iPhone 3G. Court against MTS
Everything that is written below to me, as to the author of this post, is indirectly related. My friend got into the situation. A huge request to all readers to understand the situation.
I am writing a post in order to find help or to get professional advice from a lawyer, of which there is a n-th number here ... The situation is as follows, I will explain it in chronology of events.
On October 20, 2008, I was in seventh heaven when I purchased a device I had dreamed of since the very moment it appeared - an Apple phone, an iPhone 3G . This device was acquired absolutely officially in the MTS company, the one that “put what cannot stand” :)
')
And there was no limit to my sincere joy, until the “vibro” function was strangely lost in the iPhone. It was from this moment that my story of the campaign against the MTS began.
So, on February 16, 2009, the iPhone was handed over for warranty repair / replacement to the MTS service center in connection with the broken “vibro” function. On March 18, 2009, MTS service workers refused to repair my iPhone, citing a crack near the connector.
A few days later, I carried out an independent examination (at the MGBTE ), which established that there was no connection between the crack and the broken vibrating alert. Then the first application was filed to the court. In court, lawyers of the MTS company insisted on conducting a forensic examination, which was carried out in the CECS (Central Institute of Expertise, Standardization and Certification), which was proposed by them.
The result of this forensic examination was the following conclusion: “The vibrating alert ceased to work due to dust entering through a crack near the connectors, a crack occurred during operation”. And there is a photo with a huge amount of dust.
Just in case, I’ll clarify that I didn’t notice the dust under the screen - and there she had to get there first. I just can’t imagine that such a quantity of dust could get through such a crack (the crack is standard near the vibration ring).
Soon the next court session. Everything goes to the fact that I am found guilty.
Naturally, I consider it necessary to file an appeal, because:
1. It seems to me that the amount of dust when conducting a forensic examination by specialists of CENTC CJSC
greatly exaggerated. Intentionally, this is done or not I can not judge.
2. The crack around the shakes switch button is a frequent problem of Apple iPhone 3G devices, occurs in many and, apparently, is not associated with a violation of operation (and I handled my iPhone very carefully).
3. It is not proved that the crack arose as a result of a violation of operation.
MTS, of course, is fighting for this business, because for them it will be a precedent. And I want to bring it to a fair end. But I feel that I cannot do without an intelligent lawyer.
Therefore, I appeal to the habro-community with a request to advise good lawyers who will be ready to take on this difficult matter, or simply to give good advice, which may well be useful. I want to add that for me it has become a matter of principle. Too many nerves spent on all court proceedings. Thanks in advance to everyone ...
PS Transferred to Consumer Protection.
Updated December 9
Today the situation is as follows. The vibration is in the opposite side of the case from the polluted area. Accordingly, the expert did not even watch the vibrating alert itself. In addition, the relationship between dust and breakage has not been described (proven).
Despite this, the court refused to call the expert for additional questions, refused to conduct additional examination and closed the case, admitting my guilt.
Now we are waiting for the case to be ready (filed) so that you can familiarize yourself with it, and immediately after that I will appeal.
Updated December 10
Yesterday we went to court - we photographed all the pages of the case.
From the interesting - here is a color photo of the “dust accumulation of dirt”:
After that, they brought all the documents to the OZPP.
They promised to read and decide today whether they will take up the appeal.
I am writing a post in order to find help or to get professional advice from a lawyer, of which there is a n-th number here ... The situation is as follows, I will explain it in chronology of events.
On October 20, 2008, I was in seventh heaven when I purchased a device I had dreamed of since the very moment it appeared - an Apple phone, an iPhone 3G . This device was acquired absolutely officially in the MTS company, the one that “put what cannot stand” :)
')
And there was no limit to my sincere joy, until the “vibro” function was strangely lost in the iPhone. It was from this moment that my story of the campaign against the MTS began.
So, on February 16, 2009, the iPhone was handed over for warranty repair / replacement to the MTS service center in connection with the broken “vibro” function. On March 18, 2009, MTS service workers refused to repair my iPhone, citing a crack near the connector.
A few days later, I carried out an independent examination (at the MGBTE ), which established that there was no connection between the crack and the broken vibrating alert. Then the first application was filed to the court. In court, lawyers of the MTS company insisted on conducting a forensic examination, which was carried out in the CECS (Central Institute of Expertise, Standardization and Certification), which was proposed by them.
The result of this forensic examination was the following conclusion: “The vibrating alert ceased to work due to dust entering through a crack near the connectors, a crack occurred during operation”. And there is a photo with a huge amount of dust.
Just in case, I’ll clarify that I didn’t notice the dust under the screen - and there she had to get there first. I just can’t imagine that such a quantity of dust could get through such a crack (the crack is standard near the vibration ring).
Soon the next court session. Everything goes to the fact that I am found guilty.
Naturally, I consider it necessary to file an appeal, because:
1. It seems to me that the amount of dust when conducting a forensic examination by specialists of CENTC CJSC
greatly exaggerated. Intentionally, this is done or not I can not judge.
2. The crack around the shakes switch button is a frequent problem of Apple iPhone 3G devices, occurs in many and, apparently, is not associated with a violation of operation (and I handled my iPhone very carefully).
3. It is not proved that the crack arose as a result of a violation of operation.
MTS, of course, is fighting for this business, because for them it will be a precedent. And I want to bring it to a fair end. But I feel that I cannot do without an intelligent lawyer.
Therefore, I appeal to the habro-community with a request to advise good lawyers who will be ready to take on this difficult matter, or simply to give good advice, which may well be useful. I want to add that for me it has become a matter of principle. Too many nerves spent on all court proceedings. Thanks in advance to everyone ...
PS Transferred to Consumer Protection.
Updated December 9
Today the situation is as follows. The vibration is in the opposite side of the case from the polluted area. Accordingly, the expert did not even watch the vibrating alert itself. In addition, the relationship between dust and breakage has not been described (proven).
Despite this, the court refused to call the expert for additional questions, refused to conduct additional examination and closed the case, admitting my guilt.
Now we are waiting for the case to be ready (filed) so that you can familiarize yourself with it, and immediately after that I will appeal.
Updated December 10
Yesterday we went to court - we photographed all the pages of the case.
From the interesting - here is a color photo of the “dust accumulation of dirt”:
After that, they brought all the documents to the OZPP.
They promised to read and decide today whether they will take up the appeal.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/77559/
All Articles