on 01-07-2014 20:04
on 01-07-2014 20:04
on 01-07-2014 20:19
on 01-07-2014 20:52
on 01-07-2014 21:28
on 01-07-2014 21:28
on 01-07-2014 21:34
on 01-07-2014 21:34
@MI5 wrote:
That system has some serious flaws in its logic - I can understand a temp block on the phone (to protect the customer in a genuine case of loss) but efforts should be made by O2 to confirm the loss (or lack of) with the customer asap....... 😞
It also sounds as if the OP thinks this call was made maliciously by a competitor. So probably a more major issue of concern?....
Veritas Numquam Perit
on 01-07-2014 21:42
on 01-07-2014 21:42
on 01-07-2014 21:52
on 01-07-2014 21:52
It's reasonable to place a temporary restriction on the phone the first time but once the customer has phoned up to tell them it's been falsely or maliciously reported as lost/stolen then surely common sense would be to contact the customer if further reports are filed. After all, there are notes on the account and it shouldn't be up to the customer to tell them not to block the phone unless they personally call to report it.
I know for a fact that at one time only the owner or account holder could report a phone as lost or stolen. There would be a temporary bar on calls placed on the phone for 24 hours and if the owner didn't call in the restriction would be lifted.
on 01-07-2014 21:58
on 01-07-2014 22:38
on 01-07-2014 22:38
on 01-07-2014 22:42
on 01-07-2014 22:42
Yes it could. It should be changed back to only the owner being able to have a restriction applied, after all the owner would be sure to report it themselves.
The only problem would be if someone is abroad or unable to contact the network and asks a family member or friend to report it.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. It's not a clearcut arguement either way.