iPhone warranty whinge

SuperHan

PRSman wrote: »

SuperHen, I most certainly did not huff and puff and I take offence at that. I can only assume you work for Apple or know someone who does. I entered into a 2 year contract with Apple and under the Sale of Goods Act it is not unreasonable to expect a product, in this case a phone, to last the minimum period of the contract. If it breaks without being misused then I think there is a case to answer; refer to the SADFART pneumonic. As for 'above and beyond customer service', I have yet to see evidence of this. Yes, they employ über trendy, friendly staff but when there is a problem they don't really want to know. I have spent £1,000s over the years with them so feel I know their products pretty well.

EU consumer law does cover the UK; the clue is in the title. Apple know this which is why they have recently and subtly changed the wording in their warranty. Have a read of this;

As a new user on this site I'm unable to post links, however if you look at www dot pcpro dot co dot uk there is a news article on 'EU probes Apple warranties but why nobody else's"


After reading this are you still arguing the Sale Of Goods Act trumps this and Apple are behaving properly?

As I guess you have now seen, the SoGA does actually trump, and Apple are behaving in line with the law. SoGA offers MORE than the EU directive (which is NOT a law), so no, the EU "law" does not apply. I did not say they have treated you exceptionally, but they have done what you asked, which is above their statutory duty. Apple's warranty issues were mostly in Italy (from memory), and were as such amended to meet the EU directive. However, they were (AFAIK) always meeting SoGA requirements.

A phone and a contract are two entirely separate products (in the eyes of the law - for the most part). You pay monthly to get minutes and texts and data, not a phone. The phone may be offered as a 'gift' or at a discounted price if you take a service plan. The law does not indicate that the two should last the same amount of time.

You also bought the phone from the Vodafone store. So Apple were legally bound to do literally nothing for you. All of your contract was with Vodafone, and not Apple. They could have refused to even look at the phone, and would still have been within their rights.

I would also like to clarify, I do not work for Apple, nor have I ever, nor do I know anyone who has. I have worked in various returns departments, and would never back down and offer a goodwill gesture for a customer who did not appreciate it. I have seen these goodwill offers multiple times in Apple stores, and customers still walking away unhappy. If you ask me, what was the point of going above your statutory duty if the customer still isn't happy? The huffing and puffing wasn't necessarily directed at you, and I did not mean to offend, but you were incorrectly quoting your rights...

SuperHan

PRSman wrote: »

The article linked is the correct one. However, how can any consumer prove that, after the six month period, that a product was faulty at the time of purchase? I would see this as a loophole that could be exploited by a retailer to wriggle out of their obligations. Maybe my recent experiences have made my cynical?

In answer to this, you get an independent report to say the fault is a manufacturing one. The fault need not have been there from day 1, but it has to be the case that the fault was inevitable, even in the best maintained product (i.e. inherent).

Once an independent report has been obtained, if from a reputable source they are fairly hard to dispute in court, so the retailer most often adheres to their obligations.

tellmah

I have been looking at the Iphone 5 warranty, which as we all know is 12 months, so a two year warranty off them is a no go.

I called at the Apple store in Manchester today though and enquired about an additional warranty to cover what are now mostly 2 year plans and was told that an extra 1 year warranty would cost £69 and can be done at any time in the first year, but has to be done via a personal visit to an Apple store so the product can be scanned and entered onto their system.

I know it is ridiculous to have to pay this and some may say go for the Samsung or HTC, but the phones are for my daughters and won't settle for anything less, so i'm stuck with it.

One other point on another forum, some have said the phones are free so you have no comeback, but at the moment a lot of the deals state you have to pay £100 towards the phone, would this affect your rights to expect it to last the length of the contract at least?

wealdroam

tellmah wrote: »

...some may say go for the Samsung or HTC, but the phones are for my daughters and won't settle for anything less, so i'm stuck with it.

Choosing a Samsung instead of an iphone is not 'settling for anything less'.

tellmah wrote: »

One other point on another forum, some have said the phones are free so you have no comeback, but at the moment a lot of the deals state you have to pay £100 towards the phone, would this affect your rights to expect it to last the length of the contract at least?

Whether the item is free or not makes no difference to your statutory rights in this case.
Have a read of MSE's Consumer Rights article, where, amongst all the other good stuff. you will find...

Do I have rights if a freebie was faulty?
This is a tricky area in consumer rights. Technically when something's free there's no contract with the supplier, so you're not entitled to get a faulty item fixed.
Yet if it was a free gift as part of a purchase, eg, if you sign up for a mobile contact and get a laptop with it – that's different. Here, you've exactly the same Sad Fart rights as if you'd paid for it. Most sellers are aware of this, but, if they try to fob you off, stand your ground.

paddyrg

wealdroam wrote: »

Choosing a Samsung instead of an iphone is not 'settling for anything less'. .

Truth! The current Samsung phones outsell current apple ones and when you look at the specs current apple ones are way behind. Don't get me wrong, the current iphones are great mid-market phones, just genius marketing means they get away with premium pricing!!

PRSman

SuperHen, thanks for the clarification. I purchased both the iPhone and the contract at the same time from the Apple Store. I paid a discounted price for the phone, I can't remember how much. Apple seem to act as agents for various carriers in their stores. My point is that it is not unreasonable for the phone to last at least as long as the contract.

I don't understand all the legalese however I find it interesting that Apple have recently changed the wording on their warranty following the ruling in an Italian court. Their alleged mis-selling of extended warranties is a separate thing entirely. The success of any business relies in part on the goodwill of their customers. While I understand some customers can be 'difficult' I just want what I pay (a lot of money) for.

tellmah

wealdroam wrote: »

Choosing a Samsung instead of an iphone is not 'settling for anything less'.

I couldn't agree more with you, however it has a unwarranted reputation as being uber cool as far as youngsters are concerned.

To me its overpriced tosh that people pay for in the name rather than the product:rotfl: