Meteor - Scammers or not......

niamh4626

Well here's my story......

I bought a new phone from Meteor in September and I rang them at the start of October to get the unblocking code as I was going to Australia at the end of the month and wanted to get an Australian sim card for the 3 weeks. They said they did not have the code on their system and that they would have to contact Nokia for it. I rang them back a week later and they still hadn't received it and they said they'd call me back the following week. I rang them on the 15th and 18th of October and they still didn't have it and they said if I rang on Tuesday the 26th they would definitely have it by then.

I was in Australia at that stage so I sent them a message from their website requesting that it would be emailed to me. I got confirmation that the email was received and someone would be in touch with me within 48 hours. I heard nothing from them that is until they cut me off about on the 10th of November for an outstanding amount on my bill of €15.

What I am wondering is, if I contact them by letter (reg posted) and explain the ridiculous situation to them will they reduce my colossal bill of €800??????

Any input would be greatly appreciated as I am quite pi55ed off by the whole bloody scenario. :mad:

RedXIV

What did you get the bill of €800 for?

if you were using the phone in OZ then I wouldn't expect to get any money off the bill to be honest

niamh4626

The bill was for phone calls, txt messages etc.

I did try my best to get the unblocking code from them, it it their fault that I had to use roaming when I was away.

5500

niamh4626 wrote: »

it their fault that I had to use roaming when I was away.

How is it meteors fault? They didnt force you to make the calls or send texts whilst away. The easier solution was to just get a sim free phone from a friend or even buy a cheap pre pay austrailian phone.

Granted they were slack in getting you your unlocking code, but I dont see how you could call them scammers or try and blame them for you using your phone whilst away.

maximoose

niamh4626 wrote: »

The bill was for phone calls, txt messages etc.

I did try my best to get the unblocking code from them, it it their fault that I had to use roaming when I was away.

Erm, best of luck with that defence

You didnt have to use the roaming, you should have known better really. Yeah they were rubbish in getting you the unblocking code but as said above they didnt force you to make calls, send texts etc.. and I cant see how you think you shouldn't have to pay for them

Dan_Solo

niamh4626 wrote: »

The bill was for phone calls, txt messages etc.

I did try my best to get the unblocking code from them, it it their fault that I had to use roaming when I was away.

Just don't pay it. As long as you have your documentation in order you have a good case that their incompetence was the problem.

techguy

niamh4626 wrote: »

The bill was for phone calls, txt messages etc.

I did try my best to get the unblocking code from them, it it their fault that I had to use roaming when I was away.

You are horribly out of line on this one, mate. Nobody forced you to use the phone on the other saide of the world! Did you not know the charges would be quite high?

What was to stop you from getting a cheap $20-30 throwaway with as much credit on it? Thats what I did when I was in the states.

Sometimes the carrier will cut some of the bill if it's for data use because people make genuine mistakes there. But not for calls/texts.. what were you thinking?

RedXIV

niamh4626 wrote: »

The bill was for phone calls, txt messages etc.

I did try my best to get the unblocking code from them, it it their fault that I had to use roaming when I was away.

This bit here is where you're going to get caught. it was NOT their fault. You decided to use roaming.

I'm sorry but if thats your argument I really can't see you getting out of this one

SteM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Just don't pay it. As long as you have your documentation in order you have a good case that their incompetence was the problem.

Hardly - all the documentation proves it that she was aware that she needed a PIN code and could incur a huge bill if she used roaming. If they hadn't recevied the PIN from Nokia what can they do?

If the full €800 was just from her calling Meteor from Oz then maybe they would, but if it's her calling/texting mates then I don't see why they would have to deduct anything. They might as a gesture of ghood faith but I don't see why they would have to legally.

sipstrassi

I had a meteor phone which had to go for repair last August (their software) and was eligible for an upgrade so got a new phone. I was assured that the old one could be unlocked as soon as it came back or would not have upgraded.
I called them 6 times since then and each time was told sorry we'll have to send the IMEI away again (I called them as they never had the courtesy to call me to say sorry, their estimate of 10 days was incorrect).
One girl told me I had to ring the manufacturer as Meteor couldn't unlock it (complete bull).
Finally this week I demanded to speak to someone who could cancel my contract as I only renewed on the basis the old phone could be unlocked and this had not happened. I told them I would not pay the cancellation fee and would sooner give a solicitor that and more to avoid paying it on principle.
Had the unlocking code within 5 minutes.

Needless to say that the second my contract is up will be going elsewhere.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

OP your post is not very clear. You say you were cut off with an outstanding bill of €15, then you say you have a bill of €800. Which is it?

niamh4626 wrote: »

...
What I am wondering is, if I contact them by letter (reg posted) and explain the ridiculous situation to them will they reduce my colossal bill of €800??????
...

Ridiculous situation? :rolleyes: That you chose to use your phone while roaming and ran up a bill? Shocker!
Why should Meteor reduce the bill?

Did you even bother to check the cost while roaming in Oz before you left?
(so as to minimise the cost of your bill until you received the unlock code)

Edit: Is this not a consumer issue?

Dan_Solo

SteM wrote: »

Hardly - all the documentation proves it that she was aware that she needed a PIN code and could incur a huge bill if she used roaming. If they hadn't recevied the PIN from Nokia what can they do?

Sorry, missed that bit from the OP. Yeah, it becomes Nokia's fault then, but I can't see how you could do much there. I'd almost chance my arm though and ask Nokia when they sent out the code. If you catch Meteor lying to you then you'll have them by the short n curlies.

niamh4626

The €15 outstanding was from the previous months bill which I didn't receive as I was away. I have been with meteor since I got my first phone 10 years ago.

Ahh sure I'll write a letter and see how far I get. I didn't actually think of getting a cheap throw away phone when I was over there, that would have been a good idea.....:o

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

So your last bill was €15 and your current bill is €800? So you owe them €815?

You knew you'd be away, so whey didn't you make sure your bill(s) would be paid while you were away? I'm sure you could have checked your account balance online.

niamh4626

Update - I rang Nokia and they said that all their phones are released to phone companies unlocked, it is the phone companies that lock them.

techguy

niamh4626 wrote: »

The €15 outstanding was from the previous months bill which I didn't receive as I was away. I have been with meteor since I got my first phone 10 years ago.

Ahh sure I'll write a letter and see how far I get. I didn't actually think of getting a cheap throw away phone when I was over there, that would have been a good idea.....:o

That makes everything your fault and not Meteors!

Dan_Solo

niamh4626 wrote: »

Update - I rang Nokia and they said that all their phones are released to phone companies unlocked, it is the phone companies that lock them.

Bring this to Meteor and tell them to shove their bill.
It was their fault PLUS they lied to you about it.

drunkmonkey

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Bring this to Meteor and tell them to shove their bill.
It was their fault PLUS they lied to you about it.

Best of luck with that.

I see a court case in the near future. OP will loose.

A Judgement in the district court is not something to chance in the current climate.

Dan_Solo

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Best of luck with that.

I see a court case in the near future. OP will loose.

A Judgement in the district court is not something to chance in the current climate.

Any chance you'd care to contribute why she'd lose?
Meteor lied to her about her phone being locked by Nokia and why her unlocking was delayed. What would Meteor claim in response?
What's this to do with the current position of the Irish judiciary?

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

Dan Solo, are you seriously of the opinion that the OP should have her €800 reduced or waived because Meteor didn't supply an unlock in time for her trip? :rolleyes:

Dan_Solo

BearNecessities wrote: »

Dan Solo, are you seriously of the opinion that the OP should have her €800 reduced or waived because Meteor didn't supply an unlock in time for her trip? :rolleyes:

If they lied to her about the delay they could be in enough trouble that a bit of "goodwill" might be generated.;)
No, I wouldn't have assumed I'd get the money back, but hey, she's caught them lying about their own and Nokia's phone locking policy. I think she has a bit of leverage.

pleasant Co.

There's no legal obligation on meteor to unlock a phone, whether they lied or the rep was just a fucking dumbass is absolutely irrelevent to the bill the OP has racked up.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

True, they most likely will reduce it some what as part of a good will gesture. But to be honest, it sounds like she's chancing her arm. I wouldn't be surprised if there's more to the story as well.

OP - are you annoyed because you didn't get the unlock code on time? Or you got cut off (coz you didn't pay your bill)? Or that you ran up an €800 bill?

Dan_Solo

Mactard wrote: »

There's no legal obligation on meteor to unlock a phone, whether they lied or the rep was just a fucking dumbass is absolutely irrelevent to the bill the OP has racked up.

Even if there's no legal obligation, kicking up a fuss over being lied to (come on, they said they asked Nokia for the code, which they couldn't have as Nokia didn't have them!) might work. I certainly have no issues with Meteor taking an €800 hit for being liars!

caspa307

do you not have to be on the network for at least 6 months before they will unlock it?? based on the idea that you could unlock the phone move gountry and never pay the bill, just curious why did you sign a contract knowing you wouldnt be in the country

drunkmonkey

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Even if there's no legal obligation, kicking up a fuss over being lied to (come on, they said they asked Nokia for the code, which they couldn't have as Nokia didn't have them!) might work. I certainly have no issues with Meteor taking an €800 hit for being liars!

This is eircom your dealing with they won't give a shoite if your right or wrong. OP is as wrong as wrong could be, pay up 800 yo yo's or go to court, I think they'll laugh at the idea of a good will gesture in this case.
OP could have bought a new phone for 20 euro and stuck an aussie sim in it.

This is somebodys credit rating your advising on, trying to shove it up their arse would be funny but it'll only make the problem worse.

Try for a good will, no luck wait for the debt collectors, offer the debt collectors something. They might have paid 50 euro for the 800 euro so if they got 150/200 quid they might walk away.

bd250110

Who has the code for unlocking is a red herring. Unlocking is completely unrelated to the story.

When a phone is logged onto a roaming network texts are sent by the home operator. These clearly outline the cost, on a per minute/text/MB, basis of calling locally and internationally. That the op racked up an €800 bill is her own doing. No one forced her to use her phone. That Meteor did not unlock the phone will not hold water in a court, in any way. Meteor have no obligation to reduce your bill, nor to unlock your handset (unless you have that in writing on your upgrade contract). When I worked for a mobile phone retailer we got these complaints and rantings on a daily basis. Ultimately their line was cut for non-payment, the company moved to recover the monies owed to them and the customers credit rating was affected.

If the OP wanted to use the phone badly enough while abroad she could have had the phone unlocked at any number of places for a small sum, or bought a cheap PAYG phone while abroad. €800 is a significant amount of usage, even while roaming. Looks like the OP used her phone exactly as she would if she had been at home.

Oafley Jones

niamh4626 wrote: »

Update - I rang Nokia and they said that all their phones are released to phone companies unlocked, it is the phone companies that lock them.

Who told you that? There may be an initial batch of phones from a generic pool that are sold to network sim-free, but after, manufacturers will ship phones to the networks in the spec that they require whether that is box art, firmware or the lock state of the phone. Meteor aren't receiving generic unlocked nokias and rebranding/locking the unit themselves, this is done at the point of manufacture. Besides the encryption is Nokia's own proprietary system something a third party like Meteor wouldn't be able to load onto a phone.

I think the OP is being ridiculous, it's like getting caught driving home drunk from a pub and expecting to be let off because the cab company you phoned before hand couldn't make it.

Dan_Solo

Oafley Jones wrote: »

I think the OP is being ridiculous, it's like getting caught driving home drunk from a pub and expecting to be let off because the cab company you phoned before hand couldn't make it.

There's so many things wrong with that analogy I don't know where to start.
Is building up a roaming bill now a crime?

drunkmonkey

Dan_Solo wrote: »

There's so many things wrong with that analogy I don't know where to start.
Is building up a roaming bill now a crime?

It's not a crime until you default on your bill.

SteM

Oafley Jones wrote: »

I think the OP is being ridiculous, it's like getting caught driving home drunk from a pub and expecting to be let off because the cab company you phoned before hand couldn't make it.

+1. Some people just refuse to take responsibility for their own actions. Always someone else's fault.