I'm a big champion of Oz Consumer Law (Watch The Checkout religiously ). But it works both ways and credit should be given where the laws have been adhered to in letter and spirit. If you settled on an inferior device that was your choice (a full walk away refund was also offered).
I agree that since Optus sold the phone then "forseeable associated costs" of it being "not fit for purpose" are also due. I don't believe the $250 was offered as a reperation for these costs so you should probably call/write Optus and request the monthly charges be refunded as is your right.
I just don't think Optus "owe" anyone anything futher in this matter. They could have offered more inducements but that's purely a business decision. Similarly any one wanting to buy a Note8 can look at all the deals and decide what they want to do.
HEY P Same here big fan of checkout and CL
Basicly mate the original contracts are from Aug/Sept when the phone was released
they did wrong by the customer in starting new contracts for note 7 replacements from OCT. if they had matched customers with their original contracts, None of this would be happening, people would be happy like in the REST OF THE WORLD where note 7 owners who got screwed are getting looked after by telcos compared with OPTUS Australia
I'll say I wasn't affected by this issue myself and obviously there's a lot of individual stories about how annoying the whole thing was (I'm sure Samsung wasn't thrilled either :).
The change of contract issue also what I'd put in the 'annoying' basket. If I understand, that was if people took the option to get a $250 discount and move to a different phone. Ideally it should have just been a swap over of handset, but I suspect from OPtus point of view it involved various changes in the terms and conditions, recognition of peoples acceptance of the offer, stuff that was Note 7 related had to be removed etc. So a new contract had to be drawn up.
Best to backdate? Sure, but then its all individual terms and not a single document for all on the new plan (as contract now varies depending on when you bought the Note7). Also it was a month or two. I doubt Optus thought much of it (as neither did customers apparently). If Samsung had released its phone a month later then all this would be a moot point anyway.
But here's what I don't get: The $99 offer is still available isn't it? It just kicks in in about a months time? About the same time the Note8 is actually available? So we're talking about a couple of weeks delay and everything is sorted?
Can't really speak to the rest of the world. The US doesn't have many of the Statutory Rights we enjoy here. Remedies often involve lawsuits etc. Its a different market and Telcos and Samsung do what they think they need to win market share and make a profit. I guess Oz missed out this time.
PS Can anyone say if the $250 was actually stated as compensation of the monthly fees? Or was it just a general signing 'bonus'? If the later then customers should definitely be requesting they get oner or two monthly fees reimbursed.
I preordered last night. I'm just going to sell my s7edge for 500 and at least that'll cover the majority of the 700 upgrade cost. Rather have a note in my hands over the edge any day.
@petergdownload if people had the experience like me last year when dealing with this cluster**** then they have a right to be furious. Don't tell people how to feel or how to deal with it. We rely on our phones for so much these days. I'm an individual disability support worker who's out all day with clients and my phone is a lifeline.
Peter, the $250 was compensation paid by Samsung to all their customers that purchased a Galaxy Note 7 on a contract if they agreed to downgrade to the Galaxy S7 or S7 Edge. It was offered by all telcos & not specific to Optus customers & was basically Samsung's way of apologizing for the inconvenience & taking responsibility for foreseeable loss or damage under the Australian Consumer Law. I cant comment on other telcos but Optus did not offer any other form of compensation to their customers for the monthly charges incurred while unable to use their services due to the recall. Also, you mentioned nobody considered backdating of the contracts at the time, i did! I begged Optus to backdate the contract for this very reason & pressed them about it for over a week before signing but they just kept refusing & id already been without a phone for a good part of 2 months & in the end i just gave up.
Hey P, I was one of the many who had multiple note 7's that worked perfectly and used them until the forced recall which was approximately 2 and a half months after the release date. Being forced to return the units I actually requested that the contracts would be from initial POS but Optus would not as had no policy for this type of cluster****. and just made new contracts.
having to wait the extra 2.5 months means missing out on inital launch credits and bonuses that really should be going to those forced to downgrade to a lesser quality product. So yes the 99 will be good but you would expect Optus and Samsung to look after their loyal customers letting those forced to downgrade to a lesser quality product Ie: (s7 S7E) be given the 99 option 2 months earlier. I feel They would have more orders overall if they valued their business customer base as it is a business phone.
Seems like a grey area - Samsung offered the $250 for 'compensation' (was that ostentibly to cover monthly payments?). Ultimately you'd need to add up what foreseable damage you felt you had a claim to. Fiancially people weren't out of pocket for the handset. IMO $250 covers a few month plan payments with a bit extra.
But that's just an interesting exercise - the whole Statutory Rights thing is pretty grey in implimentation. IMO I'm not sure any case would get more than what has been given already.
The extra month or two on contract is annoying, but for the reasons I mentioned above seems reasonable. No one was forced to take that extension. Everyone was free to get a refund and start over (of course that would have started the next contract later anyway).
I think this is the third time I've asked - Is the $99 upgrade available in October?
That's the beauty of forums - everyone gets to have their say .
I'm not telling anyone how to feel, But I can suggest those feelings may be unreasonably extreme. There was a disaster (a first world one, but still). It happens despite the best efforts of everyone involved. This was a world wide recall. To me the sign of a good company is more how it handles things when they go wrong. IMO Both Optus and Samsung response was timely and comprehensive (especially given the amounts of money involved).
It was inconvienent, dissapointing and disruptive but that happens.
Good idea on leveraging the S7 though.
As I said, Optus were also a 'victim' here and they didn't have suffiecient procedures in place for a total recall (That said, it all got resolved reasonably quickly IMO). I also mentioned that the terms needed to be changed for the new contracts. In essense Optus basically voided all contracts no matter what option people chose. Everyone then started with a clean slate so to speak.
I agree 100% that Optus could definitely announce a two month respite on upgrading phones for $99 - I'll put a couple of PMs out and see if any mod might relay the message.
a respite thats all I am asking for considering its business not personal.
Thankyou I appreciate you making the effort hopefully it will be considered under the overall circumstances.