Quantcast Are 3 really still that bad???
This is a discussion on Are 3 really still that bad??? in the uk.telecom.mobile forum at Cell Phone Forums

Go Back   Cell Phone Forums > Cell Phone Service Providers > European Service Providers > uk.telecom.mobile



Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 12-06-2005, 09:52 AM   #1
JC
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Are 3 really still that bad???


Just coming to the end of 2 O2 contracts and am considering 3 because of
the attractive tariffs (and the Motorola V3x)

Some family members already have 3 and by and large seem very satisfied
with them.

I am seeing loads of reports here though condemning 3 as a pile of poo!

So..are they really that bad??
--

Regards

John [Essex, UK]
Remove the obvious spamtrap to reply


Reply With Quote
Cell Phone Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-06-2005, 11:43 AM   #2
BlueGhost
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???


JC wrote:
> Just coming to the end of 2 O2 contracts and am considering 3 because of
> the attractive tariffs (and the Motorola V3x)
>
> Some family members already have 3 and by and large seem very satisfied
> with them.
>
> I am seeing loads of reports here though condemning 3 as a pile of poo!
>
> So..are they really that bad??


if your family has no problems then you shouldn't as most complaints are
due to poor coverage and poor customer services. If you don't have any
problems with coverage then there is no need to contact the poor
customer services.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Pritchard
Web :: http://www.blueghost.co.uk
Reply-To :: replace '@austin.3.16' with '@blueyonder.co.uk'
Ad :: Want your Nokia phone fully unlocked and reset, see
:: http://www.blueghost.co.uk/unlock_guide/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2005, 11:51 AM   #3
DCA
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???


"JC" <johncalias-newsgroupsATyahooD0TcoD0Tuk> wrote in message
news:ihcbp1ls89kgnuqbs94vfjsjd73j98q548@4ax.com...
> Just coming to the end of 2 O2 contracts and am considering 3 because of
> the attractive tariffs (and the Motorola V3x)
>
> Some family members already have 3 and by and large seem very satisfied
> with them.
>
> I am seeing loads of reports here though condemning 3 as a pile of poo!
>
> So..are they really that bad??
> --
>
> Regards
>
> John [Essex, UK]
> Remove the obvious spamtrap to reply



Initially they cocked up my discount deal and it cost me alot of "not
included" minutes to sort it out
The coverage in my area was good but penetration of my home walls was crap
so I had trouble using the minutes.
I strongly suggest you get someone to confirm the signal works in your home.
Apart from that, no issues
David


Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2005, 11:53 AM   #4
DCA
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???


"JC" <johncalias-newsgroupsATyahooD0TcoD0Tuk> wrote in message
news:ihcbp1ls89kgnuqbs94vfjsjd73j98q548@4ax.com...
> Just coming to the end of 2 O2 contracts and am considering 3 because of
> the attractive tariffs (and the Motorola V3x)
>
> Some family members already have 3 and by and large seem very satisfied
> with them.
>
> I am seeing loads of reports here though condemning 3 as a pile of poo!
>
> So..are they really that bad??
> --
>
> Regards
>
> John [Essex, UK]
> Remove the obvious spamtrap to reply



Initially they cocked up my discount deal and it cost me alot of "not
included" minutes to sort it out
The coverage in my area was good but penetration of my home walls was crap
so I had trouble using the minutes.
I strongly suggest you get someone to confirm the signal works in your home.
Apart from that, no issues
David


Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2005, 12:09 PM   #5
Jonathan Sklan-Willis
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???



"JC" <johncalias-newsgroupsATyahooD0TcoD0Tuk> wrote in message
news:ihcbp1ls89kgnuqbs94vfjsjd73j98q548@4ax.com...
> Just coming to the end of 2 O2 contracts and am considering 3 because of
> the attractive tariffs (and the Motorola V3x)
>
> Some family members already have 3 and by and large seem very satisfied
> with them.
>
> I am seeing loads of reports here though condemning 3 as a pile of poo!
>
> So..are they really that bad??
> --
>

YES!


Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2005, 12:34 PM   #6
AMO
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???


"JC" <johncalias-newsgroupsATyahooD0TcoD0Tuk> wrote in message
news:ihcbp1ls89kgnuqbs94vfjsjd73j98q548@4ax.com...
> Just coming to the end of 2 O2 contracts and am considering 3 because of
> the attractive tariffs (and the Motorola V3x)
>
> Some family members already have 3 and by and large seem very satisfied
> with them.
>
> I am seeing loads of reports here though condemning 3 as a pile of poo!
>
> So..are they really that bad??
> --
>
> Regards
>
> John [Essex, UK]


Some areas still have poor coverage such that I don't rely on a 3 phone
entirely. However, I always have a 3 contract as well simply because they
are such good value.

AMO


Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2005, 01:30 PM   #7
Gareth Evans
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???


"JC" <johncalias-newsgroupsATyahooD0TcoD0Tuk> wrote in message
news:ihcbp1ls89kgnuqbs94vfjsjd73j98q548@4ax.com...
> Just coming to the end of 2 O2 contracts and am considering 3 because of
> the attractive tariffs (and the Motorola V3x)
>
> Some family members already have 3 and by and large seem very satisfied
> with them.
>
> I am seeing loads of reports here though condemning 3 as a pile of poo!
>
> So..are they really that bad??
> --
>
> Regards
>
> John [Essex, UK]
> Remove the obvious spamtrap to reply


If you have good reception on O2, you will have good reception on 3. I
believe 3 use O2s transmitters when in areas that are not 3G.

Gareth


Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2005, 03:56 PM   #8
C
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???



"Gareth Evans" <garethevans@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:tLadnRsXE7xSewjeRVnyrw@pipex.net...
> "JC" <johncalias-newsgroupsATyahooD0TcoD0Tuk> wrote in message
> news:ihcbp1ls89kgnuqbs94vfjsjd73j98q548@4ax.com...
>> Just coming to the end of 2 O2 contracts and am considering 3 because of
>> the attractive tariffs (and the Motorola V3x)
>>
>> Some family members already have 3 and by and large seem very satisfied
>> with them.
>>
>> I am seeing loads of reports here though condemning 3 as a pile of poo!
>>
>> So..are they really that bad??
>> --
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> John [Essex, UK]
>> Remove the obvious spamtrap to reply

>
> If you have good reception on O2, you will have good reception on 3. I
> believe 3 use O2s transmitters when in areas that are not 3G.
>
> Gareth
>


Soon all Customer Support will be based in India. I mean Sky took over
10mins to advise them I wanted to get films added "sorry movies sir I dont
understand"


Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2005, 04:09 PM   #9
Gareth Evans
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???


"C" <cr014i4283@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:AOnlf.159707$Es4.13115@fe2.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
>
> "Gareth Evans" <garethevans@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:tLadnRsXE7xSewjeRVnyrw@pipex.net...
>> "JC" <johncalias-newsgroupsATyahooD0TcoD0Tuk> wrote in message
>> news:ihcbp1ls89kgnuqbs94vfjsjd73j98q548@4ax.com...
>>> Just coming to the end of 2 O2 contracts and am considering 3 because of
>>> the attractive tariffs (and the Motorola V3x)
>>>
>>> Some family members already have 3 and by and large seem very satisfied
>>> with them.
>>>
>>> I am seeing loads of reports here though condemning 3 as a pile of poo!
>>>
>>> So..are they really that bad??
>>> --
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> John [Essex, UK]
>>> Remove the obvious spamtrap to reply

>>
>> If you have good reception on O2, you will have good reception on 3. I
>> believe 3 use O2s transmitters when in areas that are not 3G.
>>
>> Gareth
>>

>
> Soon all Customer Support will be based in India. I mean Sky took over
> 10mins to advise them I wanted to get films added "sorry movies sir I dont
> understand"
>
>



http://www.landlinesms.com/images/Christmas2.jpg

Gareth


Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2005, 05:37 AM   #10
Kalico
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???


On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 15:52:50 +0000, JC
<johncalias-newsgroupsATyahooD0TcoD0Tuk> wrote:

>Just coming to the end of 2 O2 contracts and am considering 3 because of
>the attractive tariffs (and the Motorola V3x)
>
>Some family members already have 3 and by and large seem very satisfied
>with them.
>
>I am seeing loads of reports here though condemning 3 as a pile of poo!
>
>So..are they really that bad??


No, they are not that bad.

I have been connected for a year and have just taken another contract
for another year with them.

I would not suggest their customer service is the best, but then it
seems the other telcos get their fair share of poor press too with
regard to CS. Part of the CS problem seems to be that they are mainly
in the Far East. Maybe my voice is particularly clear or maybe I have
just been plain lucky but I have rarely had a problem with this issue.
I have called them a number of times about certain things and the one
time I did get the drone confused was over something I knew I would
have to put into writing anyway, so I sent a letter to Glasgow and
presume it will be answered by them and not scanned off to India.

The reception can be a bit annoying if you move around a lot since it
will not switch between Three's 3G network and O2's 2G network
seamlessly. In fact, that is pretty rubbish, though in fairness the
places I am thinking of (Yorkshire Wolds) have poor coverage from all
networks. Good news it that when it has switched to O2, I can then
drive around for ages and it will not try to switch back until I
finish my call. However, when you have signal and are stationary,
then no problems whatsoever.

Really good news is that if you are prepared to mess with cash-back
deals, then the value is unbeatable. The last 12 months I had 500
minutes and 100 texts each month and it cost me, excluding the cost of
calls abroad, absolutely zilch. I used e2save and although others
seem to have all sorts of fun and games, I have had none and got
cashbacks without problem. Unlike my previous Orange deal (remember
the CPW £225 cashback offer last year?) where it was a flipping
nightmare, since the phone was not connected the second I received
it.

Call costs abroad are not at all bad at 30p/min to receive an incoming
call. It may even be the cheapest.

The handsets tended to be a little larger than regular 2G ones when I
took my contract, but I think that is no longer the case. I have used
an NEC 338 over the last year and it is ok for voice calls and text,
though not as good as a Nokia (but miles better than the ridiculous
Nokia 7600 that came with the contract). However, battery life when
on 3G is rubbish. When roaming abroad on 2G it lasts for ages. In
the UK on 3G I have to charge every two to three days.

If you want to cancel voicemail when going abroad, the advice (same
with all the networks except O2 it seems) is to call customer services
and disable it rather than turn off via the phones menus. I have
found the opposite to be true. When they turn it off, it remains
active, but doing it myself via the menu works a treat.

Not sure what else there is to cover. If you have any specific
questions then feel free to ask.

Rob

Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2005, 02:31 PM   #11
Stuart Millington
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???


On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 15:52:50 +0000, JC
<johncalias-newsgroupsATyahooD0TcoD0Tuk> wrote:

>So..are they really that bad??


No, the signal is fine here for voice calls and it is improving for 3G
data.

However, their CS and accounting is still pathetic - after admitting
that they ignore DD change instructions from banks until the customer
rings up to ask why they have not taken their money, they have now
changed my billing address to the work address where my upgrade phone
was delivered! So, I've had to speak to English for Dummies failures
twice in a week :-(

But, it's the first time I've had to call CS and I'm staying with them
because no one else matches their call rates.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
- Stuart Millington ALL HTML e-mail rejected -
- mailtohupp@dsv1.co.uk http://w3.z-add.co.uk/ -
Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2005, 07:31 PM   #12
Owen Rees
Guest
CPF $: 0 Donate

Re: Are 3 really still that bad???


On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 15:52:50 +0000, JC
<johncalias-newsgroupsATyahooD0TcoD0Tuk> wrote in
<ihcbp1ls89kgnuqbs94vfjsjd73j98q548@4ax.com>:

>So..are they really that bad??


People seem to have trouble terminating contracts with 3. The service I
had was proportionate to the low price until I gave them notice to
terminate the contract at the end of the agreed period. The service then
degenerated into abysmally poor and utterly incompetent in the handling
of the termination.

If you decide to terminate a contract with 3 you should be prepared for
bills for service beyond the termination date, and a lot of
inconvenience and some expense in sorting out the mess.

On the whole I would say that 3 is cheap but not good value.

--
Owen Rees
[one of] my preferred email address[es] and more stuff can be
found at <http://www.users.waitrose.com/~owenrees/index.html>
Reply With Quote
Cell Phone Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
bad

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:






All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:11 AM.

Add to MyYahoo Add to NewsGator Add to MyAOL Add to Rojo Add to Bloglines Add to NewVibes Add to Technorati Favorites Add to Google

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0
©2004 - 2008 Sugarman Studios, LLC. All Rights Reserverd.