ChatterBank2 mins ago
Legal Rights
8 Answers
Hi all,
My grandson bought a iPhone for £200 from a mobile phone dealer that works from home. The phone was locked and the dealer didn't know the unlock code etc, but my grandson checked online and for £20 you can get it unlocked. This takes three days, with a percentage update each day . It has returned as lost or stolen.
But some other sites say it is clean. Dealer said " it was sold as spares as repair so no refund. Apple have no information, the IEM number shows the model and that's all they tell us. Is there anything we can do or is that £200 of hard earned money down the drain?
Thanks all
Hope you have a healthy happy 2019.
Annie.
My grandson bought a iPhone for £200 from a mobile phone dealer that works from home. The phone was locked and the dealer didn't know the unlock code etc, but my grandson checked online and for £20 you can get it unlocked. This takes three days, with a percentage update each day . It has returned as lost or stolen.
But some other sites say it is clean. Dealer said " it was sold as spares as repair so no refund. Apple have no information, the IEM number shows the model and that's all they tell us. Is there anything we can do or is that £200 of hard earned money down the drain?
Thanks all
Hope you have a healthy happy 2019.
Annie.
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by annieigma. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
he can sue the home operator in contract as the phone was not of merchantable quality as per the latest sale of goods act
BUT
does he really want to do that ? (other than as a useful exercise for later)
other points like - he is trading from home, can I do anything about that etc are really dead ends
BUT
does he really want to do that ? (other than as a useful exercise for later)
other points like - he is trading from home, can I do anything about that etc are really dead ends
How did he pay? If it's via Ebay, paypal, credit or debit card get them to try to reverse the charge. If he paid cash you could try strong arming him and kicking up a gigantic fuss and mentioning the police and stolen a lot and see if you can scare him into a refund, otherwise I'm afraid I think he's stuffed :(
I am not sure that he has much of a case. He knowingly bought a locked phone. The seller told him that it was locked and that he (the seller) didn't know the code to unlock it. I think this overrules the merchantable quality thing as the seller was quite clear that, as sold, it could not be used. I agree with Kval that mentioning the police and handling stolen goods might have an effect but if he is going to do it, I would urge him to round up a couple of his largest chums to go with him.....not to do anything illegal but for just in case. Hindsight is a wonderful thing isn't it....I mean this offer did look too good to be true....
You've told us that the dealer works from home but not how your grandson made the purchase. Was it by calling at the guy's house or was it online? If it was an online purchase (or otherwise involved 'distance selling') he's got the right to return goods for a full refund within 30 days even if it's simply because he's changed his mind about the purchase. (i.e. it's completely immaterial as to whether there's anything wrong with the goods or not).
Otherwise the wording of the advertisement offering the phone for sale might be important here. If the advert said "Locked iPhone, code unknown, offered for spares only" your grandson might find it hard to argue his case for a refund but if it said "iPhone, locked but can be unlocked online" then he'd have grounds for stating that the phone was 'not as described'.
Otherwise the wording of the advertisement offering the phone for sale might be important here. If the advert said "Locked iPhone, code unknown, offered for spares only" your grandson might find it hard to argue his case for a refund but if it said "iPhone, locked but can be unlocked online" then he'd have grounds for stating that the phone was 'not as described'.
Hi All,
It was advertised as locked, sold for spares, he collected it from the sellers house and paid cash. the story was that the seller purchased the phone new three years ago, then sold it to a friend. The seller bought the phone back recently, but the friend had forgotten the cloud log in. My grandson went online to see if it could be unlocked, he found a site that did it for £20. paid the money, then three days later it came back saying it had been reported as lost or stolen, and therefore could not be unlocked. He informed the seller, who sent a copy of another check, which said it was "clear". my grandson did another different check,that came back stolen or lost. He rang apple, who could tell him nothing. The way i see it, the seller is experienced in these matters, my grandson knows nothing about phones, so to sell a young lad a phone for £200 that you know will never work again and can only be thrown in the dustbin is not good business, it just proves that the seller is, in my opinion, a crook. why not give a refund? its still in its box, and obviously not been used, and already cost my grandson £20 in failed unblocking. I do not think any genuine businessman would treat a customer like that, £200 better off for a worthless item. its three years old, so would be at the end of its life if it did work. Sellers like that need exposing for the lowlife that they are.
It was advertised as locked, sold for spares, he collected it from the sellers house and paid cash. the story was that the seller purchased the phone new three years ago, then sold it to a friend. The seller bought the phone back recently, but the friend had forgotten the cloud log in. My grandson went online to see if it could be unlocked, he found a site that did it for £20. paid the money, then three days later it came back saying it had been reported as lost or stolen, and therefore could not be unlocked. He informed the seller, who sent a copy of another check, which said it was "clear". my grandson did another different check,that came back stolen or lost. He rang apple, who could tell him nothing. The way i see it, the seller is experienced in these matters, my grandson knows nothing about phones, so to sell a young lad a phone for £200 that you know will never work again and can only be thrown in the dustbin is not good business, it just proves that the seller is, in my opinion, a crook. why not give a refund? its still in its box, and obviously not been used, and already cost my grandson £20 in failed unblocking. I do not think any genuine businessman would treat a customer like that, £200 better off for a worthless item. its three years old, so would be at the end of its life if it did work. Sellers like that need exposing for the lowlife that they are.
Whatever the ethical position might be, the legal one would seem to centre around the fact that the phone was sold 'for spares'. i.e. the vendor made it clear that, as sold, it was a non-functioning item. Unless he clearly implied that it could easily be rendered functional, I can't see that (legally) he's done anything wrong.
Looks like he's got no comeback. Seller offered the phone as spares only, didn't state, or even suggest, that it could be unlocked. As I said, if it looks too good to be true then it probably is. I really am sorry for your grandson's loss but maybe a 200 quid lesson now will save him from a more expensive lesson when he is older. DH and I got swindled out of our rented flat deposit in our mid 20's. It cost us a bit more than 200 and of course the amount was worth more then so I really do sympathise.
1 to 8 of 8
