logo elektroda
logo elektroda
X
logo elektroda
Advanced Search
logo elektroda

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

batot 27912 46
ADVERTISEMENT
Treść została przetłumaczona polish » english Zobacz oryginalną wersję tematu
| New topic
  • #1 19249039
    batot
    Level 15  
    IMEI change (il)legal.
    I will give a real life example when you need to change the IMEI.

    A customer comes to the commission / store / service with phones and says that he has a new one that is not covered with any papers, purchase invoice, etc.
    The service buys back this phone.
    The service sells the phone to customerB.
    Customer A stops paying installments from the operator for the phone because he bought the phone in installments.
    The operator doesn't screw around and since Subscriber A, the legal buyer of the phone stops paying, it blocks the IMEI in the system.
    Customer B's phone suddenly stops working and returns to the service/deal/purchase.
    The second hand surprised accepts the complaint and stays in the black ass because the operator has blocked the IMEI.
    The consignee changes the IMEI so that the camera can work in the network and gives it to customer B.

    1. So what is it like who breaks the commission or operator law by blocking IMEI unjustifiably?
    What does the service care that client A hacked the operator for money and he took revenge by blocking his IMEI. The service has purchased the phone legally (has all the papers) and wants to use it online, so it modifies the IMEI.

    2. I do not see a paragraph under which the service could be subject to by changing the IMEI. The law (CC) does not explicitly prohibit changing the IMEI.

    I am asking for substantive answers, preferably with the given legal basis, if someone thinks that the service does not have the right to change the IMEI programmatically.
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #2 19249147
    rapper3d
    Level 20  
    In my opinion, an unpaid phone does not fully belong to the customer, so the operator has the full right to dispose of his property and blocks it.
  • #3 19249173
    gathor10
    Level 27  
    batot wrote:
    I am asking for substantive answers, preferably with the given legal basis, if someone thinks that the service does not have the right to change the IMEI programmatically.
    You do not have the right to change the IMEI number and it is dictated by law. If you want to know the details, consult a lawyer, or look for it and you will find it.
    batot wrote:
    1. So what is it like who breaks the commission or operator law by blocking IMEI unjustifiably?
    The operator does not break the law, because the phone belongs to him and he can dispose of his property as he pleases.
    batot wrote:
    The service purchased the phone legally (has all papers)
    You did not legally purchase your friend's phone, because it did not belong to the seller, and it is the commission's duty to verify this fact.
    Quote:
    The Penal Code (Article 270 § 1 of the Penal Code) provides for the possibility of punishment for forging the IMEI number by an unauthorized person, treating a telephone set permanently marked with the IMEI number as a document (recorded information carrier). However, a prerequisite for imposing a penalty is to establish that the perpetrator acted with the intention of directly using the phone so modified as authentic.
    The second possibility of imposing a penalty (Article 306 of the Penal Code) is to assume that the perpetrator removes, counterfeits or alters the identification mark of the device, because the IMEI number assigned to the mobile phone is its identification mark.
  • #4 19249390
    Vortex1987
    Level 23  
    Changing the IMEI is illegal in our country or abroad, I don't know for sure and there are GSM dealers who did it in old phone models such as Nokia or Sony Ericsson.
  • #5 19250428
    batot
    Level 15  
    gathor10 wrote:
    You do not have the right to change the IMEI number and it is dictated by law. If you want to know the details, consult a lawyer, or look for it and you will find it.

    gathor10 wrote:
    The Penal Code (Article 270 § 1 of the Penal Code) provides for the possibility of punishment for forging the IMEI number by an unauthorized person, treating a telephone set permanently marked with the IMEI number as a document (recorded information carrier). However, a prerequisite for imposing a penalty is to establish that the perpetrator acted with the intention of directly using the phone so modified as authentic.
    The second possibility of imposing a penalty (Article 306 of the Penal Code) is to assume that the perpetrator removes, counterfeits or alters the identification mark of the device, because the IMEI number assigned to the mobile phone is its identification mark.

    You're right, strange, our law is on the side of the TELECOMS OPERATOR here, but more on that later.
    However, the last vote will belong to the judge because the commission/seller will defend that the operator's actions have exposed him to damage and the only way out of this situation was to change the IMEI number.

    gathor10 wrote:
    The operator does not break the law, because the phone belongs to him and he can dispose of his property as he pleases.

    The operator/shop/seller/whoever is never the owner of the phone when selling in installments!
    My friend confused Leasing with a loan.
    Of course, the operator cannot dispose of property that is not his own and the phone is not and never has been.
    If the operator/commission/shop/anyone would like the goods to be repaid to be the property of the seller, they would have to do so in accordance with Art. 589 CC.
    There are no such strange mentions on my telephone operator invoices.
    I know that UKE is looking at this case and wants to stop the actions of operators blocking IMEI in retaliation for not paying installments. If he hadn't curtailed it, he would have allowed the monopoly of buying a phone only from the operator or manufacturer.

    gathor10 wrote:
    You did not legally purchase your friend's phone, because it did not belong to the seller, and it is the commission's duty to verify this fact.

    Dude you are wrong in all my contracts I always get the device purchase invoice!
    Since there is a proof of purchase, ownership is transferred to the new buyer, it cannot be otherwise.
    Unless the policy has changed over the last few months and they no longer issue invoices for the phone when taken in installments? Didn't get an invoice?

    Myk is that the operators in the new contracts / regulations reserved the right to block the IMEI if he does not pay the installments. UKE does not like this, so the procedure will probably not take too long.
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #6 19250460
    Vortex1987
    Level 23  
    batot wrote:
    gathor10 wrote:
    You do not have the right to change the IMEI number and it is dictated by law. If you want to know the details, consult a lawyer, or look for it and you will find it.

    gathor10 wrote:
    The Penal Code (Article 270 § 1 of the Penal Code) provides for the possibility of punishment for forging the IMEI number by an unauthorized person, treating a telephone set permanently marked with the IMEI number as a document (recorded information carrier). However, a prerequisite for imposing a penalty is to establish that the perpetrator acted with the intention of directly using the phone so modified as authentic.
    The second possibility of imposing a penalty (Article 306 of the Penal Code) is to assume that the perpetrator removes, counterfeits or alters the identification mark of the device, because the IMEI number assigned to the mobile phone is its identification mark.

    You're right, strange, our law is on the side of the TELECOMS OPERATOR here, but more on that later.
    However, the last vote will belong to the judge because the commission/seller will defend that the operator's actions have exposed him to damage and the only way out of this situation was to change the IMEI number.

    gathor10 wrote:
    The operator does not break the law, because the phone belongs to him and he can dispose of his property as he pleases.

    The operator/shop/seller/whoever is never the owner of the phone when selling in installments!
    My friend confused Leasing with a loan.
    Of course, the operator cannot dispose of property that is not his own and the phone is not and never has been.
    If the operator/commission/shop/anyone would like the goods to be repaid to be the property of the seller, they would have to do so in accordance with Art. 589 CC.
    There are no such strange mentions on my telephone operator invoices.
    I know that UKE is looking at this case and wants to stop the actions of operators blocking IMEI in retaliation for not paying installments. If he hadn't curtailed it, he would have allowed the monopoly of buying a phone only from the operator or manufacturer.

    gathor10 wrote:
    You did not legally purchase your friend's phone, because it did not belong to the seller, and it is the commission's duty to verify this fact.

    Dude you are wrong in all my contracts I always get the device purchase invoice!
    Since there is a proof of purchase, ownership is transferred to the new buyer, it cannot be otherwise.
    Unless the policy has changed over the last few months and they no longer issue invoices for the phone when taken in installments? Didn't get an invoice?

    Myk is that the operators in the new contracts / regulations reserved the right to block the IMEI if he does not pay the installments. UKE does not like this, so the procedure will probably not take too long.


    Operators defend their case as people take phones and sell them without paying installments but damaging the device by blocking it is not a good action. If they want their money back, let them take them to court. I have an installment phone in Plus and it is stipulated in the contract that this phone is not my property until the last installment is paid off, only Plus.
  • #7 19250470
    rapper3d
    Level 20  
    The colleague above thinks that if he bought something on credit and stops paying in half, it will still be his.
    In that case, I recommend buying a flat on credit and stop paying installments. Just pack your bags first and don't forget the dog.

    Added after 6 [minutes]:

    Vortex1987 wrote:
    damaging the device by blocking is not a good action. If they want their money back, let them take them to court. I have a phone in installments in Plus and it is stipulated in the contract that this phone does not belong to me until the last installment is paid off, but only to Plus.


    The device is not damaged. Only machloje januses and illegal use by persons not bound by the contract with the operator were prevented. All in all, cars are also secured so that no one wants to drive them, and only when they are sold, they hand over the keys to the new owner.

    Here, as you can see, Zebaty secured himself and he's right, it's not caritas - you'll pay it all, sell it to yourself, you won't pay it back - not yours. Is it so hard?
  • #8 19250611
    tino2003
    Admin of GSM Group  
    Changing the IMEI number is illegal as well as blocking phones by operators where cases are already based on the courts.
    The next thing is the purchase of these phones by second-hand shops and pawnshops.
    Personally, on the purchase and sale contract, I have a customer's entry/statement that the phone is his property and he did not acquire it as a result of a crime. Knock on wood, I haven't had my phone locked yet, but I have one more purchase criterion. I judge customers by how they behave, how they dress, and how they approach sales. When a customer from the street walks into me in a tracksuit with a thick neck and I hear: manager, will you give me two hundred? then I don't even talk to him, I just say that I'm not buying at the moment. Age is also an important criterion, and I practically do not buy from young people at all.

    Each point has its own policy and I prefer this hot water and small spoon.
  • #9 19251355
    Vortex1987
    Level 23  
    Approx. And what can a person who bought such a phone on a well-known auction site and after a few months this phone be blocked do?
  • #10 19251361
    tino2003
    Admin of GSM Group  
    Report the scam to the police and go through the entire legal process to get your money back.
  • #11 19251408
    Vortex1987
    Level 23  
    Won't she be charged with unintentional receiving?
  • #12 19251472
    tino2003
    Admin of GSM Group  
    Having a purchase contract with allegro (the printed confirmation of purchase that we receive in the e-mail from allegro is enough) no one will be accused of anything.
  • #13 19252456
    Szyszkownik Kilkujadek
    Level 37  
    rapper3d wrote:
    The colleague above thinks that if he bought something on credit and stops paying in half, it will still be his.

    And he thinks well, because when buying something on credit, he gets a proof of purchase. And from then on, the thing is his. Regardless of whether he then repays his liability or not.
    You have explained it very well here:
    batot wrote:
    The operator/shop/seller/whoever is never the owner of the phone when selling in installments!
    My friend confused Leasing with a loan.

    rapper3d wrote:
    In that case, I recommend buying a flat on credit and stop paying installments. Just pack your bags first and don't forget the dog.

    A mortgage is not an installment agreement. By financing the purchase of an apartment with a loan, you agree in the contract that the bank is included in the mortgage as collateral.
    You just buy an apartment against ... this apartment.

    batot wrote:
    Dude you are wrong in all my contracts I always get the device purchase invoice!
    Since there is a proof of purchase, ownership is transferred to the new buyer, it cannot be otherwise.

    Well, you've won your case in court. Even without getting a lawyer.
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #14 19252550
    rapper3d
    Level 20  
    I'm glad that the operator doesn't want to be branded with single januses, because if you bought something from me in installments and didn't pay it back, you would have entered the cottage with the item taken and still the garlic
  • #15 19252555
    staś pytalski
    Level 41  
    I am still of the opinion that operators should give the opportunity to pay back to someone who bought second-hand. If someone wants it, why defend it. And let the operator pursue the original user who failed to pay the installments.
  • #16 19252558
    Jawi_P
    Level 36  
    rapper3d wrote:
    In that case, I recommend buying a flat on credit and stop paying installments. Just pack your bags first and don't forget the dog.

    Babble, sir, gibberish.
    You lose your apartment due to another legal title, this apartment is a mortgage.

    As for the legality of the IMEI itself. You have chosen the wrong forum ;) You will get hundreds of replies and only "wishes" of users, including mine.
    Once I was also intrigued by the change of IMEI in legal terms, quite a long time ago, I read an article somewhere in the form of an interview with a lawyer.
    The case is usually simple, because cases in which a similar incident was resolved in the Polish judiciary concerned stolen devices. It is illegal to change the identifying features of such devices. The ill will of the defendant is easily shown here.
    As for the change of such features of the device in the absence of bad intentions, it is not so simple and, in principle, the legality or not is decided by the court in the context of each case separately, if it happened.
    And it makes some sense.
    Because what about the device in which the motherboard was replaced. I can do it myself, be able to replace the disc, but not be able to programmatically change the number.
    I can replace the element on the board where the IMEI is sewn, etc. Depending on my skills and device design.
    But if I replace the disc in connection with a crime and the court proves it, or only connects the fact of interfering with the identification marks of some equipment, then I am immediately charged with planning a crime or concealing it. Aggravating circumstance.
    That's how I see it ;)
  • #17 19252700
    Marco_zg
    Level 22  
    "You lose your apartment due to another legal title, this apartment is a mortgage"

    This is sick. In the UK it is so that when you cannot afford to continue paying for the apartment, the bank returns you the amount of money paid, minus the difference in the value of the apartment. Or something like that. The fact that you don't stay in your pants at the end, like with us.
  • #18 19252707
    tino2003
    Admin of GSM Group  
    Jawi_P wrote:
    Because what about the device in which the motherboard was replaced.


    The motherboard is the only part of the phone permanently marked with the IMEI number, so what will the phone be locked with a new motherboard? It will be a completely different device.

    As for the change of IMEI in a blocked phone, if it happened to me and there was a possibility to change it, I would do it without any remorse and I would wait for the case in court.
    On the other hand, I was once in a pawnshop witnessing a customer enter, pull out an S8 from his pocket and ask the seller if he will give PLN 100. He gives him money and puts the phone in a drawer. I would strongly condemn such behavior.
  • #19 19252800
    Szyszkownik Kilkujadek
    Level 37  
    tino2003 wrote:
    The motherboard is the only part of the phone permanently marked with the IMEI number, so what will the phone be locked with a new motherboard? It will be a completely different device.

    I'm afraid the forensic expert might give a different opinion and then you might be dissatisfied with the verdict.
    You can assume the logic that the motherboard (as the name suggests) is the basis of the device and there is a radio module in it that has the IMEI. And the screen, housing, speakers, microphone are just replaceable elements. Merely replacing them does not mean that we are dealing with a different device.

    It's like replacing the wheels, the alternator, the hood, the windshield and something else on your car. It's still the same car with the same VIN number. Even if you replace the engine.
    If you change his VIN without permission, you are committing a forgery.
  • #20 19252802
    Jawi_P
    Level 36  
    Marco_zg wrote:
    This is sick. In the UK it is so that when you cannot afford to pay for the flat further, the bank returns you the sum of money paid, minus the difference in the value of the flat. Or something like that. The fact that you don't stay in your pants at the end, like with us.

    It's sick that you assume that a guest comes, kicks you out of the apartment and you are left in the stairwell with no money, etc.
    To..... lively. Finally, the apartment is auctioned off, the bank takes what is due to it under the loan and you get the difference from the auction.
    Want to go out better? Before the bank takes your apartment away from you, you can look for a buyer who will take over your loan with the apartment, and you can.
    You can declare consumer bankruptcy, it is also one of the exits. Better in the UK...
    Just don't write right now that the bailiff has cheated someone somewhere.
    tino2003 wrote:
    The motherboard is the only part of the phone permanently marked with the IMEI number, so what will the phone be locked with a new motherboard? It will be a completely different device.

    As for the change of IMEI in a blocked phone, if it happened to me and there was a possibility to change it, I would do it without any remorse and I would wait for the case in court.


    The question posed here is theoretical, because I have not heard or read about anyone having a problem due to the change of IMEI and only for it. A change of this number always goes hand in hand with bad intention, a change that one has heard about, read about.. It is an activity accompanying another activity - let's say illegal. Otherwise, only the owner/user of the phone knows about the change.
    The whole discussion is about what we think about it ourselves, not how it relates to reality.

    Examples:
    [url=]https://gsmonline.pl/artykuly/zmiana-imei-to-przestepstwo[/url]

    On 1 March 2005, the President of URTiP received a reply from the Deputy Prosecutor General, Mr. Karol Napierski from the Ministry of Justice. According to the Prosecutor, it is currently not advisable to introduce new regulations in Poland regarding the punishment of persons reprogramming IMEI numbers.
    The Penal Code (Article 270 § 1 of the Penal Code) provides for the possibility of punishment for altering the IMEI number by an unauthorized person, treating a telephone set permanently marked with the IMEI number as a document (recorded information carrier). However, a prerequisite for imposing a penalty is to establish that the perpetrator acted with the intention of directly using the phone so modified as authentic.
    The second possibility of imposing a penalty (Article 306 of the Penal Code) is to assume that the perpetrator removes, counterfeits or alters the identification mark of the device, because the IMEI number assigned to the mobile phone is its identification mark.

    Comparing the above provisions of the Penal Code, it can be assumed that the perpetrator of altering the IMEI number in a stolen phone commits two crimes at the same time. This accumulation may affect the amount of the penalty imposed. However, Prosecutor Napierski emphasized that the factor verifying the accuracy of his views will be only judicial practice.


    link - and how it looks in other EU countries.
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #21 19252840
    tino2003
    Admin of GSM Group  
    Szyszkownik Kilkujadek wrote:
    I'm afraid the forensic expert might give a different opinion and then you might be dissatisfied with the verdict.


    I don't think you understand what I'm talking about, so:

    I bought a new Samsung S10 at a pawnshop, I paid PLN 2,000 for it, after some time the operator blocked my phone because someone stopped paying it. I bought the same model with a broken display for, say, PLN 200 and put the motherboard from it into the blocked one. I threw the blocked disc and the remains of the broken phone into the trash.

    Now the question: What crime did I commit and what phone do I have?
  • #22 19252884
    batot
    Level 15  
    staś pytalski wrote:
    I am still of the opinion that operators should give the opportunity to pay back to someone who bought second-hand. If someone wants it, why defend it. And let the operator pursue the original user who failed to pay the installments.

    As far as I know, if the installments are paid (no matter by whom) the phone (IMEI) will be unlocked.
    So there is such a possibility, but will it pay off to pay twice for the phone? ;)

    To add fuel to the fire, the same situation is with Tesla cars.
    Because the car, after connecting to the Internet, communicates with the manufacturer, it has happened more than once that after the occurrence of certain specific conditions, the manufacturer of the second (second-hand) buyer remotely blocked certain functions in the car, e.g. "refueling on Tesla chargers". Because the manufacturer is in the USA and the vehicle is in Poland, you can't hold the manufacturer liable for anything :)
    Some Polish companies have specialized and can reprogram the car's computer for a fee so that the manufacturer no longer has "access" to the car and can't change anything. Are they also subject to Art. 267 § 1 of the Penal Code (breaking electronic security measures).
    For now, you won't hear about it in the media because neither Tesla from the USA nor a Pole are likely to sue each other, and probably there is no interest.
  • #23 19252925
    robokop
    VIP Meritorious for electroda.pl  
    tino2003 wrote:
    illegal as well as blocking phones by operators where cases are already based on the courts.
    Eeeee, there. Receivership - in this case, usually unintentional. Even if it stands on the ears, the phone remains the property of the operator until it is repaid, like all things bought in installments - until the loan is repaid, they are the property of the lender in the sense of ownership (not to be confused with the right of use). When the borrower defaults on repayments, the operator blocks the phone to prevent its use and trading on the secondary market, and usually requests prosecution for misappropriation/fraud. So every next buyer of this phone becomes a fence - they buy a thing that comes from a crime. Changing the IMEI is more or less the same as punching the car's chassis number - falsifying the document more or less to illegally legalize something illegal.
  • #24 19252941
    tino2003
    Admin of GSM Group  
    robokop wrote:
    Changing the IMEI is more or less the same as piercing the car's chassis number


    Agreed, changing the imei number yes, but when I replace the CD in the purchased phone, as I wrote above, then what?
  • #25 19253063
    William Bonawentura
    Level 34  
    robokop wrote:
    Even if it stands on the ears, the phone remains the property of the operator until it is repaid, like all things bought in installments - until the loan is repaid, they are the property of the lender in the sense of ownership (not to be confused with the right of use).


    Do you have access to such a contract and could you post this snippet?

    In my opinion, this is the case:
    1) If the consignment commission purchased the telephone on the basis of an invoice with installments as the form of payment, it should also read the loan agreement.
    2) If the content of the contract shows that the seller (operator) may claim the right to the subject of crediting, the commission should not resell the goods without informing the next buyer of this fact
    3) If this fact was concealed, the phone with a legal defect was sold and the new buyer should claim a refund from the commission
    4) Changing the IMEI other than replacing the motherboard is a forgery
  • #26 19253115
    robokop
    VIP Meritorious for electroda.pl  
    tino2003 wrote:
    Agreed, changing the imei number yes, but when I replace the CD in the purchased phone, as I wrote above, then what?
    This is when this phone ceases to be the same phone? Identification data is sewn into the system included on the motherboard, the rest is a replaceable housing, replaceable screen and replaceable battery.
    William Bonawentura wrote:


    Do you have access to such a contract and could you post this snippet?
    I don't want to search right now.
    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.
  • #27 19253410
    William Bonawentura
    Level 34  
    robokop 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.


    Agreed, but this pledge must be invoked in the contract. For example, there are no such provisions in consumer loans granted in electronics / household appliances stores and no one will try, for example, to collect a washing machine, but normally enforce the debt by e-court and bailiff.

    I've never bought a phone in installments from the operator and I don't know anyone who would do it, which is why I'm asking about the provisions of this contract.
  • #28 19253616
    Szyszkownik Kilkujadek
    Level 37  
    tino2003 wrote:
    I bought a new Samsung S10 at a pawnshop, I paid PLN 2,000 for it, after some time the operator blocked my phone because someone stopped paying it. I bought the same model with a broken display for, say, PLN 200 and put the motherboard from it into the blocked one. I threw the blocked disc and the remains of the broken phone into the trash.

    Now the question: What crime did I commit and what phone do I have?

    None. You have the phone with the broken screen. Is everything clear?
  • #29 19253630
    tino2003
    Admin of GSM Group  
    Szyszkownik Kilkujadek wrote:
    Is everything clear?


    For me a long time, but you still don't understand.
  • #30 19253638
    Szyszkownik Kilkujadek
    Level 37  
    robokop wrote:
    Even if it stands on the ears, the phone remains the property of the operator until it is repaid, like all things bought in installments - until the loan is repaid, they are the property of the lender in the sense of ownership (not to be confused with the right of use).

    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.
    Do not confuse consumer credit and leasing. Leasing is a completely different contract.

    Added after 54 [seconds]:

    tino2003 wrote:
    Szyszkownik Kilkujadek wrote:
    Is everything clear?


    For me a long time, but you still don't understand.

    So what do I not understand?
| New topic
Report a violation of the law

Topic summary

The discussion revolves around the legality and implications of changing the IMEI number of a mobile phone, particularly in scenarios where the original owner has defaulted on payments. Participants argue that the operator has the right to block the IMEI of a phone that is not fully paid for, as it remains their property until all installments are settled. Changing the IMEI is generally considered illegal, with some participants suggesting that it could be seen as an act of forgery. The conversation also touches on the responsibilities of second-hand shops and the need for proper verification of ownership before resale. Legal nuances regarding installment purchases versus outright ownership are debated, with references to consumer rights and potential legal repercussions for changing the IMEI.
Summary generated by the language model.
ADVERTISEMENT