Apple iPhone faulty

yellowplum

I have an iPhone 5 that I purchased under a finance agreement in December 2012 directly from Apple.

In December 2013 the phone was replaced by Apple because it had developed a charging fault that the battery would not hold sufficient charge to what was displayed on the screen and would automatically shut off. At this time I was told that the replacement handset was brand new.

Further down the line - December 2014 the replacement handset developed the same fault, it turns itself off unexpectedly with 20-30% battery life remaining. I was made to travel by apple to the apple store in Southampton to conduct some tests (all of which where the same tests conducted by Apple over the telephone) which revealed a faulty battery.

It was at this time in the store that I was informed I did not have a new phone but a refurbished handset.

I contacted apple and asked that they replace the phone with a new one. They can't they can only offer a refurbished one. I am not happy having a refurbished handset since I was promised a new one (I think this is a breach of contract from the first part). Furthermore I do not want another handset that will inevitably (if we are to look at the previous replacement) develop the same fault in 12 months time (which apple will not guarantee further).

I have asked them to replace the handset with something else (willing to make a contribution) or refund me.

They accept neither of those solutions.

Barclays, who financed the handset wash their hands of the situation asserting that this is not a S75 issue.

So in essence my questions are:

1. Is Barclays liable and for what?
2. Am I right to demand a refund from apple if they offer a refurbished handset?

harrys_dad

Not sure which aspect of consumer law would entitle you to a brand new handset when you have had a working one for over two years.

If you bought it under a finance agreement how can S75 be relevant?

visidigi

Apple always replace handsets with refurbs, nearly all manufacturers do.

You are not entitled to a new handset.

I hope you haven't caused such a problem that they won't now replace your phone again for you (with another refurb, which they are entitled to do).

wealdroam

harrys_dad wrote: »

If you bought it under a finance agreement how can S75 be relevant?

I'd be more inclined to ask "if you bought it under a finance agreement how can S75 not be relevant?"

Section 75 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 makes a credit provider, not just a credit card provider, jointly and severally liable for performance of the contract.

There are exceptions, hence asking why Barclays think S75 doesn't apply?

George_Michael

harrys_dad wrote: »

If you bought it under a finance agreement how can S75 be relevant?

Because S75 is specifically for problems relating to goods that have been purchased by way of finance agreements (either credit cards or other direct finance).

yellowplum

Not quite, they are offering a replacement handset - refurbished - however as I mentioned it's on two parts that I am not satisfied with.

Firstly that this has happened again in the same space of time. The handset has already been replaced once with the same issue.

Secondly, that I was actually told that it was a new handset when it wasn't.

If the handset develops the same fault in the same space of time is it not inherently faulty? Surely you can expect the goods to function and be free from defect.

yellowplum

They told me they wouldn't cover it because apple was offering a replacement and that was good enough.

wealdroam

yellowplum wrote: »

They told me they wouldn't cover it because apple was offering a replacement and that was good enough.

Ok. Barclays are right on that point.

If Apple are doing the right thing, and it sounds like they are, then of course there is no need for Barclays to get involved.

yellowplum

wealdroam wrote: »

Ok. Barclays are right on that point.

If Apple are doing the right thing, and it sounds like they are, then of course there is no need for Barclays to get involved.

The argument was that although they stated it was new that was a breach of contract and I should take that up with apple directly.

They also said they would try to resolve the issue with Apple but did not believe I had a valid claim in this instance under S75 because apple had agreed to replace it with albeit it a refurbished unit.

Ok, so S75 is out in this instance. However I am still reluctant to take another unit for the reason that this is the second time it has failed with the same issue.

George_Michael

Provided that the refurb given by Apple is no older or not in worse condition than your faulty iphone, they will be putting you back in the same or better position than you would have been had your phone not gone wrong so they are doing what the law requires.

Many refurbished phones are totally indistinguishable from new and the one that you receive might be something like an ex-display one or one that was returned as unwanted.

George_Michael

yellowplum wrote: »

However I am still reluctant to take another unit for the reason that this is the second time it has failed with the same issue.

You are perfectly entitled to tell this to Apple, but equally, they are legally entitled to reject you request and insist on a replacement.