Apple sued over use of moisture indicators to deny free repairs - Page 5

Originally Posted by easy288

Deny warranty repairs = bigger profits.

I would like someone to test this indicator in a bathroom after a long hot shower.

Originally Posted by bsenka

None of my 5 iPods have ever been in/under water. All of them have their moisture sensors triggered red.

Originally Posted by trumptman

No one need figure out whether it is fair or not or even that the parties were thought to have agreed to it. A jury of reasonable people only need be convinced that the terms of the warranty are bad faith terms. When presented with the information above, that walking from outside a building into a building constitutes breach, the jury will find that the legal language constitutes bad faith and find for the plaintiff.

Originally Posted by trumptman

It is within Apple's control as they can sell a phone where the interior is not accessible by outside air that would contain the condensation or they can design the phones to be tolerant of such changes.

Originally Posted by jragosta

Nonsense. Until you find a way to make affordable electronics that are water resistant, it is reasonable to exclude water damage from warranty repairs.

The fact that ALL cell phone companies exclude water damage is a pretty good indication that Apple is simply following industry practice.

OK, genius. Please tell us how to make an electronic device that's immune to water damage without jacking up the price a LOT. Furthermore, when you consider all the holes in the iPhone case, it probably isn't practical at all in a consumer device. In spite of its iPad advertising, Apple isn't magic.

Originally Posted by Netcrawler

If this suit actually makes it to court, it probably won't succeed, as it's based on at least one fundamental error if not more. If either liquid contact indicator is red, the device will be opened up to see if the internal sensors have been tripped and whatever is found inside will dictate how the process will proceed from there. If the external indicator(s) are not red, than the device doesn't have to be opened up; as another poster stated, nobody's time is wasted.

Originally Posted by trumptman

I would prefer a system where people do not suffer monetary damages via false allegations related to indicators that do not indicate what they are declared to indicate. That problem is for Apple and others to solve. They are the ones who want to weed out who is returning items with false claims. They have no right to cause damages to others out of fear a fractional percentage might be trying to have their warrantied honored in an instance where they have invalidated it. The default presumption within the warranty period should be that equipment failed. If they want to invalidate the warranty, it is the manufacturer who should have the extra burden, not the consumer. The consumer is the party committing to a device costing hundred of dollars and and a two year contract often costing a couple thousand.

The phones are under contract when they are within their warranty period. You replace the phone and then if some one is truly found negligent, you can charge it to the bill they are still contracted to pay monthly. How hard is that? You can do exactly what Apple does with items like batteries, they send out the replacement while they have a card number for charges and then you get charged if you don't return the phone being warrantied or if the phone has provable liquid damage, aka not indicators that turn pink when sitting in your pocket, walking from indoors to outdoors repeatedly, or goodness knows what.

Again, you noted these can easily be tripped and that all manufacturers engage in this behavior. It sounds exactly like a problem calling out for a solution beyond a class action lawsuit but even if that is the only remedy, it makes good sense to offer products that actually perform for the term of the contracts offered otherwise it is proof of bad faith on the part of one of the parties.

I mean think about it. Does it sound like good faith for a business to be signing parties to two year contracts for cell service using a cell device only guaranteed to work for one year? When the phone fails, or fails to have the warranty honored due to little pink stickers, the suggested recourse by most companies is to offer another phone and a contract extension. It automatically suggests a situation whereby you can never get out of contract unless you "luck" into a circumstance where your phone doesn't fail.

Originally Posted by hill60

Read the fine print of the contract you signed, stating that you read the contract, understood it and agree to the terms.

The phone plan part keeps working, you can remove the SIM place it in another phone and continue to use the services it provides.

If a phone requires being sent away for assessment because a sensor has come into contact with water the phone company is under no obligation to supply you a replacement to use in the meantime.

Bear in mind that Apple is one of the only phone companies that offer an on the spot replacement, almost all the other manufacturers require a handset be sent in for assessment.

Originally Posted by trumptman

It is within Apple's control as they can sell a phone where the interior is not accessible by outside air that would contain the condensation or they can design the phones to be tolerant of such changes. You make the point exactly. If it is a known variable that no consumers could be expected to avoid and consumers are suffering damages due to it, then it is a bad faith agreement. It would be no different than Apple declaring that breathing on the phone while speaking into it invalidates your warranty. If no consumer can honor the terms, then the terms are made in bad faith. It is why the legal definition of bad faith exists.

As for having the highest customer satisfaction ratings, that is besides the point. Damages are damages and likewise if the rest of the industry is acting in worse faith, it doesn't excuse bad faith.

You say that it is not bad faith, but note that a regular person using the phone in a regular manner is very likely to invalidate the warranty. That is the very definition of bad faith. If you are sold a mobile phone and cannot use it in a mobile manner, walking from indoors to outdoors, then it was sold in bad faith.

Originally Posted by Rambo Is Listening

Here's some news for you man. Your phone came in contact with liquid and you are too weak to admit to: A) Your own faults B) Your lack of perception C) The fact that your phone is not perfectly within eye sight every second of every day and D) That your anger will get you absolutely nowhere at the genius bar as you try to blame it on someone whom you claim is "Trying to take advantage of you."

You can make claims all you want about people who sell computers, but I guarantee you do not know any more than any genius who has worked there for more than a few months. They take these things apart every day repeatedly. Something your arrogance might try to find a fleeting argument against, but will still fail. Plus, if you are taking your phone apart and tampering with it, why would they replace it for you? If you break a connector yourself, why should Apple pay for that? Hell, you're such a pro at taking it apart, why not fix it yourself? Because you can't do it in a cost effective manner while maintaining factory build quality. Might as well get the genius bar swap for $199.

There are 4 sensors on the phone. One red sensor does not automatically disqualify your device from repair. 2 does. They can open your phone and look inside, if it's still wet or internal sensors are tripped, sorry. Take better care of your stuff. If you get splashed and don't notice 1 sensor, ok. If 2 sensors are set off, your phone was wet and if you didn't notice, then it's your fault and you deserve a $199 price tag. We all know liquid and electronics don't mix. Corrosion grows on parts and breaks them. Your fault. I take long, hot showers with my iPhone on the counter every day and my sensors are white as snow.

So take your phone into an Apple store and be a dick. I hope they are dicks right back to you. Get the police in there too, then you can get arrested, spend the night in jail while your car gets towed from the parking lot and then you'll be out a lot more money than your repair would have cost to begin with and you'll still have a liquid damaged phone.

This talk of "I know it never got wet," is what you get when an arrogant person makes the assumption that their own perception of reality precedes everyone else's ability to discern facts.

Grow up.

Originally Posted by Haggar

But isn't this the fundamental issue all along? That there were instances where Apple has used the red indicator as the SOLE basis for denying warranty coverage, without conducting further examination of the phone? The first line of the article states:

A San Francisco resident has filed a lawsuit against Apple alleging that the company unfairly declines warranty coverage for its products solely on the basis of triggered moisture sensors, which the suit alleges are unreliable evidence of abuse.

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

A San Francisco resident has filed a lawsuit against Apple alleging that the company unfairly declines warranty coverage for its products solely on the basis of triggered moisture sensors, which the suit alleges are unreliable evidence of abuse.

Originally Posted by tawilson

All electronic devices work under "normal humidity" which I think goes upto about 60% for the iPhone.

At 60%+ humidity the phone isn't guaranteed to work. So if the indicator triggers because of that (60%+ humidity) then Apple doesn't haven't to replace it, as they say it won't work in those cases./QUOTE]

Not quite. The iPhone warranty specifies 95%. The problem is that it specifically says 'noncondensing'. So those of you who take a 72 degree iPhone out into 100 degree, 95% RH weather are going to get condensation - and violate your warranty. That's too bad, but it's not Apple's problem. They can't change the laws of physics to suit you.

Take a cold phone out on a hot, humid day and water will condense. Take a phone into a humid bathroom where you're taking a shower and water will condense. Sorry, folks, but Apple is entirely within its rights to block warranty coverage when the phone gets wet - and ever single example above shows that the phone was abused.

Originally Posted by Maestro64

To your point if Apple claimed it can be used an any environment without restriction then everyone has a case. If you want a phone that can operating in wet environment buy a Motorola Tundra. I can tell you that phone cost far more than a iphone but it will survive getting wet, but it was designed to do so.

You live in a nice world if you think these product work under all conditions. They do not, in a prior career I spend many years testing and certifying product to demonstrate the conditions which are in the warranty. I have work with contract and legal teams on these provisions and they hold up specially when you have test data to back it up and I can tell you there is no bad faith on Apple part since they do test and no where does it saw that mobile means it works under all environmental conditions.

The only thing I would said is the sensor should not trip under high humidity condition especially if the phone is not physically wet. But no one has presented test data that this does happen. I have seen where these sensor will change colors when exposed to high humidity conditions for long periods of time.

Lastly, most all Cell phone companies these days use these sensors since it a common practice to dump a phone in water then try and return it under warranty. The only difference is Apple's can be seen easily and the other manufacturers require the phone to be taken apart or it hidden under the battery.

Most likely Apple will fix this persons phone to make this go away since it will cost more to entertain this lawsuit. They will have a confidentiality agreement and they will not be able to talk about it.

Originally Posted by trumptman

To your point, if Apple defined their operating conditions so strictly as to preclude it reasonable for most folks to use their phone in the advertised mobile manner, then the court would find against them. Apple could define in their operating environmental standards that the phone warranty is void if the phone is ever exposed to sunlight, but the the court would declare them wrong for advertising it as mobile.

Again, bad faith, look it up. The concept exists for a reason and just because Apple or others stick it in a contract doesn't mean a court won't find against it.



I apparently live in a nice world where people make up strawman arguments. Please quote where anyone in this thread ever said that the iPhone ought to work under ALL conditions. That is a strawman. Clearly people are suing because they are using their iPhones under common everyday mobile conditions and having their warranty revoked. You claim they hold up but I've not read where they've been tested in courts or with class action status. Please cite the cases for me.

Likewise Apple lost a case in 2005 because their iPods were so easily scratched. Apple lost another case on iPods due to battery failure. The courts regardless of contract language, found against Apple or Apple settled. Is it reasonable to expect an iPod owner to put their iPod in their pocket, yes. Is it reasonable for someone to take their iPhone from indoors to outdoors when advertised as mobile. Yes.

You say go buy a different phone with different operaing specs. That won't happen. The courts will use the standard of reasonableness to rule against Apple based off how a reasonable person would use their MOBILE phone and if the operating specs are too tight, they will rule against Apple.

They will do so for exactly the reasons you noted as well. A layperson does not have an entire lab set up to determine what about their daily routine runs inside or outside of the operating specs. Apple advertises the device as mobile, by that standard it ought to work in a standard manner within the environments of 95% of the population.

Your car wasn't designed to work in ALL environments either but if the very act of taking it out of the garage invalidated your warranty, there would be suits and if environmental operating conditions were defined as no higher than 90 degree weather and no lower than 70 degree weather, they would be declared bad faith.



Since you supposedly write this contract language, you ought to know in denying a claim, Apple is declaring the other party took certain actions. If they don't have solid proof then that party has suffered damages and can recover them which is exactly what this case is about. Apple has the burden of proof because they are the ones denying warranty terms. The person seeking damages only need proof they agreed to a one year warranty and were denied it. It is Apple that must proof their rationale for denying the warranty they entered into.


These lawyers will seek class action status and will seek additional plaintiffs who were denied warranties. When you break an agreement, you need a good reason. People purchased Apple phones and expected a one year warranty. If they didn't get it, the burden is on Apple. It doesn't matter if the industry practice is a bad one. A class action lawsuit is exactly the type of tool that will change a bad industry practice.

Originally Posted by easy288

Deny warranty repairs = bigger profits.

I would like someone to test this indicator in a bathroom after a long hot shower.

Originally Posted by tullius

I'm a bit skeptical of the false positive problem if in fact the description of the independent testing is accurate. Who would let their phone be exposed to -11C temps for an hour at a time, three times in a row? If you're outside in those temps, the phone will be in a pocket or close to your body - your body heat alone will keep it from getting that cold.