Very refund - discount for age

RankWang

I think £450 can buy another brand of computer

Okell

Exodi said:

Okell said:

Apple aren't usually as obliging as that if the experiences of some posters on here are to be believed.

Normally they'd say something like:

"The Consumer Rights Act says that goods must last for 6 years."  [That by the way is totally wrong and misleading]  "If you'd bought it from us we would honour that and either give you a replacement or a full refund.  Unfortunately you bought it from somebody else so you'll have to go to them and argue your case with them.  Sorry - nothing we can do"

And I think it's virtually unheard of for them to offer you a written report confirming that a faulty or defective component had been used by them in its manufacture.

I was about to say the same. Most experiences I read about Apple on here are of them performing incredible gymnastics to obfuscate the fault and skillfully tiptoe around whether the issue has been caused by the customer or a manufacturing defect, or refusing to acknowledge any third party reports.

The fact that they've not only confirmed the fault lies with them, but also provided a report to that effect is nothing short of a miracle. Then to hand that to a retailer, have them accept the report and offer a 60% refund is beyond comprehension...

This ^^^^.

Kudos to apple and Very for being very (no pun) reasonable.

Okell

screech_78 said:

To be fair, I’ve seen a few Apple reports and whilst none of them have ever stated a manufacturing or inherent fault, they almost always say no user damage (if that’s the case). 

In my personal opinion, I believe that’s enough under CRA and I’ll accept it. Others who work in the same or similar department(s) don’t accept it and I think they’re wrong. 

Yes.

I certainly think that if you've got a bit of expensive kit that fails after 6 months but within a couple of years of purchase and the manufacturer says there's no evidence of user damage, then the retailer should sort it out - no question.

Smick100

screech_78 said:

To be fair, I’ve seen a few Apple reports and whilst none of them have ever stated a manufacturing or inherent fault, they almost always say no user damage (if that’s the case). 

In my personal opinion, I believe that’s enough under CRA and I’ll accept it. Others who work in the same or similar department(s) don’t accept it and I think they’re wrong. 

What their report stated is this:

Issue: Customer has come in with the Mac no longer powering on. Verified in appointment even with known good cables there is

no sign of power

........................................................................................

Steps to Reproduce: Booked in for revive however the software was not able to locate the Mac as it wasn’t giving any power

signals.

........................................................................................

Cosmetic Condition: Small dent to back of the display, small scratches from use. No signs of liquid or internal damage found

........................................................................................

Proposed Resolution: Depot repair is required to troubleshoot no power, the mac is likely to require a Main logic board.

Smick100

I think I have got my answer:

Take Very's offer ASAP and consider myself lucky.

Thanks everyone.

DullGreyGuy

Okell said:

screech_78 said:

To be fair, I’ve seen a few Apple reports and whilst none of them have ever stated a manufacturing or inherent fault, they almost always say no user damage (if that’s the case). 

In my personal opinion, I believe that’s enough under CRA and I’ll accept it. Others who work in the same or similar department(s) don’t accept it and I think they’re wrong. 

Yes.

I certainly think that if you've got a bit of expensive kit that fails after 6 months but within a couple of years of purchase and the manufacturer says there's no evidence of user damage, then the retailer should sort it out - no question.

I think the statement is a bit too broad @okell to be honest as there are other scenarios...

Say you buy a Braun electric razor for £599.99 and after 2.5 years you complain it's starting to pull hairs rather than cut them. A report simply saying there is no user damage is insufficient, the likely problem is that the blades, a consumable in this device, need replacing and its considered reasonable after this period of time. Likewise a failed timing belt on a car after 200,000 miles.

A report should provide consideration on what reasonable durability is

screech_78

Smick100 said:

screech_78 said:

To be fair, I’ve seen a few Apple reports and whilst none of them have ever stated a manufacturing or inherent fault, they almost always say no user damage (if that’s the case). 

In my personal opinion, I believe that’s enough under CRA and I’ll accept it. Others who work in the same or similar department(s) don’t accept it and I think they’re wrong. 

What their report stated is this:

Issue: Customer has come in with the Mac no longer powering on. Verified in appointment even with known good cables there is

no sign of power

........................................................................................

Steps to Reproduce: Booked in for revive however the software was not able to locate the Mac as it wasn’t giving any power

signals.

........................................................................................

Cosmetic Condition: Small dent to back of the display, small scratches from use. No signs of liquid or internal damage found

........................................................................................

Proposed Resolution: Depot repair is required to troubleshoot no power, the mac is likely to require a Main logic board.

As I suspected, Apple haven’t said there’s a manufacturing fault or that any specific component is inherently faulty. 

Okell

Smick100 said:

screech_78 said:

To be fair, I’ve seen a few Apple reports and whilst none of them have ever stated a manufacturing or inherent fault, they almost always say no user damage (if that’s the case). 

In my personal opinion, I believe that’s enough under CRA and I’ll accept it. Others who work in the same or similar department(s) don’t accept it and I think they’re wrong. 

What their report stated is this:

Issue: Customer has come in with the Mac no longer powering on. Verified in appointment even with known good cables there is

no sign of power

........................................................................................

Steps to Reproduce: Booked in for revive however the software was not able to locate the Mac as it wasn’t giving any power

signals.

........................................................................................

Cosmetic Condition: Small dent to back of the display, small scratches from use. No signs of liquid or internal damage found

........................................................................................

Proposed Resolution: Depot repair is required to troubleshoot no power, the mac is likely to require a Main logic board.

So the report didn't say "likely a faulty component"?

RefluentBeans

Smick100 said:

I think I have got my answer:

Take Very's offer ASAP and consider myself lucky.

Thanks everyone.

Basically, yes. Apple haven’t diagnosed the fault. They have said there is a fault, likely the motherboard. 

It’s questionable to what extent a faulty motherboard could be considered an inherent fault imo - especially as these motherboards now have pretty much every internal component soldered on to them (bar the battery). If a car fails, you would expect an engineer to tell you what component has failed. In this case I don’t think you have been told what has failed.

Apple have carefully, as they always do, said there is an issue, and said what their recommended solution is. At no point have they actually said faulty, inherent or otherwise. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Smick100 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Do you pay on credit with Very OP?

I had a credit account but paid for it with debit card.

That's a shame, if it were on credit with Very you could accept their offer and then raise a complaint to question the calculation, they might have given a few quid "go away money" on top.

I can't really comment on the lifespan of these things, our (Dell) laptop is 9 years old, haven't really used it for 2 year as it really slowed down after the last windows update at the time. I'm guessing it could go to a shop and have stuff added to help it perform but ultimately it's become obsolete rather than failed, sort of thing I would expect really and IMHO with this kind if product I wouldn't be asking how long a laptop should survive before something fails but rather how long it should be before the constant software updates render it incapable of performing. It seems the answer to that is getting shorter and shorter as these companies need to squeeze existing customers to replace given most of us already own this kind of tech by now.