Apple lengthens Australian warranty policy, but doesn't want to talk about it

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Apple had quietly extended its hardware warranty in Australia to two years, but the company's retail employees have reportedly been instructed to not reveal the changes to customers.

Apple's new two-year hardware warranty places the company in compliance with Australian laws, according to The Sydney Morning Herald. But an e-mail obtained by the publication from one Apple retail store found that employees were told that they could not discuss details of the changes with customers.

AppleCare


The Australian Consumer Law was passed in January of 2011, requiring companies to provide customers with a "reasonable" length of warranty for products. While the term reasonable is not defined, the law suggests that expensive products such as televisions should be supported for up to 24 months.

The standard warranty for most of Apple's products is 12 months, though customers can purchase an extended AppleCare warranty for their device.

Apple declined to comment on the alleged e-mail that directed employees to not discuss the new policy. But Rod Stowe, Fair Trading Commissioner for the New South Wales government, called hiding details of the 24-month warranty "rather surprising and disingenuous."

"To instruct your staff to not let people know is something that seems of quite concern, and I don't understand why they wouldn't want to be upfront about it," Stowe said. "Apple seems to be generally one of those businesses that is quite responsible to problems."

Apple's standard 12-month product warranties have placed the company in trouble in other parts of the world. Italian authorities have fined Apple nearly $1.5 million U.S. for unfair commercial practices" related to its AppleCare product warranties.

Those fines were brought on by the Italian Antitrust Authority, which deemed that Apple did not provide adequate information to customers about the length of its product guarantees. Italian law requires companies to protect buyers with a free two-year warranty, but Apple continued to offer customers the ability to purchase a two-year warranty rather than receiving one for free.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 52
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,435member
    [quote]Italian law requires companies to protect buyers with a free two-year warranty, but Apple continued to offer customers the ability to purchase a two-year warranty rather than receiving one for free.[/quote]

    Fortunately, yes. AppleCare is simply something better than regular warrenty, something not everyone knows.
  • Reply 2 of 52
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,817member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post



    Apple had quietly extended its hardware warranty in Australia to two years, but the company's retail employees have reportedly been instructed to not reveal the changes to customers.



    Apple's new two-year hardware warranty places the company in compliance with Australian laws, according to The Sydney Morning Herald. But an e-mail obtained by the publication from one Apple retail store found that employees were told that they could not discuss details of the changes with customers.


    Why would they instruct staff not to discuss the extension to a 2-year warranty? If it's true, and I haven't seen proof that it is, the Fair Trading Commissioner is right to inquire further.


     


    Where's the email that supposedly proves it?


     


    EDIT: I don't see a link to the email in the the original story at the Sidney Herald either. Maybe it's there somewhere but if so it's not obvious.


    http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/apple-keeps-warranty-switch-under-wraps-20130318-2gahc.html

  • Reply 3 of 52
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,198member
    The email is likely totally bogus or this is a combo of misquoting the mall and the change. It's possible that this is like the EU laws which, in many areas, apply to protections required from the seller on delivery defects. The email may have been to clarify the Apple's manufacturers warranty for products bought t any seller and defects not present at delivery is still one year and to not tellfolksthat that coverage is two years. Which is not the same thing as telling folks to lie by omission
  • Reply 4 of 52
    Well if their has been a change in policy I could not listed on their AU web site.
  • Reply 5 of 52
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,730member


    So in other words...Apple just wants to be childish about it. 

  • Reply 6 of 52
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,198member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post





    Fortunately, yes. AppleCare is simply something better than regular warrenty, something not everyone knows.


     


    And better than these laws. Because the laws are defect at delivery from the seller. The point is to stop folks from selling lemons that they either know are lemons or didn't reasonably check.


     


    an example. I live in Rome and I go to Pietro's Cell Phones and an iPhone. 4 months later it stops working. Under Italian law I can go to Pietro's and they legally have to repair or replace my phone. But if it happens at 8 months I will likely have to prove the issue was present when I bought it. Which I won't likely be able to prove so they will refuse me. But I can go over to the Apple store and under their 1 year warranty they will replace it. Even if it worked perfectly for 11.5 months. If they can't prove damage I'm covered. If I have Apple care im still covered if it was fine for 23.5 months if there's no damage. But Pietro's can say it worked for over a year so it wasn't a defect at delivery so they don't have to do anything.

  • Reply 7 of 52
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,198member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macxpress View Post


    So in other words...Apple just wants to be childish about it. 



     


    So in other words you want to be childish and assume the big bad corporation must be guilty of anything they are accused of simply cause they were accused and they are a big corp. double hen there's no actual proof given

  • Reply 8 of 52
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    charlituna wrote: »
    So in other words you want to be childish and assume the big bad corporation must be guilty of anything they are accused of simply cause they were accused and they are a big corp. double hen there's no actual proof given

    Not at all. He only assumes that APPLE is guilty without evidence.
  • Reply 9 of 52
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,730member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


     


    So in other words you want to be childish and assume the big bad corporation must be guilty of anything they are accused of simply cause they were accused and they are a big corp. double hen there's no actual proof given



     


    Nope...not at all. 

  • Reply 10 of 52
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,817member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    Not at all. He only assumes that APPLE is guilty without evidence.


    To be fair you've been know to assume Google or Motorola or Samsung is guilty with even less evidence. I suppose it's human nature to accept as fact those statements that support what you believe but require a higher standard for statements that don't.

  • Reply 11 of 52
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Why hide it? I would praise on high the built-in extended warranty. Be up front. I know it costs you some profit but you're offering it so you might as well be direct about it and market it to increase business.
  • Reply 12 of 52
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 13 of 52
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 13 of 52


    Charlituna said


     


     


     


    Quote:


    Because the laws are defect at delivery from the seller.



     


     


    It's not as simple as that - at least under UK law. Here it's possible to have cover against defects that develop later if the product that was delivered to you didn't have a sufficiently durable design. So the defect at delivery was lack of durability.


  • Reply 15 of 52
    geekdadgeekdad Posts: 1,131member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    Why hide it? I would praise on high the built-in extended warranty. Be up front. I know it costs you some profit but you're offering it so you might as well be direct about it and market it to increase business.


    you are correct. It would seem like they should even advertise it. The competition has a 1 year warranty but WE have a free 2 year warranty! We now back up our product with a free two year warranty...bring it to any Apple store and we will honor that warranty. Seems like a great PR and marketing point of emphasis....

  • Reply 16 of 52
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Off Topic: In case people in the US (not sure of other countries) don't know this, but if you buy Apple's headphones they are automatically covered by the warranty of other Apple products you use them with. I use to Shure and Klipsch in-ear phones and because my usage patterns are fairly abusive I'd be using that warranty within that year time frame. It was always a pain to find their warranty page, fill out the online portion, hunt down my receipt, print out the other forms, and mail it in to the companies on my dime.

    I finally stopped paying hundreds for in-ear phones (usually only got the one replacement before the warranty was over) and while they did sound better than Apple's in-ear phones for the prince of $79 Apple's option wasn't that bad. Plus, I like that Apple's cord is about 10-12" shorter than the other brands, which is a big reason they came apart as they oft got snagged on doorknobs and whatnot.

    Only recently did I find out about the added bonus of a built-in warranty for those that buy Apple products went in to buy some additional grommets(?) for the phones. Apple doesn't sell them but they gave me a pair in the size I wanted.
  • Reply 17 of 52

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post




    There may not yet be proof per se, but apparently NSW Fair Trading Commissioner Rod Stowe believes the internal email is indeed evidence.



     


    On the contrary, his quote makes it sound like he doesn't believe Apple would do something like that because "Apple seems to be generally one of those businesses that is quite responsible to the problems."  His first quote doesn't mean he believes the story being told.   He's simply saying that if any company was hiding details of a 24-month warranty it would be "rather surprising and disingenuous."

  • Reply 18 of 52
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Why would they instruct staff not to discuss the extension to a 2-year warranty? If it's true, and I haven't seen proof that it is, the Fair Trading Commissioner is right to inquire further.


     


    Where's the email that supposedly proves it?


     


    EDIT: I don't see a link to the email in the the original story at the Sidney Herald either. Maybe it's there somewhere but if so it's not obvious.


    http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/apple-keeps-warranty-switch-under-wraps-20130318-2gahc.html



    You are right on every points. It should be inquired further, and yes, we need to see that damn email.

  • Reply 19 of 52
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member

    deleted.

  • Reply 20 of 52
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    matrix07 wrote: »

    Someone hit the quote button instead of edit. :D
Sign In or Register to comment.