post #41 of 41

I) The portuguese law extended the consumer protection beyond the European Union regulations.


II) The portuguese law states that the salesperson answers by any lack of conformity of the product with the contract. If this lack of conformity appears after 2 years counting from the delivery date, then it does create the presumption that it already existed on delivery date.

Instead of being the consumer that has to prove that the deficiency occurred within the 2 years, it makes the seller responsible, unless he proves otherwise.

This is just a legal scheme used to transfer the risk to the salesperson completely and it does have some repercussions. Considering that it is the celebration of a contract that transfers the propriety and subsequently the risk, it could be possible that just seconds after the celebration of the contract the product could go haywire (short circuit for example) and the responsibility could fall on the buyer. This norm prevents this and makes the salesperson responsible all the way.


This protection is just offered to one that buys consumer products from a professional vendor, so if you buy a car from your friend and it gets broken seconds after you close the deal, you will have to pay your own repairs.

III) The central question here is that Apple is eluding its costumers and even its sellers. I recall buying my first iPod Mini and it came with a one year warranty paper. That was like 6 years ago and it was indeed strange because the law had already fixed a 2 year warranty. I remember that the vendors simply didn't knew what to say about this, even though they were forced to give the 2 year warranty.


The law states very clearly that the warranty papers should be brief and have clear information. The fine can go up to 30 000€.

IV) Considering specifically the case of the Apple Care Service, it could go exactly the same way as the Italian decision, aiming for unfair consumer practices, which could certainly go for higher fines.

They argue the Apple Care paid service offers the same protection as the one they should offer, by legal imposition.


V) DECO also referred to other consumer protections that are not mentioned by Apple. If a salesperson sells a faulty equipment, the buyer can ask for a repair, substitution, price reduction or contract resolution. Apple only refers the first two.