MTR Group Limited Bewertungen 

Same as others, traded in a phone in near perfect condition, now they claim its damaged and want payment.

I had pictures of the device taken before sending showing no damage as advised by others with the same issues, it was also packaged exceedingly well.

Response from them was poor, pay or we disable your new device. Samsung response was more professional but they were not able to help.

Possibly phone damaged on purpose to try and claw back £50, actual repair cost for the damage shown in the picture is around £8 to replace back glass and about 10 mins of someone’s times, so a quick way of making a few pounds.

I’m unlikely to purchase Samsung devices or participate in Samsung promotions again.

Samsung phone six weeks old sent for a warranty repair (charging port), advised I would need to pay for the repair as it had water damage. The phone has never been near water, used in a bathroom or anything that would cause the damage. I refused the repair, and I'm still waiting a week later for the phone to be dispatched back to me (two weeks in total). Calls and emails go unanswered. This is the last Samsung product I will ever buy due to the service offered by MTR. Please please just save yourself the stress and take your phone to a local company to be fixed.

MTR need to be investigated by Trading Standards.
I sent a phone to them only to receive, after 2 weeks, an email saying that there were faults. The back was apparently lifting and there was screen burn, therefore I needed to pay them £125 else the phone I purchased would be blocked. Only when I requested evidence did they send me 3 photos. However, only one photo showed that it was my trade in device, the other two photos could have been from any phone. As with many reviewers on here I asked for definitive proof that the faults shown were my phone but they never provided what I was requesting. I sent numerous emails and they then directed me toward Samsung. Samsung then directed me back toward MTR.

The whole thing could be seen as a racket that's been set up deliberately. Batting me back and forth and then basically backing me into a corner making me pay the money. I never did receive my request of dated, meta data photos etc... Reading these reviews I now am edging toward my gut instinct that the photos were perhaps never actually of my phone that I sent in. This I will never know as they refused to address my simple requests.

NEVER EVER send your device to these people. Sell it at CEX or online or do a trade in via one of their shops. I will be referring my experience to Trading Standards.

Be very very careful!
This company may be running a scam.
They received my phone which was sent to them in original Samsung box including internal dividers and instruction manual. I removed the screen protector and hard phone cover seconds before packaging it all up and sending off.
They waited almost 2 weeks before sending an email threatening that they would remotely disable my new phone if I didn't pay an additional £150 because now there is a blob on the screen.
I asked for meta data showing the picture was taken on the day they received it and they have refused.
Samsung customer service have not been helpful as they say this is a third party.
These people have the power to demand any additional sum they want after having had the phone for weeks - you will not know the chain of custody.
Steer clear of them if you can.

Disgraceful and completely disingenuous, how Samsung can be associated with this organisation is beyond me. 86% of reviews 1 star, that is only because 0 stars is not an option.
Used the trade in option when buying my new phone direct on Samsung website. My phone a Flip 5 powered up, held charge, had no screen damage or black areas, opening and closing properly and always kept in a case. There was a very small piece of rubber which covered the hinge on one side missing through normal use. This met all Samsungs criteria for trade-in.
I returned the device the day after delivery of the new phone, packaging it extremely carefully.
Today I received a demand to repay £150 of the £199 discount back due to, as they put it the frame being broken. Frame broken my foot. Added to the demand was the threat if I did not pay my new device would be disabled by Samsung. Livid doesn't come close to my reaction.
I contacted Samsung and spoke with customer service who clearly has a script to spout rubbish at you. Eventually a "ticket" was raised to investigate why the flip 5 failed to qualify, but no confirmation that my new device would not be deactivated during the process.
Due to personal circumstances and the need for a working phone 24/7, I payed the full value of the discount received and instructed my old Flip 5 to be returned. I would have secured more than the discount amount selling on ebay or at the local pawn shop, but stupidly could not be bothered with the hassle of that. Yes I failed to do due diligence on the this company who work hand in hand with Samsung but assumed a tech titan company would only use reputable and trustworthy partners Wrong wrong wrong. Be assured the matter is not ended.

Continuing to use MTS reflects really poorly on Samsung.

I traded in my Samsung device as part of an upgrade to the latest Fold 8 - Echoing many of the experiences posted here, MTR go round and round in circles spinning you the same message about your device being "faulty" or "broken" when evidently it isn't.

Putting "wear and tear" in the terms and conditions is effectively meaningless - I asked specifically for the difference between "normal wear and tear", and "faulty/damaged" and was shut down, being told "a repair is required"

For their part - I admit there is wear to the curved screen bumper on my Flip 5 trade-in, but this reflects this piece of plastic doing its job. When wear to this part makes the device 'broken', the threshold for 'wear and tear' effectively cannot be met.

Equally disappointing - I escalated to Samsung and they could not/would not highlight how/where exactly my device failed to meet the 'wear and tear' threshold.

In summary - Trade-in your device as broken or otherwise don't waste your time trading in with Samsung.

Dreadful company. They are so bad that it has now stopped me ever buying another Samsung phone with trade in.
They refuse to provide any proof of what they say is wrong, their only photos clearly show the phone charging but they state it has a damaged USB port. They threaten (blackmail) you into paying them a surcharge by saying they will block/disconnect your phone.
I have escalated through Samsung CEO (and will also refer to Trading Standards if Samsung do not resolve adequately) and given a legal warning to MTR of possible referral to SCC for recovery - they are incompetent at best, scammers at worst, but either way avoid avoid avoid.
They are really doing Samsung no favours at all as they are emailing with Samsung's branding although the MTR details are at the bottom of emails and payments are made to them not Samsung.

Thieving lying scumbag scammers. 4 times my tablet has been sent to the by samsung within a year whilst under warranty for the exact same issue where it does not charge or turn on. They do not answer the phone or emails and are trying to say that I now need to pay for the repairs as it is not a warranty issue. Why Samsung have sent to these scumbags is beyond me.

Unfortunately I broke my own golden rule and didn't check out the Samsung Trade in process before sending my perfectly working galaxy fold 4 to this unbelievably inept unprofessional company. Stupidly I presumed that such a high profile company like Samsung would not use such an unbelievably unprofessional rip off bunch of cowboys as it will eventually hopefully have repercussions for them. I cannot over emphasise how unhelpful and unwilling MTR were to help or even properly engage with you if you dispute what they are claiming is wrong with your trade-in device. They just kept telling me to either pay £150 (appears to be their go to amount) or contact Samsung customer service. I did contact Samsung and even though they were very polite and pleasant its all lip service!! because you end up being directed back to MTR and so the circle of doom continues! After weeks of emails, phone calls and empty promises from Samsung customer service you will end up back where you started with MTR still being as uncaring and inept as they were at the start of the dispute.
I will NEVER buy a phone directly from Samsung again (there were severe problems with the order and delivery of the new phone) and will certainly not ever be drawn in by their Trade-In promises. If you are ever considering trading in your old phone just make sure that the company your using are not using MTR as the chances are you WILL be charged £150 by them for an issue that was not a problem when you sent the device to them.

I sent my MacBook Pro to MTR Trade-In after receiving an offer of £286.

After inspection, MTR reduced the offer £100 because they said the battery maximum capacity was 80% or below. I declined the revised offer and asked for the MacBook to be returned.

The MacBook has now been returned to me, but my original Apple charger and cable were not returned with it.

This is particularly concerning because MTR’s own trade-in criteria require the charger to be supplied with the device. Their inspection specifically identified the battery as the reason for reducing the valuation, but I was not told that the charger was missing.

I contacted MTR asking them to investigate and return the charger or reimburse me for it. So far, I have received no response.

I will update this review if MTR resolves the issue.

Warning to everyone dealing with the company. Avoid at all costs because they are not trustworthy. I am not sure why Samsung uses them for their Trade-in program, because they are destroying Samsung's reputation by damaging your trade-in phone to lower the value and get money from you. Check out the Samsung community website
Need to make people aware so it can be reported on social media and Trading Standards.

Terrible people, they're frauds. Trying to steal money out of people's pockets by lying.

I paid MTR (Samsung's Authorised Service Centre) £216 under Order 429098889 to fix an intermittent black screen issue on my Galaxy A55 5G. They replaced the motherboard, claiming it was the "most likely cause."However, they clearly misdiagnosed the device. The phone was returned to me with the exact same black screen fault. When I sent it back for reassessment, a supervisor admitted in writing that they could not prove if their original diagnosis was correct, yet they demanded an additional £126.02 to replace a charging port before they would even continue troubleshooting their own failed repair.Under Section 49 of the UK Consumer Rights Act 2015, paid services must be carried out with reasonable care and skill. Paying £216 for a repair should buy a resolution, not a gamble.When held accountable to UK consumer law, MTR walked away from the contract, stating they "do not have the authority" to resolve it and told me to take it up with Samsung directly.

Disappointing handling of Samsung trade-in dispute

I have been a Samsung customer for many years, but my recent experience with Samsung's trade-in process has been extremely disappointing.

I traded in a phone which I had always looked after carefully and was subsequently told that I needed to pay an additional £150, with the device assessed as having “Display faulty – Display damaged & dust under lens.”

I disputed the assessment and asked what I thought were very straightforward questions.

My phone had been sent with a screen protector fitted, so I asked whether this had been removed before the actual display was assessed. It took several emails before I finally received confirmation that it had.

I then asked them to identify/provide the photograph showing the actual display after the screen protector had been removed and to show where the alleged display damage could be seen.

I also asked for evidence demonstrating that the alleged “dust under lens” was actually underneath the camera lens rather than something visible externally.

Instead of directly answering these questions, I repeatedly received very brief responses essentially telling me that the faults were visible, the surcharge was valid and I should pay it.

I eventually escalated the matter directly to Samsung. Although Samsung's communication has been considerably more professional, I still feel that I am receiving explanations of the general Trade-In Terms and Conditions rather than answers to my fundamental question: what evidence demonstrates that my particular device had the faults being alleged?

What has particularly concerned me is being warned that my new Samsung phone could be remotely disabled if I don't pay the disputed £150. I am currently abroad and need my phone, so I feel I have little practical choice but to pay the surcharge while continuing to dispute it.

I have made it very clear throughout that I am not trying to avoid paying a legitimate charge. If Samsung can demonstrate that my device genuinely had the faults alleged, I will accept that. I simply expect a £150 reduction in trade-in value to be supported by clear evidence and reasonable questions about that evidence to receive direct answers.

The whole experience has left me feeling as though I am dealing with scripted responses rather than people actually reading and addressing the substance of my complaint.

For a company I have remained loyal to for many years, this has been a very disappointing experience.

I hope Samsung will still properly investigate the matter and restore my confidence in its trade-in process. If the complaint is resolved fairly, I will happily update this review to reflect the outcome.

I had a very disappointing experience with MTR regarding a Samsung trade-in.

After sending my phone in, I was informed that a £100 surcharge had been applied because the rear camera lens was supposedly delaminated. I disputed this charge and repeatedly asked MTR for a clear explanation of how the £100 figure had been calculated and why the issue had resulted in this particular surcharge.

Unfortunately, I found MTR's responses extremely unhelpful. Rather than properly addressing my concerns or providing a meaningful breakdown or justification for the charge, I was essentially told that the surcharge was applicable because the device did not meet the trade-in criteria.

I continued to challenge the decision because I did not feel I had been given a satisfactory explanation.

I eventually had to escalate the matter directly with Samsung. I am pleased to say that Samsung reviewed the case and ultimately waived the £100 surcharge and refunded the money to me.

Whilst I appreciate Samsung resolving the matter, the fact that the surcharge was ultimately waived and refunded has left me even more disappointed with the way MTR handled my complaint in the first place.

My main issue was never simply the £100 itself; it was the lack of transparency and the way my concerns were handled. I believe customers should be given a proper explanation when a significant additional charge is imposed, rather than having their concerns repeatedly dismissed.

If you are using MTR for a Samsung trade-in and encounter a similar issue, my advice would be to keep all correspondence, challenge any surcharge you believe is unjustified, and escalate the matter to Samsung if MTR does not adequately address your concerns.

If anyone else has experienced an unfair or disputed trade-in surcharge and needs support or advice on how I approached the issue, please feel free to get in touch. I'm happy to share my experience and the steps I took to get the charge challenged and ultimately refunded.

I am pleased to have finally received my refund, but based on my experience, I would have significant reservations about dealing with MTR again.

They undertake the 3rd party handling for the Samsung Trade In process - mtr.co.uk.

Received an unsolicited email seeking £150 payment due to an alleged chip in my Fold 5 frame. So I wonder if they have a bonus system in operation, to reject x number of devices and reduce the trade in value?

Funny part is, they had it for 12 days before rasing the fee invoice and the phone was checked by Belfast Samsung before sending it off.

A Trading Standard query is warranted in my opinion.

I wish I had read reviews on here prior to using the Samsung trade in, via their own website.
They are corrupt!
Sent a perfectly good condition S21 Ultra to trade in and I received an email stating the back had lifted, therefore the phone did not meet the condition of the trade in.
Having since read reviews here, this is a very common response from MTR Group when trading in your mobiles through Samsung.
Even though we stated we had photographic evidence, they did not want to know. They threatened to ' switch off ' the new phone if payment wasn't made. They replied to all emails very generically with no luck of speaking to anyone.
Luckily (kind of) for us they only requested a £25 payment to complete the trade in.
Such a corrupt company who appear to get away with conning people out of money.
Do not use to trade in phones!

Con-artists. I am sure they damaged my trade-in phone, as I could not see any damage when I sent it in. So small, they will just sell it without repairing it, but I foolishly did not take photos before I posted this. Do not use Samsung trade-in! Had to pay extra after I received a new device, or they threatened to remotely shut my phone down.

Samsung arranged my 2 month old Galaxy laptop to go in for repair as it kept freezing.
DPD packed the computer well at pick up and took a photo.
Received an email from MTR next day to say there was damage to the Screen, Keyboard and Cover. Luckily I photographed these before sending, all in perfect condition
Reported this to Samsung with my photos and requested a refund or replacement. I am waiting for their decision

I traded-in my Flip 5 phone in excellent condition via the official Samsung website, expecting a smooth and fair process. Instead, I received an email from their trade-in partner MTR Group claiming the phone's frame was lifted — supported by two unclear photos that don’t even prove the device was mine.
It felt like they’re trying to reduce the trade-in value unfairly, and try to scam me of a £150.