[Solved] Real-life Example: Is IMEI Change Legal & Possible in Blocked/Non-Payment Situations?

Szyszkownik Kilkujadek wrote:

Could you point to a specific clause in the contract to back up your words? As far as I know, when I buy something as a consumer in installments, the seller is never a lender. And I, having proof of purchase, am the owner and that's it.

So you know very little. https://www.telepolis.pl/images/2020/07/Regulamin_sprzeda_y_urz_dze__na_raty.pdf
pt. 5 specifically. It's like this, for example.

Szyszkownik Kilkujadek wrote:

As far as I know, when I buy something as a consumer in installments, the seller is never a lender

If you are talking about telephones from the network, you are wrong here, my friend. The operator buys the phones and resells them to the customer, thereby being the lender. I used to manage (recently) one network and I had to order phones and pay for them with company money. Each subscription contract shows the model, brand and IMEI number, as well as the record that you took this camera from this network in "leasing" (leasing statement in this case is a mistake).

Well, now you've surprised me. I haven't bought a subscription phone for a long time. I guess it's something new, because I don't remember such a provision in the contract from years ago.

Szyszkownik Kilkujadek wrote:

Well, now you've surprised me. I haven't bought a subscription phone for a long time. I guess it's something new, because I don't remember such a provision in the contract from years ago.

This is not a question of changes in consumer loans, but rather linked loans. Such a sales system is present in Orange. But already in Play, the bank is the creditor.
[url=]https://www.play.pl/pomoc/zakupy/jak-kupic-na-raty-w-play.html[/url]
I believe both of you are right, considering that we are considering two separate cases here.
This gives Orange the right to block the phone, because it is the owner, and it further leads to the conclusion that changing the IMEI in the Orange network before paying off the phone, i.e. before transferring ownership rights to the buyer, is a breach of the contract, but it will also be an unlawful act for the court, because changing the identification number we do it on purpose to avoid consequences. Thus, to gain a financial advantage. If there was a meeting with a corporate lawyer in court, he would certainly take advantage of this fact And it's unlikely that the defendant will care.
ps
And another operator, using the intermediation of the bank, will probably respect what happened to the phone. The last link will be the bailiff who will auction off the car, TV or fridge. Surely in Orange the customer can return the phone, the operator will estimate the value and only send the bailiff for the rest I don't know the actual practice in such cases. I wonder

I have a question for people who have such a phone in installments with one of these two operators:
https://www.t-mobile.pl/c/świadczenie-imei
https://www.plus.pl/formularze/formularz-imei

What message do you get after entering your own IMEI? I mean, is there signaled the fact that the phone is the subject of a pledge or there is no warning until the timely payment of installments.

The phone is owned by the Plus network

Vortex1987 wrote:

The phone is owned by the Plus network

Thank you. So phones from the distribution of this operator can be bought back quite safely because it is possible to check the status. The first owner should pay off the loans first and then resell.

Jawi_P wrote:

because by changing the identification number we do it on purpose to avoid consequences. Thus, to gain a financial advantage

Wait a minute, what financial benefit? Read the author's question in the first post.

Possible change so as not to lose money and not get a benefit. He is the one who is harmed by the person who does not pay this phone. The merchant is the victim of a scammer.

Okay, but after changing the Imei, the phone is rather hard to find, do you give a random imei or a specific one?

tino2003 wrote:

Possible change so as not to lose money and not get a benefit. He is the one who is harmed by the person who does not pay this phone. The merchant is the victim of a scammer.

Once again, let me disagree.
The third owner of this camera is not harmed by the first only by the second owner - consignment. It was he who sold him a thing to which he did not acquire property rights. And as a professional, he should have verified that the first holder paid the installments. And it is to him that the misled new buyer should direct the claim. And the commission can, in turn, sue the first owner.

William Bonawentura wrote:

robocop wrote:
The only acceptable form of changing the ownership of the item, which is a loan pledge, is its official assignment to a new buyer, or the complete repayment of this loan, releasing the item from the rights of third parties.

Unfortunately, but when I read such nonsense and in addition written by a moderator, I have to intervene.
I have been in PLAY for many years, so I know how with other operators, but in PLAY, if I take a phone "in installments", let's agree on installments because they are hidden in the subscription, I get an invoice for PURCHASE OF THE PHONE when signing the contract!
So the owner of the phone is the subscriber and not the Operator (PLAY) and please do not mislead people.
If you still insist otherwise, give details of what you are buying whom and under what conditions?
In Play, when buying for a company, I have a phone purchase invoice for 100%!

The proof of ownership transfer is the purchase invoice.

Jawi_P wrote:

But already in Play, the bank is the creditor.

Glue not true.
Taking the phone in PLAY when signing the contract, I did not sign any contract with any bank.
Well, unless something has changed in recent months (I will ask my business supervisor tomorrow) but the last 20 years have been as I write.
I took the first better regulations with the purchase of the device in installments:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc...jnej_SOLO_M_II_z_urzadzeniem_na_raty_2020-09- 10.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1xfO6_1BkmgkkYAEjP0d7R
I don't see a transfer of ownership after paying the last installment there.

Except that after the recent changes in contracts with operators, you may actually be right (I don't know) that apart from PLAY, the owner of the phone is the operator, but in PLAY, the owner of the phone is still the subscriber. Tomorrow I will ask my tutor about these nuances out of curiosity.
Play is the only operator that has not changed the terms of the contract / regulations and I know for 100% that they cannot block the IMEI (I asked the operator).
As for the ownership of the phone, if tomorrow it turns out that after changing the regulations on new conditions, tz from new contracts, I will let you know.

William Bonawentura wrote:

tino2003 wrote:
Possible change so as not to lose money and not get a benefit. He is the one who is harmed by the person who does not pay this phone. The merchant is the victim of a scammer.

That's right, but what about the fact that someone cheated on you. Sue him, take him to court, then the enforcement clause, then the bailiff and with good winds in 1.5-3 years you will get money for the phone. And how much effort and sending letters, if you can handle it yourself?
What will you do without your phone during this time?
A simpler, faster, less stressful procedure is to change the IMEI - such is life.

RECTIFICATION
I found PLAY's statement online:
https://blogplay.pl/2020/09/introducing-rozwiawanie-na-nieprezentych-kupujacych/
and in it information from PLAY:
"Since September 10 this year.
If the phone is bought in installments, Play is its owner until the last installment is paid by the buyer.
Did the lady from play lie to me a few days ago when submitting the offer that they do not block IMEI?
Tomorrow I will know if this also applies to companies, perhaps these provisions are only in contracts with non-business people.
Looking briefly through one of the PLAY regulations for companies, I did not find such provisions there.

batot wrote:

But already in Play, the bank is the creditor.

Glue not true.
Taking the phone in PLAY when signing the contract, I did not sign any contract with any bank.

Well, with regrets to Playa, because on the website it informs that the party is the Bank.
Anyway, why this discussion, a bank, not a bank, as the author is about the legality of changing IMEI. This question, however, will not get a binding answer anyway. Only our subjective opinions.

Okay, so where is the problem, the commission changes Imei and everyone is happy.

Strumien swiadomosci swia wrote:

Okay, so where is the problem, the commission changes Imei and everyone is happy.

It is not as you write because in Poland it is illegal to change the IMEI and the only possible option is to replace it with a new motherboard due to damage that prevents the phone from working properly. All other ways are just janusking. The subject was rolled on the electrode a long time ago.

batot wrote:

Unfortunately, but when I read such nonsense and in addition written by a moderator, I have to intervene.

batot wrote:

If the phone is bought in installments, Play is its owner until the last installment is paid by the buyer.

Any thoughts buddy?

You wrote more nonsense in one post than everyone else in the entire thread.

tino2003 wrote:

Any thoughts buddy?

You wrote more nonsense in one post than everyone else in the entire thread.

The misunderstanding stems from 2 facts. You write about the phone in installments and I about the phone in the subscription once.
In the subscription, this problem does not occur in relation to companies for 100% - confirmed with the supervisor.
The problem is taking the phone itself in installments with the operator and then it is as you write.

So if someone actually took the phone in installments, they do not own the phone until they pay off the installments.
I admit this issue is interesting because I have never encountered such a record before, whether it is for a loan for a washing machine/fridge/TV/iron, etc.
So the conclusion from this is that you need to check what you sign and check the phone on the operator's website before buying.

Topic exhausted.