Consumer rights - mobile phone fixed with fake screen

Tonietaylor

Hello,

I'm new to the forums but use the main site for just about everything!

Can anyone advise me on my rights for this situation please? I'll try and keep it succinct.

I cracked my iPhone screen and had it replaced with a local company. The replacement cost £100, which I viewed as expensive so I thought all was above board.

A couple of months later the phone developed an issue with the battery. It was only around 2 years old and the retail price was £700 new at the time of purchase so I returned it to the retailer EE asking for a fix, quoting the Sales of Goods Act that it ought to be satisfactory quality and last a reasonable length of time.

However the EE technical team identified that the screen had been replaced by (their terms) fake parts and will not take any responsibility- even though there is no evidence of any relation between the screen and the fault. I have also complained to the repair company that they did not inform me that they would not be using genuine parts and I had not made an informed decision when I paid for the repair. They too are trying to dodge any accusation of wrongdoing.

Do I have a leg to stand on with either retailer? I genuinely got the screen fixed in good faith, and also I would expect a £700 smartphone to last for a lot longer than this.

Can anyone advise please?
Thanks in advance.

Fosterdog

Unless they specify that they use genuine Apple parts and are Apple approved repairers I would expect them to use 3rd party substitutes, the replacement screen probably cost them £10. Although £100 is on the high side when Apple themselves only charge £130 for a genuine repair.

alumende27

Apple's UK warranty for phones specifically states that their warranty does not apply

"(a) to consumable parts, such as batteries or protective coatings that are designed to diminish over time, unless failure has occurred due to a defect in materials or workmanship;"

but it doesn't say that the warranty is void if someone other than Apple or an AASP perform work on it, only if they cause damage. So I think EE are being unreasonable.

"(f) to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized Service Provider ("AASP");"

What exactly is the "issue with the battery"?

shaun_from_Africa

dsdhall wrote: »

Apple's UK warranty for phones specifically states that their warranty does not apply

"(a) to consumable parts, such as batteries or protective coatings that are designed to diminish over time, unless failure has occurred due to a defect in materials or workmanship;"

but it doesn't say that the warranty is void if someone other than Apple or an AASP perform work on it, only if they cause damage. So I think EE are being unreasonable.

The Apple warranty is irrelevant here as the OP is asking EE to repair the phone using their rights under the Sale of goods act because in their opinion, it has failed too early in its life.

EE are within their rights to refuse to do anything until the OP can show that in all likelihood the fault has occurred due to a manufacturing defect, something that may not now be easy to do due to the previous repair being carried out by a third party.

alumende27

Right, perhaps I should have been clearer. I was trying to demonstrate that apple themselves do not rule out warranty repairs just because someone else has replaced the screen.

EE can say that they don't feel the need to do anything unless the OP can show it is a manufacturing fault, but they have instead said that they don't want to touch it because it had an unrelated repair with supposed fake parts.

Nevertheless I'd expect an iPhone battery to last more than two years with normal use.

If EE stand their ground then they could always send it to apple to get replaced under their battery replacement scheme. I think that's £79.

shaun_from_Africa

dsdhall wrote: »

If EE stand their ground then they could always send it to apple to get replaced under their battery replacement scheme. I think that's £79.

There may be a problem with this if the screen needs to be removed in order to gain access to the battery.
Apple may well refuse to do the work if there is a possibility that the replacement screen could break when removed, something that they would then have to replace.

Tonietaylor

Thanks everyone, looks like I'm in a bit of a sticky position with this one. You live and learn! I appreciate the comments, I'll have a proper read through and see if there is any scope to do anything further but it's not looking likely. It seems both retailers are just using each other as an excuse to avoid taking any corrective action.

I'm more annoyed with the repair centre than EE as their marketing is very cleverly designed to appear to be legit (using apple logos and imagery as well as offering specific product repairs) and uses phrases such as "approved repair centre." It's only after complaining to them that I can see they haven't explicitly said they are an APPLE approved repair centre using apple branded parts. The marketing is very cleverly misleading.

Thanks again everyone.

Tonietaylor

Just to add, the fault is that the phone ran out of battery and then would not switch back on. Tried all of the reboot options before finally sending it to EE for diagnostics. But having identified the fake screen they would not proceed and identify the actual fault, despite my argument that there was no evidence that the fault was related to the screen (which had been fitted several months earlier and the handset continued to work with no issues). When they couldn't counter that argument they simply stopped answering my emails and posted the phone back.

Al_Ross

Which I Phone do you have ?

Tonietaylor

This one was the 6 plus, bought 2 years ago when the first plus model was released.

harrys_dad

Why would anyone pay £700 for a phone?