Though he's not said it explicitly, I believe he is mad that AT&T wanted him to provide proof of ownership (after AT&T would have checked their system to make sure the IMEI wasn't under an active contract). Obviously, it's very reasonable of AT&T to expect that before they just unlock any iphone the customer asks them to. Not sure about it, but someone told me AT&T is the only carrier that will even unlock an iphone. I may be wrong about that though.
First of all, AT&T does not unlock iPhones. They send approved requests to Apple for them to unlock them during the restore process. Just because you paid full price for an iPhone does not mean that someone else might not still have that phone under contract. Many customers purchase the iPhone at discount just so that they can sell it at a higher price. They then use some other telephone on their line.
Earl F. Parrish
And would that apply to Apple?
@Rich That's kind of it. The imei is how they make sure the phone is eligible so even second hand phones are available for unlocks barring they are not related to a contract.
They only unlock iPhones that they subsidized and the contract has ended, OR if you purchased the phone at an AT&T authorized dealer and can provide proof of that purchase. Thats it. If you bought the iPhone from any other source they are not under any obligation to unlock it for you. I'm frankly surprised you found someone to do it so fast and easy for you both times.
My opinions are my own and do not reflect the opinions of my employer AT&T.
"I made sure that the phone I was going to purchase was a "no-contract" iPhone. Although this was before it meant it could be unlocked I still did not want to buy a device that was subsidized, stolen or in any way related to an AT&T contract."
Now take a deep breath and read it again. I have faith in you -- you can do it!
Furthermore, I wasn't partially correct about the unlocks I'm completely correct. If you take the steps I took to purchase an iPhone this automatically qualifies it for an unlock. There's simply no partial to it. No receipt needed. My unlocks are proof of that x2.
Buy an iPhone unsubsidized that was never issued via AT&T and YOU CAN get it unlocked. No receipt required. The most you will need is to have the phone registered in your name with Apple.
Btw I go this route for a few reasons. Since I buy my phone outright I don't have to wait 2 years via an AT&T contract or pay an early upgrade fee. So what I do is a few months after the new iPhone is released I sell mine for 300-370$ and then I put that towards my purchase of the newest model. I use a prepaid plan that's 45$ a month so effectively I'm saving by not using AT&T's 100$ a month iPhone plan.
My way 45$ x 12 month = 540 per year + newest iPhone that I'll have 100-150$ in = @ most 690 per year.
AT&T's way 100$x12 months = 1200 + 199$ for upgrade = 1399$
You would have to add another 199$ to this total if you're going to always get the latest model.
So 690$ vs 1399-1598$
I'll take the 690$
Brad Mullins, you are awesome...using straight talk and complaining about ATT. Best of luck to you.
You bought a phone thinking (and still seem to think) that just because it wasn't under contract with AT&T that you are automatically entitled to an unlock request. When you called into AT&T and they pointed out that were you, in fact, wrong and proof of purchase is required when you aren't a current or former AT&T customer with a subsidized handset that has met it's contractual obligation this is their fault? The fact that you've fairly easily gotten them to unlock a device for you that they didn't have to per their policy should make them a great company in your eyes at least, instead you run a 3 page long thread about how horrible it was that you had to waste precious minutes of your day to get them to file the exception unlock for you...
I read up to the 2nd sentence of your post where it said I "thought" I was entitled to an unlock and that was as far as I needed to read just to ONCE again point out that YES buying a used non-subsidized iPhone qualified me for not only one but two unlocks. Repeating myself without you understanding has become tiresome, bothersome, insane, and beyond ridiculous because the problem was resolved via AT&T just like I knew it should have been..... and it was resolved multiple times so there's no room for even the slightest of debates.
However, speaking in terms of the purely scientific; I think it's quite clear that we can safely classify this as a scientific fact not a hypothesis because at this point I have been able to reproduce the same result out of the same controlled environment.
Thus there's not been and there never was ANY incorrect "assumptions" on my part regarding the unlock policy of AT&T. I was 100% factually correct from the start to the end of this thread regarding that matter.