![\"Verizon](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/Verizon-Wireles-logo-on-phone-stock-photo-3.jpg\"\/ "\\"Verizon"){kind=logo}
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Edgar Cervantes \/ Android Authority<\/p>\n
TL;DR<\/p>\n
Verizon replaced a customer\u2019s phone after they complained about poor connectivity, giving them a refurbished phone instead of a new one.
\nThe phone allegedly behaved unusually and then got factory-reset on its own, deleting crucial work and personal data.
\nThe owner learned the device was controlled by an enterprise MDM, and that Verizon supposedly sent them a phone from the store.
\nAfter several weeks of jumping through hoops, Verizon reportedly informed them that a replacement wasn\u2019t needed in the first place, marked the issue as resolved, and offered a maximum compensation of $400.
\nThe user is now pursuing legal options under California\u2019s consumer protection and privacy statutes.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s not uncommon for people to buy a used or refurbished phone from a random stranger, only to realize it\u2019s either stolen controlled by an enterprise MDM (Mobile Device Management) system. But it\u2019s a rather unfortunate rarity when you get locked out of a device you purchased new, even when it has been bought from a reputable company like Verizon<\/a>. That\u2019s exactly the plight of someone who sent their phone for a repair, received a refurbished unit in return, and then got locked out of what was supposed to be their own device.<\/p>\n How it began<\/p>\n Redditor Tcolls86<\/a> (a Tom Collery, according to Ars Technica<\/a>) described the harrowing experience in a lengthy post. After experiencing poor 5G connectivity, Collery, a Verizon customer of more than 21 years, reportedly sent a phone, seemingly a Galaxy Z Flip, for a hardware diagnosis. Verizon support reasoned it by saying it was due to a \u201csoftware malfunction.\u201d They were informed that this was likely a manufacturing defect, and their phone would be replaced with a new one. Usually, you would rejoice at the idea of getting a new phone without paying for it. I certainly would! But that\u2019s where things started going south for them.<\/p>\n First, Verizon delivered the phone to the wrong address, to the Collery\u2019s parents\u2019 house in New York, instead of their address in California. Then, they found out that it wasn\u2019t exactly a new phone but a refurbished<\/a> one. After being told that the phone had gone through a \u201c150-point\u201d checklist, they initially conceded and began using it.<\/p>\n Replacement didn\u2019t fix the issue, but made it worse<\/p>\n Despite that, their problems with 5G didn\u2019t go away. \u201cIf anything, it got worse,\u201d according to them, and another advisor then informed them that the issue was likely due to network extenders in the area, refuting the whole point of replacing the phone. The advisor promised to send them an extender, which never really arrived.<\/p>\n A week later, when Collery called to check on the status, they were informed that network extenders were out of stock, and the advisor wasn\u2019t sure when they would be available next. And we haven\u2019t gotten to the actual annoying part just yet.<\/p>\n And then it suddenly struck<\/p>\n Life went on for Collery, and they eventually started noticing an increasing number of security updates on their phone, followed by frequent restarts. One fine day, they noticed that the phone had restarted and gotten reset to the factory condition. And, you guessed it, that wiped off the entire data stored on the phone. Every contact, photo, video, and even the last memories with their grandma before her death.<\/p>\n Collery wasn\u2019t able to log into their Google or Samsung accounts, as the phone kept asking them to contact their IT admins. Verizon support wasn\u2019t able to comprehend the issue initially and asked them to contact Samsung instead. Since calling Verizon wouldn\u2019t help and the broken phone prevented them from going to work, Collery visited a physical store, only to be questioned about the whereabouts of the device. The store manager initially refused to believe it was sent by Verizon, and instead assumed it was either stolen or bought off eBay. After some checking, the manager told them it looked like a demo unit from the store that hadn\u2019t been properly wiped.<\/p>\n Further digging revealed it was managed by BricTECH, Verizon\u2019s provider for the MDM suite.<\/p>\n The maneuvering began<\/p>\n After spending nearly five hours at the store and trying to get through multiple advisors on call, the store manager suggested they could give them a new device while Verizon sent them another one, but said there was no way to get the data back. Over the next few weeks, Collery had to spend hours in countless calls with Verizon support to reach a resolution. In the process, they were also informed that their original device was just fine and didn\u2019t need to be replaced in the first place. Instead, their home fell under what is called a \u201cMarginal Service Zone,\u201d basically a fancy term for an area with poor coverage, which was the reason for their slow 5G. The advisor also told them about a special plan for people living in these zones, but they were never moved under it.<\/p>\n After some more calls, a service advisor offered a $400 credit for their poor experience and advised them to file a complaint with the Better Business Bureau and the FCC, specifically directing them to contact the Executive Relations team. After filing the complaint and waiting another week to actually connect to an executive advisor, Collery was told they could be sent another refurbished phone, but that Verizon was in no way obligated to provide them the service and had no specific plan for people living in Marginal Service Zones. The last advisor also told them their case was under investigation and that previous conversations, in which Collery received conflicting information, were being reviewed.<\/p>\n And the same conduct continued\u2026<\/p>\n A week later, the agent emailed Collery saying their situation was \u201cunprecedented\u201d because it had never happened before. Verizon said that the user had already received the maximum compensation ($400) and wasn\u2019t eligible for more, and even went so far as to say that they\u2019re free to switch operators. They were blatantly also told, \u201cThat is all the credit we are going to give you,\u201d and \u201cwe can take it back if you\u2019d like.\u201d<\/p>\n Naturally livid about the conversation, Collery asked for transcripts, to which they were told they would need to be subpoenaed.<\/p>\n In its response, Verizon told the FCC that it \u201cacknowledges the seriousness of the error\u201d and then \u201cadvised that all Certified devices originate directly from the manufacturer and are designed to meet stringent quality assurance standards.\u201d It further went on to mark the matter as resolved.<\/p>\n The user\u2019s legal recourse<\/p>\n Since Collery wasn\u2019t satisfied, he asked Verizon for the personal data stored on the MDM-controlled device. Verizon initially told them they needed a legal order to provide the information. Collery pointed to the California Consumer Privacy Act, which mandates companies to disclose<\/a>\u00a0personal information, and that\u00a0California\u2019s Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA)<\/a> made them eligible for $5,000 in compensation.<\/p>\n To avoid further escalation, Verizon tried to waive Collery\u2019s mobile payments, which they refused, and are now considering legal options under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). They were also initially told by a few lawyers that this wouldn\u2019t hold in court and wasn\u2019t worth the effort, at least not as a<\/p>\n The impossible attempt at regaining data, or connectivity<\/p>\n Meanwhile, trying to recover their data is something Collery may not succeed at. During an earlier conversation, a Verizon advisor suggested Collery take the phone to a uBreakiFix store, but the store manager said it wouldn\u2019t be possible since the phone was MDM-locked.<\/p>\n Verizon is also supposedly searching for the original phone in its warehouses, but hasn\u2019t found any trace of it just yet. And to make things worse, Collery\u2019s service remains as crappy as earlier, and they \u201chave to drive at least a few blocks before anything works.\u201d<\/p>\n In addition to the comments already shared with Ars Technica, we\u2019ve reached out to Verizon for additional updates and will inform you if there\u2019s an update.<\/p>\n