3 cannot unlock mobile phones - BULL****

3 Australia claim they cannot unlock their mobile phones.

This is *BULL***** because they can. They choose *NOT* to unlock them,
which is totally different to saying they cannot!


--
The views I present are that of my own and NOT of any organisation I may
belong to.

73 de Simon, VK3XEM.
<http://web.acma.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452>

---

› See More: 3 cannot unlock mobile phones - BULL****

DaN wrote:
> I had the same problem with them
> I just got a new phone check your contract it will have something in it
> about unlocking but I think they charge to unlock
>
> Simon Templar wrote:
>> 3 Australia claim they cannot unlock their mobile phones.
>>
>> This is *BULL***** because they can. They choose *NOT* to unlock
>> them, which is totally different to saying they cannot!

No, they straight out *REFUSE* to unlock the phones. They prefer to
hold customers to ransom rather that encourage them to stay with decent
service.


--
The views I present are that of my own and NOT of any organisation I may
belong to.

73 de Simon, VK3XEM.
<http://web.acma.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452>

I had the same problem with them
I just got a new phone check your contract it will have something in it
about unlocking but I think they charge to unlock

Simon Templar wrote:
> 3 Australia claim they cannot unlock their mobile phones.
>
> This is *BULL***** because they can. They choose *NOT* to unlock them,
> which is totally different to saying they cannot!
>
>
> --
> The views I present are that of my own and NOT of any organisation I may
> belong to.
>
> 73 de Simon, VK3XEM.
> <http://web.acma.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452>
>

"Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:4545f976$0$4668$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
them, which is totally different to saying they cannot!
>
> No, they straight out *REFUSE* to unlock the phones. They prefer to hold
> customers to ransom rather that encourage them to stay with decent
> service.

So buy the phone outright dimwit - oh, that's right, it will cost you $1000
more.

Gees, I wonder why they refuse to unlock them.

Pagey wrote:
> "Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:4545f976$0$4668$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> them, which is totally different to saying they cannot!
>> No, they straight out *REFUSE* to unlock the phones. They prefer to hold
>> customers to ransom rather that encourage them to stay with decent
>> service.

> So buy the phone outright dimwit - oh, that's right, it will cost you $1000
> more.

> Gees, I wonder why they refuse to unlock them.

What about out of contract phones? They still refuse to unlock them!
Looks like you are the dimwit!


--
The views I present are that of my own and NOT of any organisation I may
belong to.

73 de Simon, VK3XEM.
<http://web.acma.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452>

Simon Templar wrote:
> 3 Australia claim they cannot unlock their mobile phones.
>
> This is *BULL***** because they can. They choose *NOT* to unlock them,
> which is totally different to saying they cannot!

Correct. Now calm down, deep breath, and google for someone who _will_
unlock them for $30 or so. Hopefully you have a model that can be unlocked.

Mike wrote:
> Simon Templar wrote:
>> 3 Australia claim they cannot unlock their mobile phones.

>> This is *BULL***** because they can. They choose *NOT* to unlock
>> them, which is totally different to saying they cannot!

> Correct. Now calm down, deep breath, and google for someone who _will_
> unlock them for $30 or so. Hopefully you have a model that can be
> unlocked.

Hehe, I am calm. I just don't like people being told bull**** by large
companies. Unfortunately my Nokia 6680 or N73 can't be unlocked via a
3rd party at this time, but I will wait!


--
The views I present are that of my own and NOT of any organisation I may
belong to.

73 de Simon, VK3XEM.
<http://web.acma.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452>

Some phones are really unlockable as they have to change the ROM to do it
and that will need them
to crank open your handset and sticking soldering iron into your phone
board.

I have friends in Nokia distribution and they say " just forget buying those
unit and just find some other operator that can do software unlocks " and so
then I go buy Sony Ericsson now

=bob=




"Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:4545df66$0$4673$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>3 Australia claim they cannot unlock their mobile phones.
>
> This is *BULL***** because they can. They choose *NOT* to unlock them,
> which is totally different to saying they cannot!

"Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:45460c34$0$4675$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> Pagey wrote:
>> "Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:4545f976$0$4668$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>> them, which is totally different to saying they cannot!
>>> No, they straight out *REFUSE* to unlock the phones. They prefer to
>>> hold customers to ransom rather that encourage them to stay with decent
>>> service.
>
>> So buy the phone outright dimwit - oh, that's right, it will cost you
>> $1000 more.
>
>> Gees, I wonder why they refuse to unlock them.
>
> What about out of contract phones? They still refuse to unlock them!
> Looks like you are the dimwit!

Simon, you buy the phone on the condition that is is locked to 3. Regardless
of whether you still have a contract with them or not, they have the right
to refuse to unlock the phone.

As I said before, if you don't like that - tough titties. Buy a phone
without a contract and pay $1000 more - you can't have it both ways!

Dimwit (added for good measure).

On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:21:19 +1100, "Pagey" <adpage@invalid> wrote:

>
>"Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:45460c34$0$4675$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>> Pagey wrote:
>>> "Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:4545f976$0$4668$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>>> them, which is totally different to saying they cannot!
>>>> No, they straight out *REFUSE* to unlock the phones. They prefer to
>>>> hold customers to ransom rather that encourage them to stay with decent
>>>> service.
>>
>>> So buy the phone outright dimwit - oh, that's right, it will cost you
>>> $1000 more.
>>
>>> Gees, I wonder why they refuse to unlock them.
>>
>> What about out of contract phones? They still refuse to unlock them!
>> Looks like you are the dimwit!
>
>Simon, you buy the phone on the condition that is is locked to 3. Regardless
>of whether you still have a contract with them or not, they have the right
>to refuse to unlock the phone.
>
>As I said before, if you don't like that - tough titties. Buy a phone
>without a contract and pay $1000 more - you can't have it both ways!
>
>Dimwit (added for good measure).
>

I wouldn't go with 3 in the first place, but as for out of contract
phones, technically you have purchased the phone, and are able to do
whatever you please with it as far as I remember. If they were holding
me like that after the contract period has expired, I'd be contacting
the TIO about it.

"Tsunami Australia" <tsunami-underscore-australia-at-yahoo-dot-com-dot-au>
wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:21:19 +1100, "Pagey" <adpage@invalid> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:45460c34$0$4675$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>>> Pagey wrote:
>>>> "Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:4545f976$0$4668$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>>>> them, which is totally different to saying they cannot!
>>>>> No, they straight out *REFUSE* to unlock the phones. They prefer to
>>>>> hold customers to ransom rather that encourage them to stay with
>>>>> decent
>>>>> service.
>>>
>>>> So buy the phone outright dimwit - oh, that's right, it will cost you
>>>> $1000 more.
>>>
>>>> Gees, I wonder why they refuse to unlock them.
>>>
>>> What about out of contract phones? They still refuse to unlock them!
>>> Looks like you are the dimwit!
>>
>>Simon, you buy the phone on the condition that is is locked to 3.
>>Regardless
>>of whether you still have a contract with them or not, they have the right
>>to refuse to unlock the phone.
>>
>>As I said before, if you don't like that - tough titties. Buy a phone
>>without a contract and pay $1000 more - you can't have it both ways!
>>
>>Dimwit (added for good measure).
>>
>
> I wouldn't go with 3 in the first place, but as for out of contract
> phones, technically you have purchased the phone, and are able to do
> whatever you please with it as far as I remember. If they were holding
> me like that after the contract period has expired, I'd be contacting
> the TIO about it.

TIO? Why would the TIO become involved? If the phone is out of contract then
sure, do whatever you want with it. If you want it unlocked then take it
somewhere and pay to have it unlocked.

Don't expect 3 to unlock it for you - they don't have to. If they choose not
to then so be it.

It says in the contract that after 12 months they will unlock it.

Rob

"Pagey" <adpage@invalid> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:45460c34$0$4675$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>> Pagey wrote:
>>> "Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:4545f976$0$4668$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>>> them, which is totally different to saying they cannot!
>>>> No, they straight out *REFUSE* to unlock the phones. They prefer to
>>>> hold customers to ransom rather that encourage them to stay with decent
>>>> service.
>>
>>> So buy the phone outright dimwit - oh, that's right, it will cost you
>>> $1000 more.
>>
>>> Gees, I wonder why they refuse to unlock them.
>>
>> What about out of contract phones? They still refuse to unlock them!
>> Looks like you are the dimwit!
>
> Simon, you buy the phone on the condition that is is locked to 3.
> Regardless of whether you still have a contract with them or not, they
> have the right to refuse to unlock the phone.
>
> As I said before, if you don't like that - tough titties. Buy a phone
> without a contract and pay $1000 more - you can't have it both ways!
>
> Dimwit (added for good measure).
>

"R1rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> It says in the contract that after 12 months they will unlock it.

Care to show us where?

It doesn't say anywhere that they *will* unlock your phone. The conditions
say that if the phone is able to be unlocked they will charge a fee for
doing so. Doesn't mean they have to.

Pagey <adpage@invalid> wrote:
> "Tsunami Australia"
> <tsunami-underscore-australia-at-yahoo-dot-com-dot-au> wrote in
> message news:[email protected]...
>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:21:19 +1100, "Pagey" <adpage@invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:45460c34$0$4675$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>>>> Pagey wrote:
>>>>> "Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4545f976$0$4668$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>>>>> them, which is totally different to saying they cannot!
>>>>>> No, they straight out *REFUSE* to unlock the phones. They
>>>>>> prefer to hold customers to ransom rather that encourage them to
>>>>>> stay with decent
>>>>>> service.
>>>>
>>>>> So buy the phone outright dimwit - oh, that's right, it will cost
>>>>> you $1000 more.
>>>>
>>>>> Gees, I wonder why they refuse to unlock them.
>>>>
>>>> What about out of contract phones? They still refuse to unlock
>>>> them! Looks like you are the dimwit!
>>>
>>> Simon, you buy the phone on the condition that is is locked to 3.
>>> Regardless
>>> of whether you still have a contract with them or not, they have
>>> the right to refuse to unlock the phone.
>>>
>>> As I said before, if you don't like that - tough titties. Buy a
>>> phone without a contract and pay $1000 more - you can't have it
>>> both ways! Dimwit (added for good measure).
>>>
>>
>> I wouldn't go with 3 in the first place, but as for out of contract
>> phones, technically you have purchased the phone, and are able to do
>> whatever you please with it as far as I remember. If they were
>> holding me like that after the contract period has expired, I'd be
>> contacting the TIO about it.
>
> TIO? Why would the TIO become involved? If the phone is out of
> contract then sure, do whatever you want with it. If you want it
> unlocked then take it somewhere and pay to have it unlocked.

> Don't expect 3 to unlock it for you - they don't have to.

They do if they ever said that they would for a fee and now refuse to do that.

> If they choose not to then so be it.

It aint that black and white.

"Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Pagey <adpage@invalid> wrote:
>> "Tsunami Australia"
>> <tsunami-underscore-australia-at-yahoo-dot-com-dot-au> wrote in
>> message news:[email protected]...
>>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:21:19 +1100, "Pagey" <adpage@invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:45460c34$0$4675$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>>>>> Pagey wrote:
>>>>>> "Simon Templar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:4545f976$0$4668$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>>>>>> them, which is totally different to saying they cannot!
>>>>>>> No, they straight out *REFUSE* to unlock the phones. They
>>>>>>> prefer to hold customers to ransom rather that encourage them to
>>>>>>> stay with decent
>>>>>>> service.
>>>>>
>>>>>> So buy the phone outright dimwit - oh, that's right, it will cost
>>>>>> you $1000 more.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Gees, I wonder why they refuse to unlock them.
>>>>>
>>>>> What about out of contract phones? They still refuse to unlock
>>>>> them! Looks like you are the dimwit!
>>>>
>>>> Simon, you buy the phone on the condition that is is locked to 3.
>>>> Regardless
>>>> of whether you still have a contract with them or not, they have
>>>> the right to refuse to unlock the phone.
>>>>
>>>> As I said before, if you don't like that - tough titties. Buy a
>>>> phone without a contract and pay $1000 more - you can't have it
>>>> both ways! Dimwit (added for good measure).
>>>>
>>>
>>> I wouldn't go with 3 in the first place, but as for out of contract
>>> phones, technically you have purchased the phone, and are able to do
>>> whatever you please with it as far as I remember. If they were
>>> holding me like that after the contract period has expired, I'd be
>>> contacting the TIO about it.
>>
>> TIO? Why would the TIO become involved? If the phone is out of
>> contract then sure, do whatever you want with it. If you want it
>> unlocked then take it somewhere and pay to have it unlocked.
>
>> Don't expect 3 to unlock it for you - they don't have to.
>
> They do if they ever said that they would for a fee and now refuse to do
> that.

Just because they offer something doesn't mean they have to provide it. It's
not part of their contract, just a service they provide.

>> If they choose not to then so be it.
>
> It aint that black and white.

It is.