unlock and keep or lock and lose

today, rogers decided to decline my request to unlock an iphone I have in my account. Their reason: their "policy" states that IMEI number should be associated with an account for 90 days. But that is a laughable comic book policy that has nothing whatsoever to do with the service you are already paying for that phone. When you bought your used phone, did you remember to register its IMEI number with your carrier? Wait, your carrier already knows all about that phone, doesn't it. So what does this "policy" really mean?

Here are the relevant passages from the recent CRTC decision.

"164. The Commission therefore considers that WSPs should make an unlocking service available to customers who have been subscribed to their services for 90 days, at a rate specified in the contract and Critical Information Summary.

165. The Commission also considers that unsubsidized devices, which are fully paid for, should be unlocked immediately upon request, given that the risk of subscription fraud is not relevant in these circumstances." 

What part of these passages rogers failed to comprehend?

I told the apologetic customer retention specialist that this will cost rogers. I know he understood. I doubt rogers does.

[update: after I escalated the issue to the management, with the intention to write letter to the office of the president, and CRTC, unlock request was granted. the damage is done: the phone flew overseas without unlock.]

on practice

practice can make
the wrong thing
you practiced
perfectly
wrong.

[oz/2013]