Faulty iPad from O2 and Consumer Rights Act 2015 <<<successfully resolved>>>

ForumUser7

Okell said:

Personally I'm not 100% convinced that anything like this is an appropriate or responsible use of something like ChatGPT.

Some people (lawyers even!) have screwed up big time by using it without understanding what it does and its (many) limitations.

How to Use ChatGPT to Ruin Your Legal Career - YouTube

If you don't understand anything about the subject you are asking it about, you can't rely on it.  If you do understand it, there's no need to ask ChatGPT.  Moreover, my own view is that the grammar and syntax produced by ChatGPT is awful and that any literate person would probably do better)

I'm not certain people asking for advice on MSE should get responses based on anything from ChatGPT...

@Okell It is unfortunate you feel my response was inappropriate and irresponsible. Prior to posting, I reviewed the Forum Rules and concluded the use of Chat GPT is permitted. MSE didn't seem to have a relevant template, so I thought it would be helpful to the OP to provide a template. Chat GPT made one mistake that I did not spot during my review of the letter, but a long standing forumite kindly and quickly pointed it out, and I edited my post to correct it.

My further post was in addition to my original message which I wrote without the use of Chat GPT. Given the replies, I am certain that the poster who asked for advice on MSE forums was pleased with my response, and I am comfortable that I made it clear in my message that it was written using Chat GPT, and then altered. I'm pleased that they have said they will be using it, but if they have any reservations I completely understand if they choose not to use it.

I usually frequent the Budgeting and Bank Accounts and Savings and Investment boards where I am well known, and enjoy helping other forumites. I am pleased to be able to now do this on the Consumer Rights board, using my own knowledge alongside Google and tools at my discretion to assist forumites in the most appropriate way, always keeping within the Forum Rules.

RefluentBeans said:

Definitely make clear to O2 you are seeking resolution under the CRA, not warranty. 

Did Apple open up the iPad? Did they check for water damage? If there is water damage - I think you’ll have a hard time to show the fault was not due to water damage. Whilst Apple have said there’s no cosmetic damage (congratulations - Apple are sticklers for putting anything down at all, so must be looking like new!) and have done some diagnostics, they haven’t produced a report that this isn’t consumer error, or a fault caused by you. 

Was the credit provided by O2? You will also have additional protection under S75, but if it was purchased by O2 they may just also reject that. But I would imagine there’s a specific team at O2 that deals with S75 as it’s distinct from CRA. 

Also I would generally avoid using ChatGPT to write a whole letter - sections are generally better but be sure to read them. Especially as there is a lot of wrong information out there that it may also include. Paragraph/section at a time makes it easier for you to be sure you agree with everything! 

Apple devices have stickers on the inside which change colour upon exposure to water, or humidity on occasion. Here is a video of how it works https://youtu.be/UTYSSkkf9_A?t=247 

Glad to see OP confirm there was no water damage on this occasion though.

I agree it is very important to review what it says - I ask it to write it in the context of a letter, because then everything flows. I sometimes remove whole paragraphs though when they have no purpose, and I always read through and edit the things ChatGPT generates before use. I have successfully used the generated letters (with adaptations) several times over the past few months, and usually it is pretty accurate. When I'm doing it for myself and not trying to work quickly to get a poster an answer, I read them several times over 2 days to ensure I spot any mistakes or poor wording and I often get a second pair of eyes to review it. Out of interest, I once asked it to write a brief on a topic I was studying which was rather niche, and it was full of errors. I suppose it just depends on how much information there is for it to use. Another time, I asked it to write a consumer law letter for my own use and it quoted the wrong chapter number but the right chapter text - during my review of the letter, I consulted https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents/enacted and discovered the error which I then corrected.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Okell said:

I'm not certain people asking for advice on MSE should get responses based on anything from ChatGPT...

One day that maybe all there is, scary prospect.

Even at the start the bit about the issue being “concerning” isn’t really appropriate, added melodrama for no purpose.

OP have you checked the CEO email site to see if there is a contact there for O2, you might get a better response.

Can anyone advise how phone contracts work with regards to the value assigned to the device? Is the extra £20 or whatever above sim only cited as the cost of the device or is just service and goods under one price? 

MSE has recently introduced a Chat GPT-like tool in their app (https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/pressoffice/2023/ai-say--ai-say--ai-say--martin-lewis---mse-launch-revolutionary-/)

CEO email is a good idea - although I would usually make a formal complaint first. Going straight to the top may get OP a speedier response, but it depends if O2 responds to emails sent to that inbox (it seems to be hit and miss with some companies).

Depends on the network - some separate the 2 plans, others don't. In the case of O2, they are separate:



OP, I apologise from deviating from the thread topic - hopefully we can get back to the topic at hand rather than debating the merits of neural networks.

RefluentBeans

ForumUser7 said:

Apple devices have stickers on the inside which change colour upon exposure to water, or humidity on occasion. Here is a video of how it works https://youtu.be/UTYSSkkf9_A?t=247 

Glad to see OP confirm there was no water damage on this occasion though.

I agree it is very important to review what it says - I ask it to write it in the context of a letter, because then everything flows. I sometimes remove whole paragraphs though when they have no purpose, and I always read through and edit the things ChatGPT generates before use. I have successfully used the generated letters (with adaptations) several times over the past few months, and usually it is pretty accurate. When I'm doing it for myself and not trying to work quickly to get a poster an answer, I read them several times over 2 days to ensure I spot any mistakes or poor wording and I often get a second pair of eyes to review it. Out of interest, I once asked it to write a brief on a topic I was studying which was rather niche, and it was full of errors. I suppose it just depends on how much information there is for it to use. Another time, I asked it to write a consumer law letter for my own use and it quoted the wrong chapter number but the right chapter text - during my review of the letter, I consulted https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents/enacted and discovered the error which I then corrected.

OP hasn’t had the device opened so they are unable to confirm water damage indicators are normal or moisture detected. I believe given the excellent condition of the device - it’s likely there is not water damage. 

It’s a weird one as opening the device is (arguably) not what the intended purpose is so they could argue that by opening a device you caused the issue. Especially if it’s a screen issue and even more so if it’s due to a connector on the logic board - if it is opened by anyone you could argue that the strain of improperly opening the device has caused the connector to become strained. FWIW - I disagree. I think the right to repair your device is something that needs codifying into law. 

I’m not going to respond to the AI/LLM questions here. Not at all relevant. But be sure if you’re putting your name to anything (either written as a template/AI generated/written yourself) you should be willing to stand by it. 

born_again

- iPad Pro bought from O2 online on a 48 month device and sim contract in December 2021 (8 months out of 12-month manufacturer warranty)
- the iPad stopped working yesterday. I tried too hard reset and restore to no avail
- I took it to an Apple store today where they tested it and advised that it is definitely a hardware fault.
- Apple confirmed the following in an email:
Issue: Customer reports the iPad display turned off and now it is showing a blank black image 
Steps to Reproduce: Verified at Genius Bar
iPad is still powered on but all we can see is a blank black image on the screen.
Confirmed via diagnostics.
Issue persists when force restarting the iPad.
Cosmetic Condition: No damage or signs of misuse.
Proposed Resolution: Advised a hardware replacement will be needed out of warranty. The customer may also be able to peruse consumer law coverage through the original retailer which is O2.

my understanding is that I need to prove that the device was faulty when I bought it.

But Apple are not (& bet never will) admit that the i-pad has a inherent fault, that was present @ purchase. Only that it has a hardware issue now.

PHK

Agreed  these Apple in-store reports are effectively useless in claiming that there is an inherent fault.

The OP needs a full report with photos that diagnoses what the problem is and why it has occurred. It should included internal photos and testing outcomes.

OIIIIIIIO

PHK said:

Agreed  these Apple in-store reports are effectively useless in claiming that there is an inherent fault.

The OP needs a full report with photos that diagnoses what the problem is and why it has occurred. It should included internal photos and testing outcomes.

Internal photos of what exactly? They plugged the ipad into a computer at the apple store and ran 3 different tests. All 3 tests confirmed that the ipad hardware is functioning, except for the display panel. The screen lights up slightly when you turn it on, but it remains blank.

The apple rep said that in cases like this they just do a straight swap under CRA, no questions asked, provided the hardware was purchased from them, not a reseller.  

RefluentBeans

OIIIIIIIO said:

PHK said:

Agreed  these Apple in-store reports are effectively useless in claiming that there is an inherent fault.

The OP needs a full report with photos that diagnoses what the problem is and why it has occurred. It should included internal photos and testing outcomes.

Internal photos of what exactly? They plugged the ipad into a computer at the apple store and ran 3 different tests. All 3 tests confirmed that the ipad hardware is functioning, except for the display panel. The screen lights up slightly when you turn it on, but it remains blank.

The apple rep said that in cases like this they just do a straight swap under CRA, no questions asked, provided the hardware was purchased from them, not a reseller.  

I think what they're saying is about the water damage indicators. Apple puts water damage indicators around the internals of the iPad - mainly where there are points of ingress (around the charging port etc). Water damage can cause damage to the screen and so the logic is that if the insides are wet then the fault is from user misuse and that there can be tiny amounts of corrosion on the connectors that can cause this effect, and as it is older than 6 months, it is assumed that this is the issue, not a malfunctioning screen unit. Apple (and other companies too) will use the water damage to excuse themselves for any issue, which is arguably anti-consumer; but has not been challenged. 

In the same way, as if you took it to a repair shop (third party), they opened it up and said 'Oh yeah this is the part you need but we can't get it because only Apple sells it - take it to Apple'. When Apple realises it has been opened up they often try and say that the warranty is void, and try to sidestep the protections under the CRA. That's a whole other bag of worms, but as Apple didn't open the device up there's no question that Apple (or a third-party technician) caused the damage during opening the device. 

Apple will also certainly say those things - but their practices are certainly not much better. Have been with Apple for a long time, and certainly would never buy another Mac from them after their anti-consumer practices in store, and as a whole company. 

From your description, I doubt there is water damage. I think it is just a faulty screen unit. Has O2 got back to you at all yet?

OIIIIIIIO

RefluentBeans said:

From your description, I doubt there is water damage. I think it is just a faulty screen unit. Has O2 got back to you at all yet?

Not yet. I emailed them Wednesday night (2 days ago), their automated reply indicates that they usually reply within 7 working days.

PHK

OIIIIIIIO said:

PHK said:

Agreed  these Apple in-store reports are effectively useless in claiming that there is an inherent fault.

The OP needs a full report with photos that diagnoses what the problem is and why it has occurred. It should included internal photos and testing outcomes.

Internal photos of what exactly? They plugged the ipad into a computer at the apple store and ran 3 different tests. All 3 tests confirmed that the ipad hardware is functioning, except for the display panel. The screen lights up slightly when you turn it on, but it remains blank.

The apple rep said that in cases like this they just do a straight swap under CRA, no questions asked, provided the hardware was purchased from them, not a reseller.  

Internal photos to show there's no damage or to show a fault eg poor TAB on the display or faulty internal connector.  

Unfortunately, you didn't buy from Apple so how they handle returns under CRA is not relevant. You'll need to be armed with everything you need  as per my post. 

screech_78

Apple tell everyone that. In reality, if you had bought from them you’d be jumping through the same hoops. 

For what it’s worth, I would accept your report that states no consumer damage in a CRA claim. Our front line tech team wouldn’t. Apple will never write an inherent fault in a report. If they do, I haven’t seen it. 

With the exception of screen replacements, iPads are never repaired. They’re almost always replaced with a refurbished unit as part of the repair. 

RefluentBeans

screech_78 said:

Apple tell everyone that. In reality, if you had bought from them you’d be jumping through the same hoops. 

For what it’s worth, I would accept your report that states no consumer damage in a CRA claim. Our front line tech team wouldn’t. Apple will never write an inherent fault in a report. If they do, I haven’t seen it. 

With the exception of screen replacements, iPads are never repaired. They’re almost always replaced with a refurbished unit as part of the repair. 

Yeah I agree. Even when Apple abide by the CRA and actually repair something their legally obligated to do - I’ve always been told it’s a ‘gesture of goodwill’. Have to bite my tongue whenever they say anything like that.