Related
I've had a TP2 since June last year on a 24 month VF business contract. When I bought it I was told by the sales rep that if it went wrong during the contract they would replace it within 24 hours, and they still have this guarantee on their website today.
It went wrong in December, and, sure enough they swapped it for another within 24 hours. Now exactly the same fault has happened again. I rang VF and was told I had to send it back for repair and it would take up to a month. I mentioned the business account guarantee and was told that it is a very old phone and things move on. They don't have any so I cannot have one. But, they would let me buy another phone off them to tide me over until mine was fixed and they would credit my account with £25!
I did point out that they are still selling them with the same 24 hour replacement guarantee on their website, but have been effectively blanked me.
I've also tried going through their eforum with the same result.
Am I being unreasonable in expecting them to live up to their own advertising?
I think it is possibly a case of them breaking their side of the contract
Unfortunately, I think you are being a little unreasonable, in that you seem to be insisting they send to you something they don't have. The phone is a bit older, and isn't available to them anymore. You're asking them to live up to their advertising, but what exactly do you expect them to do? No amount of complaining is going to make a TP2 materialize out of thin air.
I also doubt it would be a breach of contract. Their legal experts have probably already included a contingency in their agreement fine print which absolves them from having to replace hardware within 24 hours when its not in stock anymore. Phones get obsoleted very quickly, they know that as well as anyone.
On the other hand, I will agree that their solution is not really acceptable, either. I doubt you would be able to buy a phone for 25 pounds (assume the price would be unsubsidized, since you are still on contract), so it sounds like they are asking you to spend money on something you don't really need. Maybe they can send you some type of refurb "loaner" phone to use while yours is repaired. Or there should be some other solution that gets a usable phone into your hands while your TP2 is being repaired, without it costing you money.
Personally, I always keep an old phone as a backup. Things break, it happens.
I dont think you are being unreasonable at all. They have the phones in stock in shops, they still advertise the deal (although not sure thats relevent).
Incidentally, what is the fault?
crazyC said:
I dont think you are being unreasonable at all. They have the phones in stock in shops
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they have the phones in stock, and have access to them, then I agree they should send him one.
Although I don't know about the UK, but in the US, stores which have the carrier's name are often franchises, and not owned by the carrier at all. So just because they have a phone in stock at a store, does not mean they carrier has any access to them.
redpoint73 said:
If they have the phones in stock, and have access to them, then I agree they should send him one.
Although I don't know about the UK, but in the US, stores which have the carrier's name are often franchises, and not owned by the carrier at all. So just because they have a phone in stock at a store, does not mean they carrier has any access to them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click here http://online.vodafone.co.uk/business/s/mobile-phones-devices/business and see :-
24 hour replacement service – for extra peace of mind lol
Then click here http://www.vodafonebusinessshop.co.uk/Details-Phone-HTC-Touch-Pro-2-3090.html
and you can click through to check out
Now they may not have a refurb to send me, but it seems pretty obvious that they have new ones being sold with the same non existent guarantee.
crazyC said:
I dont think you are being unreasonable at all. They have the phones in stock in shops, they still advertise the deal (although not sure thats relevent).
Incidentally, what is the fault?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is the same fault that I had in December. A small square of an oily substance appears in the middle of the screen and gradually (over a few weeks) expands to cover the screen, then the screen stops responding.
When I reported it at Christmas they said "Oh yes that one" as if they are used to it
The REALLY annoying part is that I was wavering on taking out a 2 year contract for precisely this reason, and was assured that if I had any problems with the phone within the 24 months they would swap it the next day.
I should have known better
The Librarian of Congress decided in October 2012 that unlocking of cell phones would be removed from the exceptions to the DMCA.
As of January 26, consumers will no longer be able unlock their phones for use on a different network without carrier permission, even after their contract has expired.
Consumers will be forced to pay exorbitant roaming fees to make calls while traveling abroad. It reduces consumer choice, and decreases the resale value of devices that consumers have paid for in full.
The Librarian noted that carriers are offering more unlocked phones at present, but the great majority of phones sold are still locked.
We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision, and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
I believe this only applies to new phones.. and you have 90 days from the date of the law to unlock your phone without any penalties.
page 16 of the docket: https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2012-26308.pdf
so most of us are okay. but it sucks for people buying new phones. Might be okay on used phones, but I haven't gotten to that part yet.
chances are they'll revise the law in 2 years.
Seeing as T-Mobile is doing away with subsidized phones and the other carriers will probably follow suit much the same as international markets then one would no longer have a need to lock into a2 year contract unless of course there are to be plan discounts. That said there should be no reason for a carrier to refuse to unlock a phone that a consumer is now paying full price for, which is pushing $600 to $700 for the newest high end models.
I certainly don't agree that we should be paying upwards of $700 for something that has a realistic life span of 2 years, i would expect a laptop of the same price to last 5+. However i do agree that if you purchased a phone at a lower subsidized price and signed a two year contract then no you should not be able to Sim unlock it. Now if you pay your early term fees and are clear of your contact them there should be no reason for a carrier to deny unlocking said device.
If you are a person that travels abroad and need an unlocked phone them you should take that into consideration at time of purchase or contact the carrier to deal with it then.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
I'm not sure but can this be posted in other threads without getting in trouble so we can make everyone know about this situation?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda premium
blakdrew said:
I'm not sure but can this be posted in other threads without getting in trouble so we can make everyone know about this situation?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see why not...but whats the point? Everyone should know about this by now, its been mentioned on various websites all over the internet.
Also, no offense to the OP but this petition is pretty useless, I mean, we all know how good petitions (ones pertaining to mobile phones) have worked before. Companies don't pay attention to it, so I doubt Congress will. The whole issue is redundant seeing as whoever wants to unlock their phone, will end up unlocking it, whatever the law may be. Its not like the government will set up random checkpoints to take your phone and make sure its not unlocked. People are just over reacting like they usually do. Its been illegal to download music and movies for a few years now and that doesn't seem to stop the people doing it. The only thing I see the this law harming are the various websites and ebay auctions that make money from unlocking phones. The truth is compared to the old Nokia days, smart phones(some, not all) are pretty easy to unlock.
One of the provisions is if you buy a phone from a 3rd party youre exempt.
My opinion? Its a sad day in this country when you dont have complete ownership of some you purchase.
Today its phones, tomorrow its......?
blackangst said:
My opinion? Its a sad day in this country when you dont have complete ownership of some you purchase.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know. Even the cell phone industry (CTIA) basically admitted in its arguments to the Library of Congress that the reason they want this is purely in order to protect their business model (based on subsidies) and has nothing to do with copyright. It's bizarre to claim that it can possibly be a violation of copyright to use a physical device that you fully own the way you want. And it's pathetic that the U.S. is so far behind the rest of the world in terms of having a rational competitive wireless market.
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidised price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
yeah, but all carriers have ETF's (Early Termination Fees) that you have to pay if you jump ship before fulfilling your contract. That should take care of the subsidized cost of the phone.
mike-y said:
yeah, but all carriers have ETF's (Early Termination Fees) that you have to pay if you jump ship before fulfilling your contract. That should take care of the subsidized cost of the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes if those fees actually get paid. Or most likely someone who is being shady in the first place will just let those fees go to collection and later written off in bankruptcy or simply forgotten about for years and years.
Take me for example, i got my phone for $99 (2 of them actually) and i am very unhappy with T-Mobile but still have 18 months on my contract well my thought is to unlock the phone, jump ship, and worry about the early term fees at a later date which by the way wouldn't be in my name anyway. So really if i break up with my girlfriend then I'm not responsible and i just made a $400 profit. Now i have two reasons not to do all that 1I'm not a shady person and 2 its now illegal.
My point is that all one needs to do is ask the carrier to unlock the phone and if there are no contact obligations then the carrier has no reason not to. The only ones that should have issue are those trying to be shady.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
explodingboy70 said:
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidised price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
explodingboy70 said:
Yes if those fees actually get paid. Or most likely someone who is being shady in the first place will just let those fees go to collection and later written off in bankruptcy or simply forgotten about for years and years.
Take me for example, i got my phone for $99 (2 of them actually) and i am very unhappy with T-Mobile but still have 18 months on my contract well my thought is to unlock the phone, jump ship, and worry about the early term fees at a later date which by the way wouldn't be in my name anyway. So really if i break up with my girlfriend then I'm not responsible and i just made a $400 profit. Now i have two reasons not to do all that 1I'm not a shady person and 2 its now illegal.
My point is that all one needs to do is ask the carrier to unlock the phone and if there are no contact obligations then the carrier has no reason not to. The only ones that should have issue are those trying to be shady.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, sir, I believe YOU are missing the point if you honestly believe this is about carriers trying to recoup their $$$ from subsidized phones. Seriously? NOTHING in the bill states carriers can unlock phones after a contract is fulfilled, or that they have to. Therefore, after said contract is fulfilled, you STILL own a device you dont have control over.
Do you own a house? Do you have a mortgage? If so, you know that just by paying off the mortgage it doesnt give you any more property ownership rights that you didnt have when you signed the mortgage. Once you've signed it, you legally own it, even though you still owe money on it. Until this overreaching law took effect, it was that way for phones (for the most part).
explodingboy70 said:
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidised price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You forgot an important point in your comment. YOU HAVE TO PAY 20-30USD PER MONTH FOR DATA! Therefore, your cost of adding a line is 120$+20x12=360$. So the profit is not as great as you mentioned.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda app-developers app
What's next? Putting restrictions on oxygen?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda premium
Signed and reposted on Hackforums.
http://www.hackforums.net/showthread.php?tid=3226550
Hope you don't mind.
I linked this thread, and quoted the contents of the OP.
Figure it'd be good to get it out to a broader audience.
45,000 more signatures needed.
Go ahead and put my name on it. I'm too lazy to register, and I don't want a bunch of new e-mails trying to get me sign a bunch of other petitions.
And to the debate: Use an Obama phone, Save your money, and BUY a phone outright. The faster they see that this hurts the big TWO (AT&T, Verizon), it will change.
If you're impatient and want a phone NOW, understand the consequences. You are licensing that phone, and may never own it. And you'll also be advertising for whatever company you go with.
Yes, I know I'm advertising for T-Mobile in my signature. That's because I think they are honest, and very beneficial to the XDA community.
explodingboy70 said:
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidized price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WELL SAID! BRAVO! This I would support as well as many others!
I have been on this side of things for a long time! I used to live in Seattle, had Sprint and Verizon because ATT and T-Mobile are both very sketchy up there, Verizon is top dawg and since Sprint uses Verizon's towers and is cheaper than anyone else, you get the best phones (imo) and best value, not to mention unlimited data.
That being said, I recently moved to Dallas, and Sprint/Verizon down here are really terrible! I mean Seattle, West Seattle I was pulling upwards of 70mb down and 50-60's up, ridiculous speeds, but made it a lot better when you paid your bill because you felt like you were getting something! Down in Dallas I never saw it go past 10-15mb. Not to mention my signal bars never reached full unless I was under a tower.
Tmobile, my current provider (only for another week or so) is just terrible everywhere. Best I have seen them anywhere is 6-10mb, and I'm sorry but they claim to have better call quality than ATT now, which is horse$hit! Dropped calls, taking over a minute just to start dialing, and when you do talk, lets just say its not good.
I just think that payment plans should be based on where you are at in their coverage area. (If you leave state/town for a trip that's on you). That's like car companies making you pay retail price for a used car same as a new one! Would you do it?
I hope you guys know they unlocking your device is legal. What's illegal is buying an unlock code from online sources. You can no longer just go online and pay a small fee (like $10) for the unlock code. You can call your service provider (T-Mobile as an example) and ask them for the code. (They shouldn't have a problem giving it to you.) Another way of legally unlocking your device is by doing a method like the one in this thread:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2024514
Or you could have someone that knows coding and have then do it for you. (As long as it is not through an online coding site you are good.)
Source: T-Mobile employee and target mobile employee.
----------------------------------------------
I'm full of great idea's, but don't have the time to create them or learn the coding to create them. If you want to make one of my ideas a reality just message me and I will give you my idea as specific as possible.
ideas:
Spoiler
-launcher/lock screen
-line rider type game where you control the character
-2d fighting game like art of fighting for the SNES
-multiplayer fps where you create your own map with a creative mode (minecraft style)
-roller coaster tycoon style game
-many more!
Just message me which idea you want info on and I'll tell you!
----------------------------------------------
Well said Ariana....
Service provider must ... unlock the device at any time and at no charge.
At least that's what the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) is recommending.
It's warm day in February when I have something good to say about the CRTC but they do finally appear to cracking down on service provider fees, lengthy contracts, and cell phone locking.
I mention this because the title of this thread sounds like the opposite of ongoing discussions in Canada about how North American consumers are paying more than cell phone customers the world over.
More information by search for "Buyer's remorse" and CBC or go to the Canadian governments CRTC website to download a full pdf of current proposal.
(I'd give you the links, but I'm newly registered here
So in nov I signed up with tmobile and got the note and a gs3 for my wife. I plan on selling the note and getting the s4 in march. I call tmobile to pay it off and they tell me I have to pay both phones off? This isn't what the agent told me when I signed up. He knew I swap phones about every 6 months. So my question is why can't I pay the note off separate? My wife never upgrades her phone plus it would lower my bill per month down. Tmobile is ending the subsidiaries anyways so I don't see what the issue is? The reason I went gsm is to be able to put any phone on the carrier as I like, such as international versions.
Talk to a different rep. Cause that rep is an asshole
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda app-developers app
Nope just spoke to customer relations and was told it cannot be done until tmobile ends the subsidiaries in a few months. No way in hell I'm paying $700+ for both phones. Basically the rep I signed up with flat out lied to me. If I would of known this I would of just bought my note full retail. Really ticked off right now.
$720 for both phones + $600 or so for the s4 is just too much for me.
3rd damn carrier that seems to lure their customers in with lies. Who would refuse me paying off a phone today? Basically I was told their systems cannot allow only one device to be payed off until may when they change their policies. This is really going to screw over a lot of people. I just don't get it.
Can anyone explain tmobiles logic in this? I'm baffled.
I've heard that since it was Even More Plus. The credit line is for everything combined, you can't separate them out. No idea if that's the truth, but they have been consistent in telling me that. If you were lied to, that really sucks and, IMO, they should try to do something for you. No idea what, but they could offer something.
Not much help, but at least confirming what they are telling you now anyway.
ttabbal said:
I've heard that since it was Even More Plus. The credit line is for everything combined, you can't separate them out. No idea if that's the truth, but they have been consistent in telling me that. If you were lied to, that really sucks and, IMO, they should try to do something for you. No idea what, but they could offer something.
Not much help, but at least confirming what they are telling you now anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I have it in writing too from the original kiosk rep. I'm really ticked as I talk to this guy all the time when I'm at the mall. Tmobile is investigating what he told me and I've notified his manger. This really screws anyone who wants to get another phone anytime before may. I just don't understand the logic. Why would they care if I decide to pay the device off? Now I'm screwed if I wanted to get the s4 in a few weeks unless I add a 3rd line.
Now I can see why so many go prepaid. To avoid all of the carrier BS. This is worse then what I dealt with on both sprint and Verizon.
There has to be a loophole for this. Any ideas guys?
It does make sense that the credit extended is put into one loan. I'm sure it makes it easier on the accounting for them....... BUT...... If that guy told you something different, I would go straight to him and have him help you get this sorted out immediately. He's the one that gave you misinformation, I would make him spend time working to correct it also.
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium
yeah, this really makes no sense to me why they would require this just because the phone accounts are linked? Just to be sure though, I'm going to make sure I buy my phone and my wife's phone separately.
Im told its becuase both phones were purchased together but that was becuase thats the day i switched from verizon to tmobile. The rep knew i switch devices often and told me it wouldnt be an issue. I got an email from the manager that they are investigating. If any of you bought the phones together id check on this. Im glad they are ending the pay per month on the phones BS. From now on ill pay full price.
This happened to me too. Opened a tmo business account and bought an S3 and a cheap text phone for the wife. Financed $500 between the two, and was told I could pay them off seperately. The note 2 comes out, so I go to pay the balance of the S3. I was told the same, you have to pay both off because they where contracted at ths same time. But I still had enough available credit to finance the note 2, swap the sim from the S3 in to the note 2, put the S3 on Craigslist, it sold the next day for the $400 balance I had on the note 2. Walked in to tmo the very next day and paid the note 2 off.
This is just an idea, I don't know for sure if it will work, but when I bought
my Note and my wife's phone, they told me that is no penalty if I pay
the phone(s) in advance OR if I pay more per month to shorten the pay
period of 20 months.
So, I guess you can go into the store and tell them you want to pay, let's say
$300 in the account for the phones. That will lower your montly payment, just
like you payed yours out and not "mess" with they're account number.
It's worth a try anyway....
Wait. So I have a $2000 credit on my account for devices. There's like $700 available. Your saying they won't let me pay a partial payment towards that?
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium
I think you can make a partial payment, but your monthly bill stays the same until its all paid off
mikeyinid said:
Wait. So I have a $2000 credit on my account for devices. There's like $700 available. Your saying they won't let me pay a partial payment towards that?
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i was told flat out i cannot pay off just one device, it has to be all of them or none until they end the subsidies and change their systems in may. im waiting to hear back from the store manager.
stevessvt said:
I think you can make a partial payment, but your monthly bill stays the same until its all paid off
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the way tmobile does business is BS. never had this issue on sprint or verizon, i could swap phones when ever i wanted without penalties. knowing me the s4 will be announced and ill get impatient and just pay the $720 off and get the new phone lol. from now on ill always just buy my devices outright.
You could do what I did. Pay the deposit on the new phone and finance the rest, sell the old phone, then pay off the new phone.
premiatul said:
This is just an idea, I don't know for sure if it will work, but when I bought
my Note and my wife's phone, they told me that is no penalty if I pay
the phone(s) in advance OR if I pay more per month to shorten the pay
period of 20 months.
So, I guess you can go into the store and tell them you want to pay, let's say
$300 in the account for the phones. That will lower your montly payment, just
like you payed yours out and not "mess" with they're account number.
It's worth a try anyway....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i get what your saying but until these phones are payed off i wouldn't be able to activate the s4 or whatever phone on the current lines without penalty. id have to open a 3rd line. if i cannot get this resolved i guess ill just have to wait until they change their systems in late april or may.
stevessvt said:
You could do what I did. Pay the deposit on the new phone and finance the rest, sell the old phone, then pay off the new phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's when tmobile gets the s4, i was planning on buying the international version as it will ship much sooner than the US carriers will get it. plus from now on i won't finance phones from tmobile, ill buy them outright. if that's what you meant buy putting a deposit down.
it's my fault for believing the rep and not reading all of the fine print. the dude must be like a car salesman. says anything for a sale.
fix-this! said:
i was told flat out i cannot pay off just one device, it has to be all of them or none until they end the subsidies and change their systems in may. im waiting to hear back from the store manager.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that is the case, which I will call tomorrow and find out, me and tmobile are gonna have a huge problem. I upgrade very often. If I can't pay a portion of that off to free up space for a new device there's no point.
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium
mikeyinid said:
If that is the case, which I will call tomorrow and find out, me and tmobile are gonna have a huge problem. I upgrade very often. If I can't pay a portion of that off to free up space for a new device there's no point.
Sent from my SGH-T889 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
same here man, i upgrade very often. go ahead and call and i bet you get the same response i was given. once they end the subsidies and change the policies you will be able to pay just one device off. "take that with a grain of salt". to me this just doesn't make much business sense. if i finance two cars at the same time for lets say 2 years and decide to pay one of them off early i doubt anyone would be complaining getting their money early.
fix-this! said:
Nope just spoke to customer relations and was told it cannot be done until tmobile ends the subsidiaries in a few months. No way in hell I'm paying $700+ for both phones. Basically the rep I signed up with flat out lied to me. If I would of known this I would of just bought my note full retail. Really ticked off right now.
$720 for both phones + $600 or so for the s4 is just too much for me.
3rd damn carrier that seems to lure their customers in with lies. Who would refuse me paying off a phone today? Basically I was told their systems cannot allow only one device to be payed off until may when they change their policies. This is really going to screw over a lot of people. I just don't get it.
Can anyone explain tmobiles logic in this? I'm baffled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Business 101.... get it in writing otherwise it's hearsay
Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 2
---------- Post added at 05:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:17 AM ----------
fix-this! said:
same here man, i upgrade very often. go ahead and call and i bet you get the same response i was given. once they end the subsidies and change the policies you will be able to pay just one device off. "take that with a grain of salt". to me this just doesn't make much business sense. if i finance two cars at the same time for lets say 2 years and decide to pay one of them off early i doubt anyone would be complaining getting their money early.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ummmm a car and a cellphone are two different anomalies... .
Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 2
I bought an almost new S3 LTE SGH-T999L for my son off CL. It checked OK on swappa and it worked for a week, then unable to connect to network. Swappa now says blacklisted. DOH!
It sucks to have a $350 paper weight! I tried to contact the seller with no luck.
Couple questions...
Any way to fix it?
Can this model be downgraded to 4.1.1 to use free unlock method and even then will it possibly work on anther carrier is the US. I know it will work outside the US if unlocked.
I contacted T-Mobile and they said nothing I can do, only the original owner can have the blacklist lifted.
Any help or advice much appreciated!
Also let this be a lesson to all...just because it works when you buy it, don't mean it wont go belly-up in a week. :crying:
Sorry I didn't answer your PM before. Wasn't ignoring you. Unfortunately your options are extremely limited.
You will have to pay for an unlock code online (see the last couple pages of the unlock thread), and then sell overseas. Just please be honest about it to whoever you sell it to in case they plan on bringing it to the states.
Personally, I'd also file a police report. May not come to anything, but if the guy gets arrested for anything else, or enough people file a report against him for similar stuff, you may then have some recourse against him. But he has twice committed fraud, or theft by deception (or something like that). First against T-Mobile, then against you.
Once unlocked, it might work on other carriers here, but not for long. I'm told all US carriers will be sharing the same blacklist by year's end. I've also heard it may also be shared with Canadian carriers as well.
Sorry to hear that happened to you. You're definitely not alone! This happens all the time, unfortunately.
Never buy used unless you make the transaction in person at a T-Mobile store where the seller can prove they have paid for the device in full and are allowed to sell it. Also, have a note made on both accounts (preferably by a manager) that the sale is made so they can't report it stolen a few weeks later.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4
I hear you, but it never goes down like that. I've bought and sold 30 or 40 smartphones. First time I've ever got burnt. I make small profit along, but this one is a stinger. I've had people want to meet me at Verizon, ATT and T-Mobile and every time I met them there all the store employees would say is if the sim card works it's ok.
Of course you could ask for a receipt...but what if it's a reseller like myself? I've had one receipt the whole time. Most of the time you can spot a fraud and steer clear. I check esn on swappa and/or Verizon site. I guess it's just a risky thing and I've been very lucky so far.
I did get a guy on ebay to unlock the phone for $10 last night. It works with a Lycamobile sim(T-Mobile reseller) and also works with a new LTE ATT Straight Talk sim...recieves LTE even. Maybe not for long...but it works fine now and it's been blacklisted about a month.
Guy on ebay unlocks clean phones for $5 & blacklisted for $10, he does remote into your pc to do it, but it only takes 2-3 minutes. He gave me the code, but it was never needed.
I'm a PagePlus dealer and I do alot of carrier flashing, not to beat blacklist, but to get more use from older 3G devices. Anytime I sell a phone I always give a 2 days return policy if they change their mind.
The seller of the phone should be able to get some sort of confirmation off of his own account showing he is not currently making payments on it. If the employees are only saying to see if the SIM works, they are just being lazy or ignorant! With the owners permission they can look it up, or call support from the phone and have him ask them to verify on speaker so you can hear. I'm just trying to say there's other ways to get the info before buying.
I'd say that if you've bought that many you are pretty lucky. But for the blacklisted one that worked on other carriers...expect it not to on AT&T very soon and all other US carriers around the end of the year. Right now T-Mobile and AT&T share their lists, but don't use the same one, so it'll often take a few weeks to catch up. As I understand it, once the national list is in place, all carriers will be using the same one so it'll be more instant.
I have spoken to a few people who bought their phone used and all seemed good, but then nearly 2 months later it got blacklisted! Some people are apparently selling it, but then waiting a month or two to report it stolen!
I just hope that if one of your customers gets blacklisted a few weeks after buying from you, you will be willing to at least exchange it.
But before you try and sell this one, please consider that it's practically a given that it's not gonna work for very long.
Also, (and I'm not sure of the ramifications here) keep in mind that you are knowingly in possession of stolen property. That by itself is probably not a big deal for you, legally speaking, since it happens to so many people and hardly no one knows what they are buying when this happens to them. But if you sell it, you will be knowingly selling stolen goods. If one of your customers gets blacklisted, you could be the one held liable.
Don't take it wrong, I'm just trying to help!
And I'm just curious, what do you mean by "carrier flashing"?
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4
I understand where you're coming from and I will not sell this phone except to one particular customer who takes them outside the country. My son is using it now on LycaMobile which is a UK based reseller using T-Molile towers. We will see how long it lasts...strange circumstance there since the provider is not from the US, will they also adhere to universal blacklist? I dunno...time will tell. At $30 per month they are cheapest unlimited I know of(Only 50MB 4G data, then 2G/3G).
I run a legitimate part time business and have rarely had phones returned, but always made the customer happy. Happy customers come back and most of my profit is selling refills and flashing/rooting/unlocking...not the actual phone sales.
Carrier flashing: Mainly I've flashed older Metro phones to work on PagePlus and GS3's from Sprint or Verizon must be flashed for pageplus because they don't yet allow 4G phones. I never do any ESN changes. I'm an old techie and I go way back to Nextel mods in mid 90's. lol
BTW I installed CM 10.1.2 RC2 right from the phone yesterday after originally flashing the CM10 linked in Doc's T999L thread. It flashed perfect right through CM update utility automatically and seems to run perfectly.
I have a T-Mobile s4, which is turned off due to non payment and I want to hook it up with another carrier. I tried the info given to unlock it but after I enter the number, it doesn't go to the screen shown on the video. Is there anything I can do besides pay T-Mobile?
Nope. I'm pretty sure that you have to have an active line to unlock.
purplekity415 said:
I have a T-Mobile s4, which is turned off due to non payment and I want to hook it up with another carrier. I tried the info given to unlock it but after I enter the number, it doesn't go to the screen shown on the video. Is there anything I can do besides pay T-Mobile?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
None payment of service or non payment on device?
Either which way your device is black listed. But if for non payment on device, technically device is stolen.
And either each way, this is probably a grey area to discuss on xda
carrier unlock s4
ShinySide said:
None payment of service or non payment on device?
Either which way your device is black listed. But if for non payment on device, technically device is stolen.
And either each way, this is probably a grey area to discuss on xda[/QUOTE
Hi, thank you for getting back to me so soon. It is off due to non payment of the bill and i put down half on the phone, so i guess its for both. I lost my job and could not afford to pay anything to anyone until i got my unemployment, anyway i wonder if i will have a problem restoring the service when i get paid? Thanks again.
denise
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ShinySide said:
None payment of service or non payment on device?
Either which way your device is black listed. But if for non payment on device, technically device is stolen.
And either each way, this is probably a grey area to discuss on xda
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope what you mean is that carrier locking of phones is borderline criminal. There is nothing morally wrong with unlocking your own phone. If you don't pay your electric bill, they don't confiscate your lights.
Sent from my One using Tapatalk
mhannigan said:
I hope what you mean is that carrier locking of phones is borderline criminal. There is nothing morally wrong with unlocking your own phone. If you don't pay your electric bill, they don't confiscate your lights.
Sent from my One using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Guess you dont understand what I meant by non payment on the phone. i.e. Tmos payment plan to pay off the phone. Which you are in a contract to pay off the device. And if you dont fulfill the contract....guess who legally owns it? Cant buy a car not pay the bank and say hey i dont bank with you anymore so now I own the car legally....
ShinySide said:
Guess you dont understand what I meant by non payment on the phone. i.e. Tmos payment plan to pay off the phone. Which you are in a contract to pay off the device. And if you dont fulfill the contract....guess who legally owns it? Cant buy a car not pay the bank and say hey i dont bank with you anymore so now I own the car legally....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, it would be a little bit more like not paying your OnStar subscription fee and then having someone in a forum talk down to you like you stole the car because of it.
There is a huge difference here. The phone and the "contract" being intermingled with control over using the phone is nothing more than a tool to blackmail the customer into staying with the provider. T-Mobile's primary business is providing service for a monthly fee. I paid cash for my T-Mobile branded phone ($700+). But when I traveled abroad about a month later, they refused to unlock it because I had not had it with T-Mobile service yet for 40 days (although I have been with T-Mobile for at least a decade).
Like I said, when you don't pay your electric, they don't disable your lamps and your TV. They don't even come take your CFL bulbs that they subsidized. I get to use those bulbs with a windmill if I want to. When you don't pay your landline bill, they don't remotely disable your Panasonic cordless phone. If they COULD, they WOULD, but we wouldn't tolerate it. Unfortunately, there are people (like you) who have been lulled into thinking that this is OK when it comes to cell phones. Being a Senior Member, I think you should set a better example and use your critical thinking - and not simply imply that someone who didn't pay their cell bill shouldn't even be discussing it in public.
That was my point - indicating that you're not even sure if it should be discussed here is a bit dramatic - the guy isn't trying to screw anyone - just exploring his options. He paid for half of the phone up front, and paid for service for somewhere between 0 and 2 years. If anyone has been screwed, it's him by being held hostage.
A cell phone and a financed automobile are in different ballparks, my friend. I think you know that.
Mike
mhannigan said:
Actually, it would be a little bit more like not paying your OnStar subscription fee and then having someone in a forum talk down to you like you stole the car because of it.
There is a huge difference here. The phone and the "contract" being intermingled with control over using the phone is nothing more than a tool to blackmail the customer into staying with the provider. T-Mobile's primary business is providing service for a monthly fee. I paid cash for my T-Mobile branded phone ($700+). But when I traveled abroad about a month later, they refused to unlock it because I had not had it with T-Mobile service yet for 40 days (although I have been with T-Mobile for at least a decade).
Like I said, when you don't pay your electric, they don't disable your lamps and your TV. They don't even come take your CFL bulbs that they subsidized. I get to use those bulbs with a windmill if I want to. When you don't pay your landline bill, they don't remotely disable your Panasonic cordless phone. If they COULD, they WOULD, but we wouldn't tolerate it. Unfortunately, there are people (like you) who have been lulled into thinking that this is OK when it comes to cell phones. Being a Senior Member, I think you should set a better example and use your critical thinking - and not simply imply that someone who didn't pay their cell bill shouldn't even be discussing it in public.
That was my point - indicating that you're not even sure if it should be discussed here is a bit dramatic - the guy isn't trying to screw anyone - just exploring his options. He paid for half of the phone up front, and paid for service for somewhere between 0 and 2 years. If anyone has been screwed, it's him by being held hostage.
A cell phone and a financed automobile are in different ballparks, my friend. I think you know that.
Mike
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahaha Okay so according to your logic, Everyone go to Tmobile Only put a down payment down then run off with the phone and you legally own it. Sounds so legit and logical. Their not going to unlock a phone they legally own because some one didnt pay it off. Or unlock your phone for you when you owe them money. Nor let you use it on their service under a different account. Why? Because everyone will just rack their bill up then just open a new account so they dont have to pay that racked up bill off. Obviously you dont understand how a business and contracts work. Hes not being "held hostage" he/she just isnt going to receive a service (ie unlock code) when he/she owes money.
Is but same logic. Dont pay your phone, no unlock code. Dont pay your note, No title. As far as your 40 day problem? (And its actually 90) No where lets you buy phones out right, unlock them right away and walk away free without service. They'd lose money and wouldnt be a service but just a cell phone dealer. If you want to do that go buy a factory unlocked which costs even more then one locked to a carrier then you dont have to worry about whinning and crying you cant unlock your phone when you dont pay your bill, fulfill a contract, or fulfill the terms of service you signed when you purchased the device.
Anyways you think its cool to unlock and "run off" with a phone that isnt paid in full and money is owed on, and I dont. We can just leave it at that.
OT but actually its 7 or 14 days service needed to get it unlocked once its paid in full, I don't remember exactly but its one of those. I called T-Mobile a few months ago and that's what they told me.. It might be a recent change