p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- Back in July last year, “The Bell Canada decision to use the Samsung Instinct touch-screen mobile to grab control of the Canadian smartphone market might not be as productive as the companies undoubtedly hope,” p2pnet said, going on »»»

The mobile is central to a Bell marketing plan designed to set it up against Rogers, which is suffering serious blow-back after having tried to sell deeply flawed and inflexible ‘Flexible Price’ mobile packages for the iPhone 3G range.

They come in at $60 for 400MB, rising to $115, And none of them include unlimited use,” p2pnet posted.

Now Bell is planning to offer Instinct, with the option of an unlimited data plan, upping the ante in its battle for the Canadian smartphone market, says the CBC.

OK. So it`s wisely reading the writing on the wall. Isn`t that smart marketing?

It is, but for the fact Bell Canada is now a pariah in the eyes of a substantial portions of the Canadian buying public and anything it touches is consequently tarnished.

Fast forward to 2009 and we can reveal the Samsung Instinct with Bell Canada firmware isn’t a mobile.

It’s a dog.

Here’s a from-the-hip analysis by p2pnet’s Ottawa Gal »»»

It’s said to have hit Bell stores on August 8, 2008. But according to Howard forums, a mobile phone discussion board frequented by many Bell and Bell world employees, problems had been detected the day before it even went on sale. (ref. 1)

Nonetheless, with Bell touting its “smartphone” as the Apple Eater or iPhone killer in clear attacks on the Rogers iPhone (per the forums) some people went for it anyway.

Samsung even had a pre-sale launch party with a select few people invited to test drive the Bell and Telus “smartphone”.

Of note were the reviews by two of the invited party goers (Ref. 3 & 4), “for some odd reason all of the devices had problems accessing the internet so I couldn’t test out the browser or IM at all.”

A good indication of what’s to come, in my opinion. Some people held off on reading this, but others went out the next day and bought it.

On launch day, the complaints started rolling in centering on proprietary pay-for-GPS and blocked-out Google maps, both web and app (those of you who read p2pnet are already aware of the GPS throttle and such http://www.p2pnet.net/story/17098 so this is no surprise, just another Bell monetization scheme), pay-for-email only through Bell-MSN, locked out Gmail and other Email mechanisms due to the keyboard display disappearing when these are used, and all sorts of normally free options locked to specific vendors by Bell with no other choice (ref 5) because of the Bell crippled firmware.

Complaints about Bell advertising its “smartphone” as the Apple eater/killer also started arriving (ref 6), and the same day and days that followed other bugs (too numerous to list) also started showing up.

People complained to Bell World and Bell and some returned their supposedly “smartphones”. But others were stuck because Bell had a no-return policy of a max of 15-minutes of use (currently at 30-minutes, changed in 2009).

So anyone who used their “smartphone” to actually call Bell and complain negated the return policy!

I suspect someone got a salary raise for that one at Bell!

For the list of problems with this “smartphone,” read the Howard forum link starting on Page 15. Then jump to this forum http://www.instinct-samsung.com/index.php?board=60.0;sort=last_post for more.

After that, check out the petition started October 1, 2008, here: http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/BellSamsungInstinct.

At the time of writing, 524 Bell Samsung Instinct users had already signed it, and some complained to the Better Business Bureau (BBB) – good luck on that – an anyway, Bell isn’t a BBB member.

Does it end there?

Nope.

‘Quality control. Hmmm. Now there’s a thought.’

Then people started calling and emailing the president of Bell Mob.& BDI & Chief Brand Off. wireless. (See ref 8.)

As one person said, “i really thought Bell might get it right with this device, but i have to say, it’s a disaster … they really should have pushed off the launch until it passed some sort of quality control … this unit is clearly NOT ready for sale (and they shouldn’t have disabled many of the features the Sprint version had) … considering Bell advertised it as the “Apple Eater”, they really set the bar pretty high for themselves … i think someone, or some department is going to get in a lot of crap about this one.”

Quality control. Hmmm. Now there’s a thought.

According to an August 12 CTV story on the Bell-Samsung Instinct (ref. 7), “Bell refers to the Samsung Instinct on their billboard ads as the ‘apple eater’, a thinly veiled attack on the iPhone 3G being sold by competitor Rogers.”

It’s ‘more of a wallet eater.

“The strength of the Instinct can be found more in its ability to trade text messages than its capability as a smartphone where its poor web browsing, lack of true desktop synchronization, and limited selection of non-subscription-based features make it the handset to avoid and the most unlikely choice for Bell to position against the Apple iPhone 3G,” says the story.

Was Bell well informed about Samsung Instinct with Bell firmware problems?

Employees and insiders werecomplaining before it even went on sale, and Bell was pushing updates for bugs before its release.

How many petitions, returns, attempted returns, calls, Emails, BBB complaints and forums does one need to complain in, and to?

We can conclude Bell knew exactly what was happening, and was well aware of the defects.

Samsung Instinct Not Happy – livesuperman

Let’s jump ahead 6.5-months later to February 2009.

Samsung Instinct Not Happy – livesuperman:

One post. Simple and to the point.

This is my video: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/wna1gnmxb77h (ref. 9), said livesuperman.

This started a flurry of complaints in Bell’s own Forum (guess no one knew it existed).

A Bell employee stated:

“From information found on Bell.ca, http://www.bell.ca/shopping/en_CA_ON.Samsung-Instinct/67039.details, Instinct is more a phone with multimedia feature like music, video or browsing internet. This is why he have unlimited browsing option at 10$ like other phones. Since instinct was launch, this was is purpose and what our people educated customer.”

Oh reeeaally. Just a phone with mutli-media?

I don’t think so, Tim. This was advertised as a “smartphone”. The “Apple eatER”, and sold as such with much hype.

Let’s review a picture of this Samsung Instinct taken apparently in Toronto found here (Pic. #2, ref 10) http://flickr.com/photos/arobar/3293756609/sizes/l/

Yup. It says “smartphone”. No denying it.

But now it’s just a phone with mutli-media. It’s not a “smartphone” any more, and that’s how it always been sold to the customer, according to Bell. Its surely isn’t an ‘apple eater either. What is it?

Livesuperman continues:

“My biggest problem is that I can’t use any applications such as Gmail or Google Calender. The reason why is the on screen keyboard does not come up when I need to enter information in a 3rd party app. In the US they have solved this problem but Bell has been slow to come out with this update. If Bell hadn’t modified the phone to such a  extent that now Samsung has to make a customized update for Bell users maybe it wouldn’t take so long to receive this update.

“In the link you have sent me it states that I can download ‘applications’. You only have put up one since you launched the phone 4 months ago. That’s one example of false advertisement.”

Also you have labeled in two of your press releases that this is a ‘Smart Phone’.”

http://www.bce.ca/en/news/releases/corp/2008/08/07/74829.html
http://www.bce.ca/en/news/releases/bm/2008/08/08/74831.html

For a close-up on those press releases, Click Here (Ref 11) and Click Here (Ref 12)

This is an article http://mobilesyrup.com/2008/08/06/new-friendly-focused-bell-adser/ (ref 13) with a Poster from Bell stating the Samsung Instinct is the Apple eater.

The iPhone is a ‘SmartPhone”.

So I did a lot of research before I purchased this phone and what I think is:

Bell didn’t and is now trying to pass its mistake to the customer.

————–

Wow! Did this ever start a flurry of complaints from the people, and Bell is playing dumb in the forum.

After more than six months it’s only now starting to make a list of the problems?

Only now saying it’s being “escalated”?

The company has known know aboutthese problems for more than six months.

A Bell Canada employee posted a bogus list of stuff that doesn’t even cover the complaints, and apparently this was forwarded to Samsung.

Does Bell even listen to their customers?

Basically, the Bell Canada forum employee went into robot mode and just kept repeating (copying/pasting) the same words in every complaint post made.

Guess Bell wanted him/her to say nothing else. Besides, what else could s/he say?

It’s been in this material-defective state since before it went on sale with Bell’s crippled firmware.

And livesuperman? Bell took his ’smartphone back saying it needed repair; it was returned around Feb 28.

But as per his latest two video releases (see video complaints 12 & 13), it’s still not functional.

Heh.

And Yes! Bell is still selling this ’smartphone to unsuspecting people.

What can you do?

I don’t know. I don’t have the magic answer.

Bell seems to get away with anything and everything. But this fight shouldn’t stop. If you’re an unhappy owner, you’ve paid hundreds of dollars for this phone, you’re stuck with a three-year contract, you’re paying for functions and services that don’t work, and that you can’t even use.

Enough is enough. It’s time to get your money back, or get them to give you an actual functioning ‘Apple eater’ smartphone at no extra cost.

OR – they should give you your money back for the “smartphone” they sold you, and let you out of your contract.

Below are my suggestions since your correspondence with Bell is basically going nowhere for about seven months:

Complaint Mechanisms and Raising Awareness:

1) Always start with the company itself, Bell.

Some of you complained in Bell’s own forum http://forums.bell.ca/ and received the reply that this was being escalated to management. In addition, management appears to have given the Bell forum employee information regarding some of your concerns.

Some of you wrote or Emailed a letter to Mr. Wade Oosterman http://people.forbes.com/profile/wade-oosterman/10869, http://www.instinct-samsung.com/index.php?topic=9548.0 and received a reply on his behalf by a Bell employee by the name of ‘Helena’.

One person had a Bell ‘head office’ employee (’top management) named Sherri or Sherry actually look at the complaints in Bells OWN forums. I laughed when I read this because it was supposed to be already escalated. Matter of fact there has been many people complaining since the day it went on sale! According to ‘top management, they’re only now aware? A few cases? Unh-hunh.

‘So after a almost 40 minute call with Sherri/Sherry from head office this morning, I am assured that the issues are being looked into. She explained that she and the other members of top management were only aware of a few cases of problems with the instinct.’ http://www.instinct-samsung.com/index.php?topic=9548.30

With the petition going here, http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/BellSamsungInstinct and everything else stated above in this article since 2008, and all the calls for support, and the CTV story and more, how could they not be aware?

So once again (as stated above) we can conclude Bell is very much aware. It’s just more viewable now than it was back in 2008. The only thing missing is a facebook group of upset customers! How many months worth of complaints does one need? Its 7-months now.

2) The Commissioner for Complaints for Telecommunications Services (CCTS):

This one is weird in this situation. Certain parts fall within its scope and certain parts are outside of its scope (refer to http://www.ccts-cprst.ca/en/page/Scope). But this should be the next step, in addition to some of the others due to the nature of some complaints and videos posted and listed (ie #5 & #8 below).

Per the CRTC, you have to go through the CCTS for consumer complaints against Bell mobile/cell. Any company who is a member of the CCTS the CRTC will tell you to complain there. Bell is a member.

Also, per the CRTC http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/faqs.htm The Competition Bureau investigates complaints about false and misleading ads. If this is your case, then you should file with the Competition bureau.

So that’s a problem here for some people. The CCTS will not, and does not, handle advertising complaints, as some people are complaining about. If you go through the process of filing a complaint on the CCTS website, and if you select that you also filed a complaint with another agency, then they toss it out.

So if you file with the CCTS and do plan on filing with #5 & #8 (Advertising Standards Canada and the Competition Bureau) do not state that you filed another complaint since this is outside of their scope and mandate.

So it’s important to know this. It’s even stated on the CRTC website which oversees the CCTS.

The CCTS should handle your complaints of ‘Service delivery, which some of you don’t have service to parts of the service you bought and paid for, ‘repair, billing of services that don’t seem to work or partially work, and ‘compliance.

Since some parts of your service isn’t working you should state to the CCTS what you want. This includes refunds, credits, contract termination and/or a replacement that functions as was sold to you. You should state that it does not work as advertised, if applicable.

Their decision is binding on Bell Canada only. Nothing is binding on you. Meaning if they take a decision Bell has to follow it. If you don’t agree with the decision you can tell them to review it and it not acceptable to you, or your recourse is small claims court (or maybe one or a group of you can contact the entities below).

3) The Canadian Council of Better Business Bureaus (CCBBB, AKA the BBB): http://www.ccbbb.ca/

To file a complaint, proceed to this BBB website, http://www.ccbbb.ca/complain.cfm

Before we continue, one thing on the BBB’s webpage http://www.ccbbb.ca/about_overview.cfm caught my eye. It was the following:

Our Vision:
An ethical marketplace where buyers and sellers can trust each other.

Our Mission:
To be the leader in advancing marketplace trust.
We do this by:
* Creating a community of trustworthy businesses
* Setting standards for marketplace trust
* Encouraging and supporting best practices
* Celebrating marketplace role models
* Denouncing substandard marketplace behavior

I liked this vision and mission statement. It says and shows a lot. I respect it.

Going forward, a search of the Better Business Bureaus online database @ http://www.ccbbb.ca/ reveals the following:

A) Bell Mobility, Burlington, ON, Rating: F
Failure to respond to complaints filed against business
http://hamilton.bbb.org/commonreport.html?ID=190837520

B) Bell Canada, Toronto, ON, Principal: Executive Office: Rating: F
http://mwco.bbb.org/WWWRoot/Report.aspx?site=160&bbb=0107&firm=1043848
Reasons for this rating include:
* Failure to honor commitment to arbitrate or mediate disputes.
* Number of complaints filed against business.
* Failure to respond to complaints filed against business.
* Number of complaints filed against business that were not resolved.
* Overall complaint history with BBB.

C) Bell Canada, Carling Ave, Nepean, ON: Rating: F
http://ottawa.bbb.org/WWWRoot/Report.aspx?site=163&bbb=0117&firm=26321
Reasons for this rating include:
* Number of complaints filed against business.
* Failure to respond to complaints filed against business.
* BBB does not have sufficient information to determine how long this business has been operating.
* BBB does not have sufficient background information on this business.

D) Bell Canada, Hotel de Ville Street, Hull, QC, Rating: F
http://ottawa.bbb.org/WWWRoot/Report.aspx?site=163&bbb=0117&firm=19606
Reasons for this rating include:
* Number of complaints filed against business.
* Failure to respond to complaints filed against business.
* Number of complaints filed against business that were not resolved.
* BBB does not have sufficient background information on this business.

E) Bell Canada, Elgin Street, Ottawa, ON, Rating: F
http://ottawa.bbb.org/WWWRoot/Report.aspx?site=163&bbb=0117&firm=12066
Reasons for this rating include:
* Number of complaints filed against business.
* Failure to respond to complaints filed against business.
* Number of complaints filed against business that were not resolved.
* Overall complaint history with BBB.
* Length of time business has taken to resolve complaint(s).
* BBB does not have sufficient background information on this business

F) Bell Mobility, Mississauga, ON, Rating: F
http://mwco.bbb.org/WWWRoot/Report.aspx?site=160&bbb=0107&firm=11370
Reasons for this rating include:
* Number of complaints filed against business.
* Failure to respond to complaints filed against business.
* Number of complaints filed against business that were not resolved.
* Overall complaint history with BBB.
* BBB does not have sufficient background information on this business.

Note:
There are a few “Bell Mobility” outlets with No Rating due to a different BBB location handling the company (a move or consolidation/merge of BBB locations it appears), or that particular Bell Mobility business is no longer in operation. However, these types seem to have a history, but no rating.
Example: http://ottawa.bbb.org/WWWRoot/Report.aspx?site=163&bbb=0117&firm=22550

Also, there were a few “Bell Mobility” outlets that had a rating of B (+/-). However, this appears to be the standard default rating when zero complaints have been filed with a company (or zero company history, including contact), thus, not included. Maybe this is a good sign?
Example: http://mwco.bbb.org/WWWRoot/Report.aspx?site=160&bbb=0107&firm=12527

There are also a couple of BBB URL’s in relation to “Sympatico” that you can look for also. But the ratings aren’t any better.

It should be noted that Bell is not a member of the BBB and has in fact ignored the BBB in the past, per BBB reports. So I don’t know how effective the BBB will be with Bell. But it appears that they do offer advice to the consumer as well if you call a local BBB branch in your area, http://www.ccbbb.ca/search_map.cfm

So we have a summary of Bell BBB ratings that I guess doesn’t fit in with the BBB’s vision and mission based on the BBB’s proprietary rating formula.

In my opinion it’s still worth it to file with the BBB so that there is a documented history and/or to give Bell the opportunity to increase their BBB stats and correct the situation and their failing BBB grade of ‘F.

Also, it appears many of you have dealt with an executive at Bell and/or sent a letter to an executive at Bell. So if you do file a complaint with the BBB I think I would tell the BBB to direct it to their filing about ‘Bell Canada, Toronto, ON, Principal: Executive Office (reference B above) The BBB should be able to help you classify the correct Bell entity. Also inform them (give documents/notes/pictures/videos/links) of all you tried and any responses you got from Bell and their employee’s.

Some of you complained about the advertizing of this phone. If you feel there was deceptive advertizing (ie, the ‘Apple Eater’ and ’smartphone’ as well as its functions), then you should include this as part of your complaint as well.

4. Quebec’s L’Union des Consommateurs:

If you’re a Quebec resident, this would be a good place to go to. I don’t think you have to be a Quebec resident to make a complaint with them. Not 100% sure. Bell is HQ’d in Montreal QC, so maybe it’s worth a shot. They may also direct some of your complaint to the Competition Bureau of Canada if there is concern with the advertizing and such.

This Quebec consumers union already has a class action lawsuit going against Bell Canada for their internet throttle that’s open for BOTH Ontario and Quebec users, http://www.consommateur.qc.ca/union-des-consommateurs/?page_id=282

Contact info: http://www.consommateur.qc.ca/union-des-consommateurs/?page_id=30
union @ consommateur.qc.ca

Refer to the notes on PIAC and the Consumers Association of Canada (#6 & #7) in case they tell you to go to the CCTS.

5. The Canadian Competition Bureau

Note: Before filing a complaint, be sure to read http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/h_00129.html to make sure your complaint falls within their mandate. They are not a consumer protection agency.

Per the CRTC http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/faqs.htm The Competition Bureau investigates complaints about false and misleading ads. If this is your case, then you should file with the Competition bureau.

If I had a concern about the way something was advertised, or a concern about some marketing or advertising leading me to buy a product that didn’t function or perform as it should or as stated, I think I would try my luck here.

In some concerns raised, some of you thought you bought a ’smartphone. Personally I would have thought it was as well with all I originally read about this ‘apple eater, in addition to the Bell media releases and other media releases I originally read (refer to the references below on ‘Media). But according to Bells own forum reply to the complaints, this is just a phone with some media capabilities.

Per the Competition Bureaus webpage on the Competition Act, http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/01315.html:

‘All methods of making representations, including printed or broadcast advertisements, written or oral representations, audio-visual promotions and illustrations, are within the general scope of the Act. Some provisions, however, relate only to advertisements (for example, sections 74.04 and 74.05).

‘The Act refers to representations made “to the public.” It has been held that a representation to just one person constitutes a representation to the public.’

‘To contravene the Act, a representation must be “false or misleading in a material respect.” This phrase has been interpreted to mean that the representation leads a person to a course of conduct that, on the basis of the representation, he or she believes to be advantageous. “Material” does not refer to the value of the product to the purchaser but, rather, the degree to which the purchaser is affected by the representation in deciding whether to purchase the product.’

‘The application of the general impression test is particularly important where:

* The representation is partially true and partially false, or the representation is capable of two meanings, one of which is false;
* The representation is literally true but is, in fact, misleading since it fails to reveal certain essential information (Refer to the non-disclosure of material information section);
* The representation is literally or technically true but creates a false impression, for example where the advertised results of a test of a product may not be significant to its use or efficacy but the representation makes it appear otherwise (Refer tothe Inappropriate claims section);
* The representation is literally true insofar as the oral or written statements are concerned but the visual part of the representation may create a false impression, for example where it depicts a model which is different from the advertised product  (Refer to the Use of illustrations section).

Now I don’t know about you, but if I bought an ‘apple eater’ ’smartphone’ and was then told it’s just a phone with media capabilities, I don’t think I would be pleased. This is in addition to the advetised capabilities of which some don’t even work as shown by the ‘livesuperman’ videos, and people’s complaints.

Per http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/02776.html

‘Misleading Advertising and Labelling

The misleading advertising and labelling provisions enforced by the Competition Bureau prohibit making any deceptive representations for the purpose of promoting a product or a business interest, and encourage the provision of sufficient information to allow consumers to make informed choices:

The false or misleading representations and deceptive marketing practices provisions of the Competition Act contain a general prohibition against all materially false or misleading representations. They also prohibit making performance representations which are not based on adequate and proper tests, misleading warranties and guarantees, false or misleading ordinary selling price representations, untrue, misleading or unauthorized use of tests and testimonials, bait and switch selling, double ticketing and the sale of a product above its advertised price. Further, the promotional contest provisions prohibit contests that do not disclose required information.

Well CTV covered its performance. It’s no ‘apple eater’ according to them. Its just a ‘wallet eater’. Also, many of its functions that are supposed to perform in fact don’t, as per the complaints and ‘livesupermans videos.

‘Performance representations not based on adequate and proper tests

Businesses should not make any performance claims unless they can back them up. The Competition Act prohibits any representation in the form of a statement, warranty or guarantee of the performance, efficacy or length of life of any given product, not based on adequate and proper testing. The onus is on advertisers to prove that the representation is based on an adequate and proper test. The test must have been concluded before the representation is made and the data must be readily available upon request by the Bureau.

I won’t copy and paste everything on the Competition Bureaus website, but you get the general idea.

Additional information worth reading can be found here:
http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/00513.html
http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/01224.html

The way I read many of the complaints, this seems like a valid course of action to take.

Complaints can be filed online. They have a FAQ on filing a complaint here: http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/02930.html

You would have to make a case to submit following what was listed above. Include pictures, documents, media etc if applicable.

6. Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)
http://www.piac.ca/
PIAC is a non-profit organization that provides legal and research services on behalf of consumer interests, and, in particular, vulnerable consumer interests, concerning the provision of important public services.

Contact info: http://www.piac.ca/information/contact_piac

The problem I see here is the possibility of PIAC telling you to go to the CCTS. It isn’t wrong, but I think some of the complaints fall outside of the CCTS’s mandate (scope) as, shown here: http://www.ccts-cprst.ca/en/page/Scope I see this as falling within a couple of jurisdictions. Best to ask them for expert advice.

Reasoning: Per the CRTC http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/faqs.htm The Competition Bureau investigates complaints about false and misleading ads. If this is your case, then you should file with the Competition bureau in addition to the CCTS. The CCTS does not handle this at all.

Bring this to their attention, if applicable, with your complaint. Requesting help or information isn’t a bad thing.

7. Consumers’ Association of Canada
http://www.consumer.ca/
Good list of steps to follow: http://www.consumer.ca/1657

The problem I see here is the possibility of the Consumers’ Association of Canada telling you to go to the CCTS. It isn’t wrong, but I think some of the complaints fall outside of the CCTS’s mandate (scope), as shown here: http://www.ccts-cprst.ca/en/page/Scope I see this as falling within a couple of jurisdictions. Best to ask them for expert advice.
Reasoning: Per the CRTC http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/faqs.htm The Competition Bureau investigates complaints about false and misleading ads. If this is your case, then you should file with the Competition bureau in addition to the CCTS. The CCTS does not handle this at all.

Bring this to their attention, if applicable, with your complaint. Requesting help or information isn’t a bad thing.

8. Advertising Standards Canada (ASC)

Note: Bell is not a member of Advertising Standards Canada. As such, and like the BBB, Bell has ignored them in the past. However, the ASC does go to the media if they find there is a public concern as they have done in the past as shown here : http://www.p2pnet.net/story/18196

If you feel you were deceived by the advertizing, or have a concern with the way the phone was advertized, a complaint should be filed there.

Let them know of any pictures or media material you may have.

9.  Ms Ellen Roseman of the Star

Now this is great person to contact. She has literally thousands of complaints on her website in relation to Bell. Matter of fact she has a small piece in relation to the Instinct from December 8 2008, http://www.ellenroseman.com/?p=251 that goes back to last year. Again, this shows bell was well aware, as opposed to what some Bell customers are being told. Don’t be fooled.

Her Email can be found on her website, or you can post on her website. See if she will do a piece on the Bell Instinct, but more in depth this time. Feel free to send her this P2Pnet article (Tell her we said she rocks!). Try to ask her to write an article on it and to include the videos by ‘livesuperman as well (refer to the ‘livesuperman videos in the references).

10. CBC’s Market Place

This is another good place to help raise awareness to this issue. See if they will do an investigate piece on it.

11. Your contract.

Now I’m no contract expert, but on the BBB’s website is says this.
‘A contract may be discharged by:
Agreement
Performance
Impossibility
Operation of law
Breach
Failure to perform
Where a party suffers a loss as a result of breach of contract, they are usually entitled to recover that loss. If the party suffers no loss, they cannot receive compensation.
Well ‘failure to perform is a definite cause here. So is ‘performance. Is loss of sanity an arguable case?

‘Under the Fair Trading Act; this Act declares it illegal for a seller to knowingly sell a defective item when the buyer is unaware of the defects or is unlikely to notice them before the sale.

Not sure if this is applicable here. This may be province specific, I’m not sure. But if it is, it’s already known that Bell was rushing out updates to get this thing working the day before it even went on sale according to Howard forums ‘Bell insiders. They knew.

I know I wouldn’t tolerate being stuck in some contract, let alone a 3 year contract, with this thing. No way.

To top it off, after all these complaints Bell is still selling this thing as if there is no problem. Go figure. It must be a good monetizER.

Conclusion:

Well, let’s face it and be honest. There is no conclusion until you got what you paid for.

But don’t hold your breath because people have been complaining to Bell since the day this went on sale.

The only conclusion I can see will be if:

• Bell refunds your money and terminates your contract without any additional fee’s
  
• Bell replaces the ’smartphone (or the plain phone with some media capabilities) however they wish to call it now, that they sold you at no additional cost.
  
• Bell actually addresses all the issues they have known about since last year and fixes it and gives you a credit for all your grief.
  
• Bell gives you a credit and a reduced rate for functions that can’t even be used on this phone as is with their firmware/software going back since you first bought this phone.
  
• Bell does some sort of recall in good faith and stops the sale of this ’smartphone’.
  
• Or if one of the agencies above gets serious and calls Bell to task on the issues and concerns raised by all of you. Its up to you to complain in force though.

Good luck. And if you get a reply from the agencies or people above, let us know. We can always try a follow-up to this insanity.

If someone has a complete full list of all the defects with this ’smartphone,’ please feel free to post it.

Ottawa Gal – p2pnet

References:

1. http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1392260&page=15&pp=15
2. Pic #1: http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1392260&page=18&pp=15 and http://www.markevanstech.com/2008/08/17/samsungs-apple-eater/
3. http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1392260&page=16&pp=15
4. http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1392260&page=17&pp=15
5. http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1392260&page=20&pp=15
6. http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1392260&page=22&pp=15
7. http://krisabel.ctv.ca/blog/_archives/2008/8/12/3834570.html
8. http://www.instinct-samsung.com/index.php?topic=9548.0
9. http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=785
10. http://flickr.com/photos/arobar/3293756609/sizes/l/
11. http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Tg-19BnMifc/SYtB4bhKFcI/AAAAAAAAAAk/FFWj_cU39K0/s1600-h/Bell+to+launch+its+new+national+brand+tomorrow.jpg
12. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Tg-19BnMifc/SYt1PBombrI/AAAAAAAAAAs/CorIIr-2khY/s1600-h/Highly+anticipated+Samsung+Instinct+available+today+from+Bell.jpg
13. http://mobilesyrup.com/2008/08/06/new-friendly-focused-bell-adser/

Additional Information:
http://www.instinct-samsung.com/index.php?board=60.0
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/BellSamsungInstinct
http://www.bce.ca/en/news/releases/corp/2008/08/07/74829.html

Livesuperman video complaints and Recorded Bell manager:
Feb 3rd, Original video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/wna1gnmxb77h
Feb 10, 2nd video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/e8nes8r148p0
Feb 11, 3rd video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/13i05nqm098p
Feb. 12, 4th video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/kp4qj57t3kng
Feb. 17, 5th video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/yfr1ytf0mvdw
Feb 18, Bell Manager recorded: http://livesuperman-jorge.blogspot.com/2009/02/bell-manager-taking-about-samsung.html
Feb 20, 6th video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/2pjmwsguzjf0
Feb 22: 7th video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/yrljadij6qid
Feb 23, 8th video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/oy5h7q52n9ll
Feb 24, 9th video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/jo221j4no16c
Feb 24, 10th video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/dhkul0ccda0q
Feb 25, video tip: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/gnoirjk2vbvo
Feb 26, 11th video complaint http://www.tokbox.com/vm/grrzwx19552n
Feb 28th, 12th video complaint: http://www.tokbox.com/vm/bkka9ljltx7a
March 1st, 13th video complaint http://www.tokbox.com/?#vmail=lz49eoal6rpq

Bell Canada’s own forum complaints After “Livesupermans” post (not in order):

http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=785
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=920
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=932
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=875
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=943
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=896
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=940
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=881
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=939
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=933
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=912
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=922
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=927
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=910
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=911
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=883
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=891
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=874
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=892
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=863
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=838
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=884
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=879
http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=903

p2pnet said – Bell v Rogers with `unlimited` smartphone, July 4, 2008
p2pnet – Rogers Canadian iPhone rip-off, June 28, 2008
CBC – Bell to offer smartphone with unlimited data plan, July 3, 2008
serious blow-back – Online Canadians reject Rogers iPhone plan, July 2, 2008

---

Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It`s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php

---

Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.

This entry was posted on Monday, March 2nd, 2009 at 1:14 pm and is filed under Freedom, P2P. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

HOME

Viewed 7578 times