Troubleshoot Dell Dock WD19TBS

[Divine_Barakah]

Briefly explain your current issue(s)

Dell Wd19TBS

Steps taken to resolve, but have been unsuccessful

- thunderbolt is disabled in bios
- disabled VT in bios
- ran the firmware silently using CMD to force it.

Your current Antivirus

Bitdefender

I spent hours trying to update the firmware of the dock. All attempts failed

This dock is Thunderbolt 3
My laptop, Dell Latitude 5340, is Thunderbolt 4

Now when I try to update the dock firmware I get an error "timeout" or "target could not be detected"

With the help of Gemini, I disabled all protection from Bios, everything under intel VT and the firmware managed to update three components but not the NVM component.

The problem is I cannot connect my external monitor as it does not receive signal from the dock.

Is this due to the outdated firmware or sth else?

 

[Divine_Barakah]

If Dell told you in writing that it was escalated to “Fraud” but ProSupport now says nothing about it and you’re getting no emails, the immediate objective is to force a single written status inside the official SR that answers one binary question: Is the case on a fraud/blacklist hold or not? Everything else follows from that.

1) Don’t rely only on Activity Center notes
Adding notes is good for a record, but it often doesn’t trigger ownership or SLA the way an SR email thread or an L2 queue does. Make sure you also reply to the SR’s official email thread (or ask ProSupport to send you an email update so you have a reply channel that is definitely tied to the SR).

2) Request a “case notes read-back” and a written status
On the hotline, ask the agent to do two things (and stay on the call while they do it):

• Read the latest internal case notes verbatim (or summarize them line-by-line) and confirm whether there is a “Fraud/Blacklist hold” flag on the SR/service tag.
• Send a case summary emailwhile you’re on the phone that includes:
  • Current status (Fraud hold: yes/no)
  • Current owner/team (L2/ARG/Fraud/queue name)
  • Next action + expected update date

If they can’t email, ask them to add the same text into the SR notes and confirm it was saved.

3) If the “Fraud” email was inaccurate, request correction in writing
You want Dell to explicitly reconcile the contradiction:

• Email says “blacklisted” + “Fraud team”
• Hotline agent sees no fraud investigation

Ask them to confirm one of the following in writing:

• “Fraud investigation is active (reference/queue ____), case is on hold pending ____,” OR
• “No fraud investigation is active; previous email was incorrect; case proceeds under standard warranty exchange/escalation path.”

4) About your “full chat transcript” request (what’s realistic)
Many support teams will not provide “full WhatsApp transcripts” via support channels, and they may not open ZIP files at all. The route that usually fits this type of request is a formal privacy/data access request (GDPR/UK GDPR if you’re in EMEA; similar privacy requests exist elsewhere). Practically:

• Ask ProSupport to confirm whether they can provide the transcript via support. If they can’t, ask for the Dell Privacy/data protection process for obtaining personal data and communications tied to your account/phone number.
• Separately, attach your own key excerpts (screenshots/PDF) to the SR so the case can move even if the transcript request takes time.

5) Short email you can post in the SR (Activity Center or case email)

Hello,​

​

I have not received any further updates since the email stating the system is “blacklisted” and escalated to the Fraud team.​

​

Please confirm in writing (in this SR):​

1) Is there an active Fraud/Blacklist hold on this Service Tag or SR? Yes/No.​

2) If Yes: which team owns it (queue/reference) and what specific information/documents are required from me to proceed, and the expected timeline for the next update.​

3) If No: please correct the previous email in writing and confirm the case owner (L2/ARG) and the next action date for the exchange/escalation.​

​

I also request guidance on the formal process to obtain the full WhatsApp/Social chat transcript associated with this case/phone number (if this must go through Dell Privacy / a data access request, please confirm the correct route).​

​

Regards,​

Name​

Service Tag: ___ | SR: ___​

What to do if there’s still no written update
If you don’t have a written SR update by end of business Friday, December 26, 2025 (or the next business day in your region), call again and request escalation to an L2 case owner or escalation/case manager specifically due to conflicting written statements and lack of status updates.

Next step: paste the exact “blacklisted/fraud” email header date (and any SR status text you can see in the portal, with personal info redacted). I can help you turn it into a tighter escalation note that forces a Yes/No answer on the fraud hold and a concrete timeline.

The email I received about fraud investigation explicitly said "your system appears to be blacklisted" not blacklisted.

 

[Bot]

The email I received about fraud investigation explicitly said "your system appears to be blacklisted" not blacklisted.

That wording difference matters.

“Appears to be blacklisted” is not a confirmed determination—it usually indicates one of these situations:

• A preliminary flag/indicator in one internal tool, but not yet validated by the team that owns the decision (Fraud/asset/entitlement).
• A misread of a status (e.g., entitlement restriction, region/transfer hold, ownership mismatch) that the agent summarized as “blacklisted.”
• A temporary hold pending verification (not the same as “the device is blacklisted and final”).

How to use this to your advantage
When you write back or add SR notes, quote their exact phrase and require a precise, written clarification:

• Ask them to define what “appears to be blacklisted” means in Dell terms (flag name/category).
• Ask whether it is confirmed or unconfirmed.
• Ask who owns the determination (Fraud team / Asset / ARG / Entitlement) and the expected timeline.
• Ask what evidence is required to clear/validate it.

Suggested wording (tight, forces a clear answer)

Hello,

In your email you stated that my system “appears to be blacklisted” and that the matter was escalated to the Fraud team.

Please confirm in writing:
1) Is there a confirmed blacklist/fraud hold on this Service Tag/SR, or is this an unconfirmed indicator (“appears”) pending review?
2) Which internal team/queue owns this review (Fraud/Asset/ARG/Entitlement) and what is the reference/owner?
3) What specific reason category applies (e.g., ownership mismatch, region/transfer restriction, entitlement dispute, other) and what documents are required from me to resolve it?
4) When is the next scheduled update?

Regards,
Name
Service Tag: ___ | SR: ___​

One important caution
Try not to argue the word “blacklisted” itself on the phone—focus on getting them to convert it into: status (confirmed/unconfirmed), reason category, owner, and next action date. That’s what breaks “stalling.”

If you paste the exact sentence paragraph (with names/IDs redacted), I can help you tailor the follow-up so it matches Dell’s wording and minimizes room for them to dodge.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

That wording difference matters.

“Appears to be blacklisted” is not a confirmed determination—it usually indicates one of these situations:

• A preliminary flag/indicator in one internal tool, but not yet validated by the team that owns the decision (Fraud/asset/entitlement).
• A misread of a status (e.g., entitlement restriction, region/transfer hold, ownership mismatch) that the agent summarized as “blacklisted.”
• A temporary hold pending verification (not the same as “the device is blacklisted and final”).

How to use this to your advantage
When you write back or add SR notes, quote their exact phrase and require a precise, written clarification:

• Ask them to define what “appears to be blacklisted” means in Dell terms (flag name/category).
• Ask whether it is confirmed or unconfirmed.
• Ask who owns the determination (Fraud team / Asset / ARG / Entitlement) and the expected timeline.
• Ask what evidence is required to clear/validate it.

Suggested wording (tight, forces a clear answer)

Hello,​

​

In your email you stated that my system “appears to be blacklisted” and that the matter was escalated to the Fraud team.​

​

Please confirm in writing:​

1) Is there a confirmed blacklist/fraud hold on this Service Tag/SR, or is this an unconfirmed indicator (“appears”) pending review?​

2) Which internal team/queue owns this review (Fraud/Asset/ARG/Entitlement) and what is the reference/owner?​

3) What specific reason category applies (e.g., ownership mismatch, region/transfer restriction, entitlement dispute, other) and what documents are required from me to resolve it?​

4) When is the next scheduled update?​

​

Regards,​

Name​

Service Tag: ___ | SR: ___​

One important caution
Try not to argue the word “blacklisted” itself on the phone—focus on getting them to convert it into: status (confirmed/unconfirmed), reason category, owner, and next action date. That’s what breaks “stalling.”

If you paste the exact sentence paragraph (with names/IDs redacted), I can help you tailor the follow-up so it matches Dell’s wording and minimizes room for them to dodge.

They are stalling. I called the hotline again today and the agent confirmed that my case is "pending escalation."

 

[Bot]

They are stalling. I called the hotline again today and the agent confirmed that my case is "pending escalation."

“Pending escalation” is a classic limbo status. The way out is to make them convert it into a specific queue + owner + timestamp (or admit it hasn’t been submitted).

What to do on the next call (script-style, minimal debate)

• 1) Ask: “Pending escalation to which team/queue?”
  Get an exact destination (e.g., L2 queue name, ARG, Asset/Fraud, etc.). “Pending escalation” without a destination is meaningless.
• 2) Ask for the escalation reference
  “Can you read me the escalation ID / internal task number / routing code that was created?” If there is no ID, it likely hasn’t actually been escalated.
• 3) Ask for the timestamp and who submitted it
  “What date/time was the escalation request created, and by which agent/team?” This is important for SLA accountability.
• 4) Ask them to update the SR notes while you’re on the phone
  Request they add a note containing:
  • Escalation destination team/queue
  • Escalation reference/ID
  • Created date/time
  • Next promised update date
  Then ask them to read back the note they just entered.
• 5) Ask for a case owner or escalation manager if it’s older than 24–48 business hours
  If it’s been “pending escalation” since yesterday (or longer), request assignment to an L2/case manager due to lack of progress and conflicting statements from different channels.

Short message to post in the SR (Activity Center or email thread)

Hello,

I called ProSupport on December 22, 2025 and was informed the SR is “pending escalation.”

Please confirm in writing:
1) Pending escalation to which team/queue (L2/ARG/Fraud/Asset/etc.)?
2) The escalation reference/ID and the date/time it was created.
3) The current owner (name/role) and the next update date/time.

Regards,
Name
Service Tag: ___ | SR: ___​

Why this works
It forces them to produce trackable metadata. If they can’t provide a queue + ID + timestamp, then the escalation effectively isn’t real yet, and you have a clean basis to request a manager/case owner.

If you share (redacted) the SR status page text and the exact phrasing the agent used (plus your timezone), I can help you make the SR note even tighter and harder to ignore.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

“Pending escalation” is a classic limbo status. The way out is to make them convert it into a specific queue + owner + timestamp (or admit it hasn’t been submitted).

What to do on the next call (script-style, minimal debate)

• 1) Ask: “Pending escalation to which team/queue?”
  Get an exact destination (e.g., L2 queue name, ARG, Asset/Fraud, etc.). “Pending escalation” without a destination is meaningless.
• 2) Ask for the escalation reference
  “Can you read me the escalation ID / internal task number / routing code that was created?” If there is no ID, it likely hasn’t actually been escalated.
• 3) Ask for the timestamp and who submitted it
  “What date/time was the escalation request created, and by which agent/team?” This is important for SLA accountability.
• 4) Ask them to update the SR notes while you’re on the phone
  Request they add a note containing:
  • Escalation destination team/queue
  • Escalation reference/ID
  • Created date/time
  • Next promised update date
  Then ask them to read back the note they just entered.
• 5) Ask for a case owner or escalation manager if it’s older than 24–48 business hours
  If it’s been “pending escalation” since yesterday (or longer), request assignment to an L2/case manager due to lack of progress and conflicting statements from different channels.

Short message to post in the SR (Activity Center or email thread)

Hello,​

​

I called ProSupport on December 22, 2025 and was informed the SR is “pending escalation.”​

​

Please confirm in writing:​

1) Pending escalation to which team/queue (L2/ARG/Fraud/Asset/etc.)?​

2) The escalation reference/ID and the date/time it was created.​

3) The current owner (name/role) and the next update date/time.​

​

Regards,​

Name​

Service Tag: ___ | SR: ___​

Why this works
It forces them to produce trackable metadata. If they can’t provide a queue + ID + timestamp, then the escalation effectively isn’t real yet, and you have a clean basis to request a manager/case owner.

If you share (redacted) the SR status page text and the exact phrasing the agent used (plus your timezone), I can help you make the SR note even tighter and harder to ignore.

They keep giving me contradictory info. The gave me two different names for the case owner. Now they're telling me that the agent who requested the escalation to level 2 support won't be available till next Wednesday.

 

[Bot]

They keep giving me contradictory info. The gave me two different names for the case owner. Now they're telling me that the agent who requested the escalation to level 2 support won't be available till next Wednesday.

They shouldn’t be tying progress to one specific agent being “available.” If an escalation was truly created, it should have a reference/queue and be workable by the receiving team or reassigned internally. Two different “case owner” names is also a red flag that the case is either not properly assigned or you’re being routed between queues.

Also, since today is Monday, December 22, 2025, “next Wednesday” is ambiguous—some agents mean Wednesday, December 24, 2025, while others mean the following week (Wednesday, December 31, 2025). Don’t let them hide behind that wording: force a date.

What to do (in order)

1) Force them to state one owner + one queue in writing
On the next call, say you need the agent to update the SR notes with:

• The current official case owner (name + role/team)
• The current queue (L1/L2/ARG/Fraud/etc.)
• The escalation reference/ID (or confirm “no escalation ID exists”)
• The next committed update date/time (with timezone)

Then ask them to read back exactly what they wrote in the case notes.

2) Do not accept “the requesting agent is not available” as a blocker
Use this phrasing:

“If the escalation depends on one agent, then it hasn’t been properly actioned. Please reassign the escalation request to an available L2/escalations owner today, and note the reassignment in the SR.”​

In most support organizations, supervisors/duty managers can reassign tickets and ownership. You’re not asking for a favor—you’re asking for standard continuity.

3) Ask for an escalation manager / duty manager (not another front-line agent)
If they gave you two different owner names, request:

• A case manager/escalation manager to be assigned due to conflicting information
• A single point of contact for updates going forward

4) Post a tight note in the Activity Center (and email thread if you have one)
Paste something like this:

Hello,

Support has provided contradictory information about ownership (two different case owner names). I was also advised the agent who requested the L2 escalation is unavailable until [ask them to confirm: Wed Dec 24, 2025 or Wed Dec 31, 2025].

Please confirm in writing in this SR:
1) The current official case owner (name/role/team) and queue.
2) The L2 escalation reference/ID, creation date/time, and receiving team/queue.
3) If the escalation is not actionable without a specific agent, please reassign it to an available escalation owner today and confirm the reassignment in the SR.
4) Next update date/time (with timezone).

Regards,
Name
Service Tag: ___ | SR: ___​

Key takeaway
Your leverage here is case metadata (owner, queue, escalation ID, timestamps) written into the SR. Once that exists, “contradictory info” usually stops because everyone is forced to align to the same record.

If you tell me the two owner names they gave you (redacted if needed) and whether they said “next Wednesday” verbally or in writing, I can help you craft a shorter, stronger escalation note that specifically targets the handoff failure.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

They shouldn’t be tying progress to one specific agent being “available.” If an escalation was truly created, it should have a reference/queue and be workable by the receiving team or reassigned internally. Two different “case owner” names is also a red flag that the case is either not properly assigned or you’re being routed between queues.

Also, since today is Monday, December 22, 2025, “next Wednesday” is ambiguous—some agents mean Wednesday, December 24, 2025, while others mean the following week (Wednesday, December 31, 2025). Don’t let them hide behind that wording: force a date.

What to do (in order)

1) Force them to state one owner + one queue in writing
On the next call, say you need the agent to update the SR notes with:

• The current official case owner (name + role/team)
• The current queue (L1/L2/ARG/Fraud/etc.)
• The escalation reference/ID (or confirm “no escalation ID exists”)
• The next committed update date/time (with timezone)

Then ask them to read back exactly what they wrote in the case notes.

2) Do not accept “the requesting agent is not available” as a blocker
Use this phrasing:

“If the escalation depends on one agent, then it hasn’t been properly actioned. Please reassign the escalation request to an available L2/escalations owner today, and note the reassignment in the SR.”​

In most support organizations, supervisors/duty managers can reassign tickets and ownership. You’re not asking for a favor—you’re asking for standard continuity.

3) Ask for an escalation manager / duty manager (not another front-line agent)
If they gave you two different owner names, request:

• A case manager/escalation manager to be assigned due to conflicting information
• A single point of contact for updates going forward

4) Post a tight note in the Activity Center (and email thread if you have one)
Paste something like this:

Hello,​

​

Support has provided contradictory information about ownership (two different case owner names). I was also advised the agent who requested the L2 escalation is unavailable until [ask them to confirm: Wed Dec 24, 2025 or Wed Dec 31, 2025].​

​

Please confirm in writing in this SR:​

1) The current official case owner (name/role/team) and queue.​

2) The L2 escalation reference/ID, creation date/time, and receiving team/queue.​

3) If the escalation is not actionable without a specific agent, please reassign it to an available escalation owner today and confirm the reassignment in the SR.​

4) Next update date/time (with timezone).​

​

Regards,​

Name​

Service Tag: ___ | SR: ___​

Key takeaway
Your leverage here is case metadata (owner, queue, escalation ID, timestamps) written into the SR. Once that exists, “contradictory info” usually stops because everyone is forced to align to the same record.

If you tell me the two owner names they gave you (redacted if needed) and whether they said “next Wednesday” verbally or in writing, I can help you craft a shorter, stronger escalation note that specifically targets the handoff failure.

I called them again demanding the reference ID of the escalation and they said they don't have that. They said the escalation is like internal emails.

 

[Bot]

I called them again demanding the reference ID of the escalation and they said they don't have that. They said the escalation is like internal emails.

If they “don’t have” any reference/ID and describe the escalation as “internal emails,” treat that as: there is no trackable escalation in the ticketing system yet. Internal emails can exist, but a real escalation should still leave some auditable footprint in the Service Request (worklog/case notes/assignment group/ownership change).

What this likely means

• They may have intended to escalate but only emailed someone informally.
• They may not have created the internal task/transfer that actually moves the SR to L2.
• They may be using “pending escalation” as a holding phrase without any formal handoff.

What to do next (force a formal handoff)

1) Ask for the ticketing-system proof, not an “ID”
If they claim there’s no reference number, ask for any of these (one of them almost always exists if anything was actually done):

• Assignment group / queue name the case is currently in (and what it’s being moved to)
• Worklog / case note entry timestamp showing “escalated to L2” (date/time + who entered it)
• Current case owner shown in the system (name + team)
• Any internal task/activity number tied to the SR (sometimes not shared, but they can at least confirm it exists and was created on X date/time)

If they can’t provide any of that, it’s fair to conclude nothing formal has been actioned.

2) Require them to create a formal L2 transfer while you’re on the phone
Use a direct line like this:

“If escalation is only internal emails and there is no logged escalation entry, then my SR is not formally escalated. Please create the formal L2 escalation/transfer now, add a case note with the date/time and destination queue, and read back the note to me.”​

3) Ask for a supervisor / duty manager
The moment you hear “the agent who requested it is unavailable” or “it’s just emails,” ask for a supervisor or duty manager to take ownership and reassign it. You’re specifically requesting continuity and accountability, not arguing.

4) Post this in the SR Activity Center (copy/paste)

Hello,

On [today’s date], phone support advised the L2 escalation has no reference ID and is handled via “internal emails.” At this time, I have not received written confirmation of any formal escalation.

Please confirm in writing in this SR:
1) The current assigned queue/assignment group and case owner (name/team).
2) Whether a formal L2 escalation/transfer has been created in the system. If yes, provide the case-note/worklog timestamp and destination queue. If no, please create it and document it in the SR.
3) Next update date/time (with timezone).

Regards,
Name
Service Tag: ___ | SR: ___​

Key takeaway
Internal emails are not a substitute for a logged escalation. Your goal is to get Dell to commit—in writing inside the SR—to an assignment group/owner and a dated worklog entry that proves the handoff occurred.

Next step: keep it factual and pin them down to a date—what exact date did they say the “requesting agent” returns (Wednesday, December 24, 2025 vs Wednesday, December 31, 2025), and what timezone/region are you calling from.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

It is a dead end now. My escalation is still pending. Dell no longer answers me neither on Whatsapp or email. When I call the hotline, agents get too hostile and refuse to help. They keep repeating the same script of "contact the seller". I also have not received any replies from the Advanced Resolution Group. For now my service request is still showing "working" but without any real progress.

I received an email 6 days ago confirming that my case was escalated to L2 support but that never happened. I also asked them to provide me with policy-based confirmation of what's going on, but I still have not received that.

 

[Bot]

It is a dead end now. My escalation is still pending. Dell no longer answers me neither on Whatsapp or email. When I call the hotline, agents get too hostile and refuse to help. They keep repeating the same script of "contact the seller". I also have not received any replies from the Advanced Resolution Group. For now my service request is still showing "working" but without any real progress.

I received an email 6 days ago confirming that my case was escalated to L2 support but that never happened. I also asked them to provide me with policy-based confirmation of what's going on, but I still have not received that.

Based on what you described (no replies on WhatsApp/email, hotline agents reading a script and refusing to progress, “L2 escalated” email with no actual L2 engagement), you’re at the point where you should stop trying to “convince” front-line support and instead switch to a documented, policy-and-timeline escalation plus a parallel consumer/transaction path.

As of today (Thursday, December 25, 2025), your “6 days ago” L2 escalation email would have been around Friday, December 19, 2025. That’s a clear, concrete anchor date to use.

1) Treat “working” with no progress as “stalled” and demand a written position
You already did the right thing by asking for policy-based confirmation. At this stage, the key is to ask for a short list of non-negotiable items in writing:

• Is the Service Tag under any hold (fraud/blacklist/ownership/entitlement) — Yes/No
• If Yes: which hold category and what exact proof resolves it (invoice, ID, transfer form, etc.)
• If No: why the case is not moving and who owns it now
• A dated next-step commitment (e.g., “L2 will contact you by Dec 29, 2025”)

If they refuse to provide that, you have strong grounds to escalate outside normal support channels.

2) Send a formal “Notice of stalled escalation” message (keep it short and factual)
Post this in the SR Activity Center and send it by email to whatever Dell case address you have (so it’s harder to ignore):

Subject: SR ####### – Escalation promised Dec 19, 2025 but not actioned / Request written status

Hello,

My Service Request (SR ####### / Service Tag ______) remains in “Working” status with no progress. Dell emailed me on Dec 19, 2025 confirming escalation to L2 support, but I have not been contacted by L2 and no actionable update has been provided. WhatsApp and email are no longer responding.

Please respond in writing within 2 business days with:
1) Current owner (name/team) and current queue/assignment group.
2) Whether any hold exists (fraud/blacklist/ownership/entitlement) — Yes/No.
3) If Yes: the hold category and the exact documents required to clear it, and where to send them.
4) If No: the next concrete action step and a dated timeline for completion.
5) The policy basis for the repeated instruction “contact the seller” as the only resolution path (quote or reference the relevant Dell policy/process).

Regards,
Name​

3) Stop relying on phone agents who refuse to help — ask for a supervisor and log each refusal
On phone calls, do not argue details. Use a single sentence and repeat it calmly:

“I need a supervisor/duty manager. My SR has a Dec 19, 2025 L2 escalation confirmation email but no L2 action, and I’m requesting a written status and owner assignment.”​

Also keep a simple call log (date/time, number called, agent name/ID if given, what they refused). If you’re considering recording calls, check your state’s consent law first.

4) Use a parallel path: Dell “Customer Care / Executive Escalations”
When standard channels stall, most large vendors have a higher-level customer care/escalations route (often called “Executive Escalations,” “Office of the President,” or similar). Use your written timeline:

• SR number + Service Tag
• Key dates: Dec 19 escalation email; no L2 contact since
• Contradictory statements; no policy provided; communications stopped
• Your requested outcome (clear hold reason + required docs OR proceed with service)

You don’t need to accuse anyone—just state process failure + lack of written status.

5) Don’t ignore the “contact the seller” angle — treat it as an ownership/proof-of-purchase blocker
I can’t know your exact scenario, but when support repeats “contact the seller,” it often means Dell won’t proceed without valid proof of purchase or a legitimate ownership transfer (especially for second-hand/marketplace buys).

Practical move:

• Collect the invoice/order confirmation, seller listing, payment receipt, and serial/service tag proof.
• If you bought via a marketplace, open a dispute with the platform and request seller cooperation in writing.

Even if Dell is wrong, having those documents ready removes the most common “stall” reason.

6) If you’re within dispute windows, start the transaction dispute path now
If the device was bought recently and you used a credit card/financing/PayPal/marketplace payment protection, start a dispute/claim process in parallel. This creates an external deadline and often gets faster results than support escalation loops. (Time limits vary by payment method, so don’t wait.)

Key takeaway
At this point, your best leverage is written, date-stamped documentation + escalation outside front-line support, while you also protect yourself via seller/payment dispute options.

If you paste (redacting personal info) the Dec 19, 2025 escalation email text (especially the paragraph that mentions L2 and any “appears to be blacklisted” wording), I can help you tighten the escalation notice so it’s harder for Dell to respond with a generic “contact the seller” script.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

Based on what you described (no replies on WhatsApp/email, hotline agents reading a script and refusing to progress, “L2 escalated” email with no actual L2 engagement), you’re at the point where you should stop trying to “convince” front-line support and instead switch to a documented, policy-and-timeline escalation plus a parallel consumer/transaction path.

As of today (Thursday, December 25, 2025), your “6 days ago” L2 escalation email would have been around Friday, December 19, 2025. That’s a clear, concrete anchor date to use.

1) Treat “working” with no progress as “stalled” and demand a written position
You already did the right thing by asking for policy-based confirmation. At this stage, the key is to ask for a short list of non-negotiable items in writing:

• Is the Service Tag under any hold (fraud/blacklist/ownership/entitlement) — Yes/No
• If Yes: which hold category and what exact proof resolves it (invoice, ID, transfer form, etc.)
• If No: why the case is not moving and who owns it now
• A dated next-step commitment (e.g., “L2 will contact you by Dec 29, 2025”)

If they refuse to provide that, you have strong grounds to escalate outside normal support channels.

2) Send a formal “Notice of stalled escalation” message (keep it short and factual)
Post this in the SR Activity Center and send it by email to whatever Dell case address you have (so it’s harder to ignore):

Subject: SR ####### – Escalation promised Dec 19, 2025 but not actioned / Request written status​

​

Hello,​

​

My Service Request (SR ####### / Service Tag ______) remains in “Working” status with no progress. Dell emailed me on Dec 19, 2025 confirming escalation to L2 support, but I have not been contacted by L2 and no actionable update has been provided. WhatsApp and email are no longer responding.​

​

Please respond in writing within 2 business days with:​

1) Current owner (name/team) and current queue/assignment group.​

2) Whether any hold exists (fraud/blacklist/ownership/entitlement) — Yes/No.​

3) If Yes: the hold category and the exact documents required to clear it, and where to send them.​

4) If No: the next concrete action step and a dated timeline for completion.​

5) The policy basis for the repeated instruction “contact the seller” as the only resolution path (quote or reference the relevant Dell policy/process).​

​

Regards,​

Name​

3) Stop relying on phone agents who refuse to help — ask for a supervisor and log each refusal
On phone calls, do not argue details. Use a single sentence and repeat it calmly:

“I need a supervisor/duty manager. My SR has a Dec 19, 2025 L2 escalation confirmation email but no L2 action, and I’m requesting a written status and owner assignment.”​

Also keep a simple call log (date/time, number called, agent name/ID if given, what they refused). If you’re considering recording calls, check your state’s consent law first.

4) Use a parallel path: Dell “Customer Care / Executive Escalations”
When standard channels stall, most large vendors have a higher-level customer care/escalations route (often called “Executive Escalations,” “Office of the President,” or similar). Use your written timeline:

• SR number + Service Tag
• Key dates: Dec 19 escalation email; no L2 contact since
• Contradictory statements; no policy provided; communications stopped
• Your requested outcome (clear hold reason + required docs OR proceed with service)

You don’t need to accuse anyone—just state process failure + lack of written status.

5) Don’t ignore the “contact the seller” angle — treat it as an ownership/proof-of-purchase blocker
I can’t know your exact scenario, but when support repeats “contact the seller,” it often means Dell won’t proceed without valid proof of purchase or a legitimate ownership transfer (especially for second-hand/marketplace buys).

Practical move:

• Collect the invoice/order confirmation, seller listing, payment receipt, and serial/service tag proof.
• If you bought via a marketplace, open a dispute with the platform and request seller cooperation in writing.

Even if Dell is wrong, having those documents ready removes the most common “stall” reason.

6) If you’re within dispute windows, start the transaction dispute path now
If the device was bought recently and you used a credit card/financing/PayPal/marketplace payment protection, start a dispute/claim process in parallel. This creates an external deadline and often gets faster results than support escalation loops. (Time limits vary by payment method, so don’t wait.)

Key takeaway
At this point, your best leverage is written, date-stamped documentation + escalation outside front-line support, while you also protect yourself via seller/payment dispute options.

If you paste (redacting personal info) the Dec 19, 2025 escalation email text (especially the paragraph that mentions L2 and any “appears to be blacklisted” wording), I can help you tighten the escalation notice so it’s harder for Dell to respond with a generic “contact the seller” script.

I only get contadictory info from them. They do not even know who my case owner is. They keep repeating " your system APPEARS TO BE BLACKLISTED".
I got the laptop second-hand (brand new) and it was originally shipped to Sweden. I know that cross-region system exchange is complicated, but they cannot even fix it although my Prosupport Flex warranty is valid through 2028.

 

[Bot]

I only get contadictory info from them. They do not even know who my case owner is. They keep repeating " your system APPEARS TO BE BLACKLISTED".
I got the laptop second-hand (brand new) and it was originally shipped to Sweden. I know that cross-region system exchange is complicated, but they cannot even fix it although my Prosupport Flex warranty is valid through 2028.

What you’re describing (“appears to be blacklisted”, no identifiable owner, and a second-hand unit originally shipped to Sweden) is very often an entitlement/ownership/asset-status hold rather than a normal “hardware support” problem. In that situation, front-line ProSupport agents commonly default to “contact the seller” because they cannot override an ownership/asset restriction, even if the warranty term shows active.

I can’t determine from here whether the laptop is actually stolen/reported lost or whether this is an administrative mismatch, but either way the fix is the same: you need Dell to route your SR to the team that can validate ownership and clear/confirm the hold, and you need the right documents ready.

Why “valid through 2028” still doesn’t guarantee an exchange

• Warranty validity can be true while a separate hold blocks service actions (ownership dispute, asset recovery flag, region/entitlement restrictions, or similar).
• Cross-region exchanges typically require the Service Tag entitlement to be transferred to your current country/region (or handled by the original region). If the unit is still tied to Sweden in Dell’s systems, the local team may refuse or be unable to ship parts/exchange units.

What to do next (most effective path)

1) Stop chasing “L2 support” and explicitly request the right function
On your next written update (SR note/email), don’t ask for “L2.” Ask for Entitlement/Ownership/Asset Status review, and require a written outcome.

Use wording like:

“Please route this SR to the team that handles ownership validation / entitlement restrictions / asset status (‘appears to be blacklisted’). I need a written determination of the hold reason category and the exact documents required to clear it.”​

2) Open/duplicate a case with Dell Sweden (original shipping country)
Because the system was originally shipped to Sweden, the fastest “source of truth” path is often through the original region’s support/entitlement team.

• Contact Dell Sweden support and provide the Service Tag and your current country.
• Ask them to confirm whether the Service Tag has an asset/ownership hold and whether they can perform an ownership + country/region entitlement transfer.

Even if you’re not in Sweden, they can usually at least tell you what’s blocking it and what proof they require.

3) Get the documents that typically unblock this
Since it’s second-hand, the single most important item is the original proof of purchase (from Dell or an authorized reseller) showing the first purchaser.

Prepare:

• Your proof of purchase from the seller (invoice/receipt + date + serial/service tag if present)
• Seller listing screenshots (showing “new/unused” etc.)
• Payment proof (card/PayPal/marketplace transaction)
• Any communication with the seller showing chain of custody
• If possible: the original invoice from the original buyer (this is often the deciding document)

If the seller cannot provide the original invoice or refuses to cooperate, that strongly predicts Dell will keep telling you “contact the seller,” because Dell has no safe way to establish legitimate ownership.

4) Force a written “Yes/No + required docs” response inside the SR
Post this (edit as needed) to the SR Activity Center:

My ProSupport Flex coverage is valid through 2028, however support repeatedly states the system “appears to be blacklisted” and cannot identify a case owner.

Please provide a written response with:
1) Is there an ownership/asset/entitlement hold on this Service Tag? Yes/No.
2) If Yes: the hold category (ownership dispute/asset recovery/entitlement restriction/other) and the exact documents required to clear it, and where to submit them securely.
3) Whether service is restricted due to the system originally shipping to Sweden, and the required steps to transfer entitlement to my current country/region (or confirm it must be handled by Dell Sweden).

SR: ____ Service Tag: ____​

5) Protect yourself with the seller/marketplace/payment route (do this in parallel)
If you’re within any return window or dispute window, open it now. This isn’t “giving up”—it’s risk control. If Dell ultimately won’t service due to an ownership/asset hold, your practical remedy may be through the seller/platform/payment method.

Key takeaway
Right now you’re stuck because you’re in the wrong workflow: this isn’t a normal ProSupport hardware exchange until the asset/ownership/entitlement status is cleared and the country/region entitlement is correct. The fastest path is usually: Dell Sweden entitlement/ownership review + ownership transfer docs, while you keep a parallel seller/payment dispute open to avoid being left holding the bag.

If you paste (redacted) the exact sentence/paragraph from Dell that says “appears to be blacklisted” and confirm what country you’re currently in, I can help you tighten the SR wording so it’s explicitly routed to the correct internal function instead of looping on “contact the seller.”

 

[Divine_Barakah]

What you’re describing (“appears to be blacklisted”, no identifiable owner, and a second-hand unit originally shipped to Sweden) is very often an entitlement/ownership/asset-status hold rather than a normal “hardware support” problem. In that situation, front-line ProSupport agents commonly default to “contact the seller” because they cannot override an ownership/asset restriction, even if the warranty term shows active.

I can’t determine from here whether the laptop is actually stolen/reported lost or whether this is an administrative mismatch, but either way the fix is the same: you need Dell to route your SR to the team that can validate ownership and clear/confirm the hold, and you need the right documents ready.

Why “valid through 2028” still doesn’t guarantee an exchange

• Warranty validity can be true while a separate hold blocks service actions (ownership dispute, asset recovery flag, region/entitlement restrictions, or similar).
• Cross-region exchanges typically require the Service Tag entitlement to be transferred to your current country/region (or handled by the original region). If the unit is still tied to Sweden in Dell’s systems, the local team may refuse or be unable to ship parts/exchange units.

What to do next (most effective path)

1) Stop chasing “L2 support” and explicitly request the right function
On your next written update (SR note/email), don’t ask for “L2.” Ask for Entitlement/Ownership/Asset Status review, and require a written outcome.

Use wording like:

“Please route this SR to the team that handles ownership validation / entitlement restrictions / asset status (‘appears to be blacklisted’). I need a written determination of the hold reason category and the exact documents required to clear it.”​

2) Open/duplicate a case with Dell Sweden (original shipping country)
Because the system was originally shipped to Sweden, the fastest “source of truth” path is often through the original region’s support/entitlement team.

• Contact Dell Sweden support and provide the Service Tag and your current country.
• Ask them to confirm whether the Service Tag has an asset/ownership hold and whether they can perform an ownership + country/region entitlement transfer.

Even if you’re not in Sweden, they can usually at least tell you what’s blocking it and what proof they require.

3) Get the documents that typically unblock this
Since it’s second-hand, the single most important item is the original proof of purchase (from Dell or an authorized reseller) showing the first purchaser.

Prepare:

• Your proof of purchase from the seller (invoice/receipt + date + serial/service tag if present)
• Seller listing screenshots (showing “new/unused” etc.)
• Payment proof (card/PayPal/marketplace transaction)
• Any communication with the seller showing chain of custody
• If possible: the original invoice from the original buyer (this is often the deciding document)

If the seller cannot provide the original invoice or refuses to cooperate, that strongly predicts Dell will keep telling you “contact the seller,” because Dell has no safe way to establish legitimate ownership.

4) Force a written “Yes/No + required docs” response inside the SR
Post this (edit as needed) to the SR Activity Center:

My ProSupport Flex coverage is valid through 2028, however support repeatedly states the system “appears to be blacklisted” and cannot identify a case owner.​

​

Please provide a written response with:​

1) Is there an ownership/asset/entitlement hold on this Service Tag? Yes/No.​

2) If Yes: the hold category (ownership dispute/asset recovery/entitlement restriction/other) and the exact documents required to clear it, and where to submit them securely.​

3) Whether service is restricted due to the system originally shipping to Sweden, and the required steps to transfer entitlement to my current country/region (or confirm it must be handled by Dell Sweden).​

​

SR: ____ Service Tag: ____​

5) Protect yourself with the seller/marketplace/payment route (do this in parallel)
If you’re within any return window or dispute window, open it now. This isn’t “giving up”—it’s risk control. If Dell ultimately won’t service due to an ownership/asset hold, your practical remedy may be through the seller/platform/payment method.

Key takeaway
Right now you’re stuck because you’re in the wrong workflow: this isn’t a normal ProSupport hardware exchange until the asset/ownership/entitlement status is cleared and the country/region entitlement is correct. The fastest path is usually: Dell Sweden entitlement/ownership review + ownership transfer docs, while you keep a parallel seller/payment dispute open to avoid being left holding the bag.

If you paste (redacted) the exact sentence/paragraph from Dell that says “appears to be blacklisted” and confirm what country you’re currently in, I can help you tighten the SR wording so it’s explicitly routed to the correct internal function instead of looping on “contact the seller.”

If the laptop was stolen, my warranty would have been voided ages ago. The fact that they accepted liability and created a work order to replce two major compenents of the system (motherboard and touch screen) confirms that latop was not stolen. Also the service request is still working and the warranty is still valid. Moreover, I have effectively used the unit for 13 months without any issues.

 

[Bot]

If the laptop was stolen, my warranty would have been voided ages ago. The fact that they accepted liability and created a work order to replce two major compenents of the system (motherboard and touch screen) confirms that latop was not stolen. Also the service request is still working and the warranty is still valid. Moreover, I have effectively used the unit for 13 months without any issues.

You’re using reasonable logic, but unfortunately Dell’s internal controls don’t always behave the way you’d expect, and none of the items you listed are a reliable “proof” that the system is not on an asset/ownership hold.

Why your points don’t conclusively rule out an asset/ownership hold

• Warranty showing active through 2028 usually reflects entitlement dates, not necessarily “cleared ownership/asset status.” A separate hold can coexist with an active warranty record.
• A work order being created can happen before a later-stage checkpoint blocks fulfillment (especially if parts shipping / depot processing / system exchange requires an additional validation step).
• 13 months of normal use doesn’t prove anything about back-end status. A device can function normally while the Service Tag later gets flagged (for example, after a report, an ownership dispute, or a regional/entitlement review).

I’m not saying it’s stolen. I’m saying: the facts you have don’t force Dell’s systems to treat it as “cleared,” and that’s why you’re stuck in “appears to be blacklisted.”

What “APPEARS TO BE BLACKLISTED” usually means in practice
It’s often a front-line paraphrase for: “There is a restriction/hold on this Service Tag and we can’t proceed until the entitlement/ownership/asset-status team clears it.” Front-line support frequently can’t see the exact reason, which is why you’re getting contradictory info and no owner.

What to do next (the path that actually moves this)

1) Stop debating the word “stolen” and demand the hold category + required documents
Post this as a final, firm SR update (and email it too if you can):

My ProSupport Flex warranty remains active through 2028 and the SR is still “Working,” however multiple agents state the system “appears to be blacklisted,” and the case has no consistent owner.

Please provide a written determination:
1) Is there a hold/restriction on the Service Tag? Yes/No.
2) If Yes: state the hold category (ownership/asset recovery/entitlement restriction/region restriction/other) and the exact documents required to clear it, and where to submit them.
3) If No: confirm in writing that there is no hold and provide the assigned owner/queue and a dated plan to complete service/work order.

SR: ____ Service Tag: ____​

This forces a binary response and removes the “script loop.”

2) Run the entitlement/ownership process via the original region (Sweden)
Because the unit was originally shipped to Sweden, the team most able to see/resolve region + entitlement issues is often Dell Sweden (or EMEA entitlement/ownership). Even if you’re in the US now, getting the “source region” to confirm status can break the stalemate.

3) Prepare for the most common blocker: original proof of purchase
For second-hand “brand new” devices, Dell commonly requires the original purchaser invoice (or an authorized reseller invoice) to clear/transfer ownership/entitlement. Your own receipt from the seller helps, but often isn’t enough if Dell is treating it as an ownership validation issue.

Have ready:

• Your purchase proof (receipt + payment proof)
• Seller listing screenshots
• Any seller communications
• If possible: original Dell/reseller invoice from the first buyer

4) Protect yourself with the seller/payment route in parallel
If Dell ultimately refuses service due to an ownership/asset/entitlement restriction, your practical remedy may be a return/dispute with the seller/marketplace/payment provider. Start that process if you’re anywhere near the time limits.

Key takeaway
Active warranty + an opened work order + months of normal use still doesn’t force Dell to proceed if an internal hold exists. The only thing that ends this is a written hold category + required documents (or a written “no hold” confirmation) from the entitlement/ownership/asset-status side, ideally through the original shipping region (Sweden).

 

[Divine_Barakah]

You’re using reasonable logic, but unfortunately Dell’s internal controls don’t always behave the way you’d expect, and none of the items you listed are a reliable “proof” that the system is not on an asset/ownership hold.

Why your points don’t conclusively rule out an asset/ownership hold

• Warranty showing active through 2028 usually reflects entitlement dates, not necessarily “cleared ownership/asset status.” A separate hold can coexist with an active warranty record.
• A work order being created can happen before a later-stage checkpoint blocks fulfillment (especially if parts shipping / depot processing / system exchange requires an additional validation step).
• 13 months of normal use doesn’t prove anything about back-end status. A device can function normally while the Service Tag later gets flagged (for example, after a report, an ownership dispute, or a regional/entitlement review).

I’m not saying it’s stolen. I’m saying: the facts you have don’t force Dell’s systems to treat it as “cleared,” and that’s why you’re stuck in “appears to be blacklisted.”

What “APPEARS TO BE BLACKLISTED” usually means in practice
It’s often a front-line paraphrase for: “There is a restriction/hold on this Service Tag and we can’t proceed until the entitlement/ownership/asset-status team clears it.” Front-line support frequently can’t see the exact reason, which is why you’re getting contradictory info and no owner.

What to do next (the path that actually moves this)

1) Stop debating the word “stolen” and demand the hold category + required documents
Post this as a final, firm SR update (and email it too if you can):

My ProSupport Flex warranty remains active through 2028 and the SR is still “Working,” however multiple agents state the system “appears to be blacklisted,” and the case has no consistent owner.​

​

Please provide a written determination:​

1) Is there a hold/restriction on the Service Tag? Yes/No.​

2) If Yes: state the hold category (ownership/asset recovery/entitlement restriction/region restriction/other) and the exact documents required to clear it, and where to submit them.​

3) If No: confirm in writing that there is no hold and provide the assigned owner/queue and a dated plan to complete service/work order.​

​

SR: ____ Service Tag: ____​

This forces a binary response and removes the “script loop.”

2) Run the entitlement/ownership process via the original region (Sweden)
Because the unit was originally shipped to Sweden, the team most able to see/resolve region + entitlement issues is often Dell Sweden (or EMEA entitlement/ownership). Even if you’re in the US now, getting the “source region” to confirm status can break the stalemate.

3) Prepare for the most common blocker: original proof of purchase
For second-hand “brand new” devices, Dell commonly requires the original purchaser invoice (or an authorized reseller invoice) to clear/transfer ownership/entitlement. Your own receipt from the seller helps, but often isn’t enough if Dell is treating it as an ownership validation issue.

Have ready:

• Your purchase proof (receipt + payment proof)
• Seller listing screenshots
• Any seller communications
• If possible: original Dell/reseller invoice from the first buyer

4) Protect yourself with the seller/payment route in parallel
If Dell ultimately refuses service due to an ownership/asset/entitlement restriction, your practical remedy may be a return/dispute with the seller/marketplace/payment provider. Start that process if you’re anywhere near the time limits.

Key takeaway
Active warranty + an opened work order + months of normal use still doesn’t force Dell to proceed if an internal hold exists. The only thing that ends this is a written hold category + required documents (or a written “no hold” confirmation) from the entitlement/ownership/asset-status side, ideally through the original shipping region (Sweden).

But I already have a confirmation to proceed with system exchange promised by a supervisor.

 

[Bot]

But I already have a confirmation to proceed with system exchange promised by a supervisor.

A supervisor promising a system exchange is helpful, but it only matters if it’s backed by something that survives handoffs: a written note in the SR/work order and an exchange authorization that can be fulfilled. In your situation, the “appears to be blacklisted” message means the fulfillment step is likely being blocked by a separate team/process, regardless of what one supervisor said verbally.

What to do (convert the promise into an executable authorization)

1) Get the promise into the SR verbatim
If you don’t already have it in writing, post this to the SR (and email it to the case address):

On [DATE], Supervisor [NAME] confirmed approval to proceed with a system exchange for Service Tag ______ under ProSupport Flex (valid through 2028).

Please document this approval in the SR/worklog and provide:
1) Exchange/work order number (or dispatch/exchange reference) and current status.
2) The assigned owner/queue responsible for fulfillment.
3) Any remaining holds or checks preventing fulfillment (e.g., “appears to be blacklisted”) — Yes/No.
4) If Yes: the exact blocker and the team currently holding it, with a dated ETA to clear.​

(Bold point: you’re not asking them “whether” it’s approved—you’re asking for the operational identifiers.)

2) Ask for the “exchange reference” (not the escalation reference)
Even if they claim escalations are “internal emails,” an actual exchange normally generates something tangible:

• Exchange / replacement order number
• Dispatch ID
• Depot case / return material authorization (RMA) / waybill tracking
• Parts allocation status (if it’s a repair-first workflow)

If they can’t provide any of these, it likely hasn’t entered the fulfillment pipeline yet.

3) Force the contradiction into a single Yes/No statement
On the next call, keep it to one line:

“Is there any hold (including the ‘blacklisted’ flag) that blocks fulfillment of the supervisor-approved exchange—yes or no?”​

If “yes,” you then ask: which team can clear it and what document is required. If “no,” you ask for the exchange order/dispatch number and ship date.

4) If they still stonewall: escalate via written complaint/escalations channel
Not because you want drama, but because you have a concrete failure: supervisor approval not being executed. Provide the date of the supervisor promise and request assignment to a case manager.

Key takeaway
Verbal approval is not the finish line. You need Dell to produce the exchange/work order reference + owner/queue + confirmation that no hold blocks fulfillment. If they can’t, the approval isn’t operational yet, and the next step is to force that documentation into the SR so it can’t be “lost” between agents.