bell

Its an EU rule that's in place apparently. The reasons the shops wont apply it, is that the manufacture wont give the money or product to the retailer which has replaced it.

slimjimmc

Davy wrote: »

Its an EU rule that's in place apparently. The reasons the shops wont apply it, is that the manufacture wont give the money or product to the retailer which has replaced it.

Not quite correct, the reason shops won't apply that is because it's not law here. Ireland has not adopted the EU Directive 1999/44/EC because our own existing legislation offers high levels of protection. For example under the EU directive you have at least 2yrs to make a claim for redress, under Irish law you have 6yrs.

maglite

Slim again not true.... Care to do a search for 6years in any statute book relating to sale or supply of goods or services

tatli_lokma

in my case the advi from drunkmoney to allow them repair AGAIN is a joke. In my case there is no simple solution of taking out a battery nonsense. Initially they said it might be the sim card, gave a new card, this didn't work. Then the agreed to send for repair - They said the antenna was faulty and they repaired it. 2 days later the fault recurred. Had the shop taken the phone back at that point I would have been 'reasonable' and agreed to a second repair, but they first said that they couldn't take the phone into the shop because it was bought online. I was given the run around due to misinformation from several meteor staff. It is because of their lack of knowledge and because they completely gave the wrong advice that we are now in January and I still do not have a working phone. I have been more than reasonable, it is the telecoms companies who are being unreasonable, and furthermore they are infringing on statutory rights.

Registered letter and email gone off today outlining the issue and advising head of customer care that they have 14 days to resolve the issue or court proceedings will be initiated. I have nothing to loose - I have a phone that doesn't work, and I am fed up going to meteor stores and being told a lot of misinformed rubbish. So it is no biggie to me to lodge a claim for a few quid online and then in a few days turn up to court if needed.

Elessar

maglite wrote: »

Slim again not true.... Care to do a search for 6years in any statute book relating to sale or supply of goods or services

6 years is the statute of limitation, and not just for sale of goods cases. Technically there is no time limit in the act itself.

slimjimmc

maglite wrote: »

Slim again not true.... Care to do a search for 6years in any statute book relating to sale or supply of goods or services

I already did and couldn't find anything, similarily I couldn't find any other applicable time limit either. My info was based on two credible (imo) sources:
a) information published by the European Consumer Centre (not an offical EU body but credible none the less)
http://www.eccireland.ie/topic.php?topic=5#subtopic_37

A common set of consumer rights for consumers are valid no matter where in the EU the goods are purchased, which are enforceable for at least 2 years from delivery of the goods. In Ireland, there is limitation period of 6 years within which a consumer can bring an action against a trader.

and
b) a document issued by the EU Commission who would have a detailed familiarity with Irish law and all other member states.
http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/cons_int/safe_shop/guarantees/CSD_2007_EN_final.pdf
The document reports on how the consumer protection directive was implemented by EU members over the preceding 8yrs and states on pg 10:

6. TIME LIMITS – ARTICLE 5(1)
The seller is liable under Article 3 where the lack of conformity becomes apparent within two years as from the moment of delivery (Article 5(1)). A majority of Member States have transposed this provision literally. Others have chosen to rely on the time limitation that is generally applicable in their contract law: Finland (3 years from delivery), Ireland and the UK (six years for both countries).

As one can see, this statement clearly states that the 6yrs protection is provided by contract law and not directly by any consumer or sale of goods legislation.

diamondtooth

Hello all,
I'm not forgetting to keep you updated. Still in the process of getting this sorted. Will have more news on this soon.

diamondtooth

Ok well finally this has been sorted.

O2 initially offered me a replacement Nokia E51. As consumer law states I am entitle to a refund, I chose not to accept a new Nokia E51.

After sending them a registed letter, stating my complaint and also quoting the consumer law they offered me my money back. I was happy to accept a refund. With which I bought a much more up to date and better phone for the same money.

I am so glad I stuck with this until I got what I was entitled to. Its only right that I got a refund. And my advice is to anyone who has a similar problem, would be to not accept anything less that what you are due. People should never let them away with that stupid 3 repairs before replacement rule. Its a pity O2 dragged out the problem for so long and it was very annoying but I won in the end

Thanks everyone for the advice.

nordiestar

diamondtooth wrote: »

Ok well finally this has been sorted.

O2 initially offered me a replacement Nokia E51. As consumer law states I am entitle to a refund, I chose not to accept a new Nokia E51.

After sending them a registed letter, stating my complaint and also quoting the consumer law they offered me my money back. I was happy to accept a refund. With which I bought a much more up to date and better phone for the same money.

I am so glad I stuck with this until I got what I was entitled to. Its only right that I got a refund. And my advice is to anyone who has a similar problem, would be to not accept anything less that what you are due. People should never let them away with that stupid 3 repairs before replacement rule. Its a pity O2 dragged out the problem for so long and it was very annoying but I won in the end

Thanks everyone for the advice.

Thanks For the Update mate.

Can you confirm for the rest of us though, if a mobile bought from O2 develops a fault etc inside 12 months we are ENTITLED to a refund, NOT a repair x 3 times?

Want to get this sorted in my own mind.

Thanks

tatli_lokma

nordiestar wrote: »

Thanks For the Update mate.

Can you confirm for the rest of us though, if a mobile bought from O2 develops a fault etc inside 12 months we are ENTITLED to a refund, NOT a repair x 3 times?

Want to get this sorted in my own mind.

Thanks

No, you are not entitled to a refund. You are entitled to a repair, replace or refund. The company are within their rights to offer a repair initially. HOWEVER that repair must be permanent, so if the same fault recurrs then you are then ENTITLED to seek a replacement or a refund. It is not specified which it must be, so it is down to you and the company to agree on this. If you REALLY want a refund and they offer a replacement, then you need to be prepared to fight it to the end to get your refund. But if it went to small claims you may not win as the company made a 'reasonable' offer of a replacement.

BUT and this is the important part - you do not have to accept the '3 repairs' bullsh!t policy they all try to get away with. If the repair is not permanent then envoke your satutory rights.

theteal

nordiestar wrote: »

Thanks For the Update mate.

Can you confirm for the rest of us though, if a mobile bought from O2 develops a fault etc inside 12 months we are ENTITLED to a refund, NOT a repair x 3 times?

Want to get this sorted in my own mind.

Thanks

entitled to repair, replacement or refund. OP's phone had already been repaired, he wasn't willing to accept another repair or a replacement of lesser quality/value, he fought his case, got his refund, fair play

hussey

Cincikchick wrote: »

No, you are not entitled to a refund. You are entitled to a repair, replace or refund. The company are within their rights to offer a repair initially. HOWEVER that repair must be permanent, so if the same fault recurs then you are then ENTITLED to seek a replacement or a refund. It is not specified which it must be, so it is down to you and the company to agree on this. If you REALLY want a refund and they offer a replacement, then you need to be prepared to fight it to the end to get your refund. But if it went to small claims you may not win as the company made a 'reasonable' offer of a replacement.

If a different fault develops with the replacement phone, what would be the state of play?

MunsterCycling

Its a new fault and so starts the process again.

MC

foggy_lad

hussey wrote: »

If a different fault develops with the replacement phone, what would be the state of play?

it could be argued then by the customer that the phone is not fit for purpose due to having more than one fault! all these items phones tv's ipods mp3 players etc should last a reasonable time before any fault occurs and if they have one fault it is reasonable to accept a repair but any more and you should have doubts about the product being of merchantable quality!

tatli_lokma

Lads and Lassies,
I got my phone call from Meteor yesterday. Upshot is, I got a new phone, and they acknowledged that whilst they do have a policy of 3 repairs this is to protect against people taking advantage and trying to get replacement phones willy-nilly, or purposely damaging phones to get a replacement/refund.
They acknowleged that whilst this is their policy, it does not over ride statutory rights and as soon as a customer envokes these rights, then the manager concerned should deal with the issue appropriately.

Long story short, I put my complaint in writing to head of customer care, by recorded post, 2 days later got a response, and once I got to speak to the customer services agent dealing with my complaint I got an agreement to a new phone with no further hassle.

So stick to your guns, if the phone is faulty then don't accept 2nd or 3rd repairs, insist on refund or replacement.

louise1985

What address did you use to send the letter,I am having the same problem. I emailed o2 customer service to ask for an address but they never got back to me

tatli_lokma

louise1985 wrote: »

What address did you use to send the letter,I am having the same problem. I emailed o2 customer service to ask for an address but they never got back to me

sorry, my issue was with meteor. It was OP who dealt with O2. I just googled it to find out who was head of customer care and addressed my letter to him, rather than a general department.