Stefan Langkamp
Customer Operations Director
VODAFONE UK LIMITED
VODAFONE HOUSE
THE CONNECTION
NEWBURY
BERKSHIRE
RG14 2FN

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

Breach of Contract and Loss of Bargain – Huawei G300 Smartphone (“G300”)

Vodafone has been advertising the G300 as having Google’s ICS operating system since launch on April 13th 2012. Advertising boards were in stores claiming it already had the software.

At various times, Huawei posted versions of ICS on it’s website, all of which were broken in various ways.
We duly reported these problems to both Vodafone and Huawei.

Over time, Vodafone staff and “Community Experts” have suggested that the reason the upgrade has taken so long is because bugs are being fixed.

31st October 2012 - Vodafone releases over the air to UK customers build B936 of ICS that was previously released in New Zealand back in August. We told you months ago that this build had many basic functional issues but you’ve ignored us.

Examples:-
Dictionary still broken

Caller ID still broken - it doesn't display in time.

Still no hardware accelerated UI despite documented written promises

Still reverts to internal storage after reboot even if you tell it to use the SD card

Still sluggish and slows down over time leading to force closes etc - bad memory management - Why does the ZTE blade, a hugely inferior device, not have these problems?

Still defaults back to factory ringtones when connected to PC


A binding contract exists between us for a suitably specified Android smartphone with a reasonably functional release of ICS or higher. As this has not been forthcoming in a reasonable time I believe that there is a case for breach of contract and loss of bargain.

At this stage I can make a without prejudice offer to return my G300 to be replaced free of charge with a suitably specified alternative.

Failure to supply a properly specified item or the cash equivalent to buy such an item on the open market will result in legal action. I will have no alternative than to serve an N1 claim on you for breach of contract and loss of bargain. This measure of damages is intended to place the injured party in the same situation, as far as money can do it, as if the contract had been performed Robinson -v- Harman(1848).

I believe you would be acting unreasonably by forcing this to court so I will make a further application for a Wasted Costs Order and will also claim court costs, litigant in person case preparation costs at the standard rate of £9.25/hour, travelling expenses and 8% statutory interest. It follows that this will greatly increase the amount being claimed.  You will have to appear in person at my local court.

I assert my rights under Sale of Goods Act 1979, S51 - Damages for Non-delivery:
"51(3) Where there is an available market for the goods in question the measure of damages is prima facie to be ascertained by the difference between the contract price and the market or current price of the goods at the time or times when they ought to have been delivered or (if no time was fixed) at the time of the refusal to deliver."