Danish court rules Apple not allowed to dole out refurb iPhones for service swaps



  • Reply 61 of 71
    croprcropr Posts: 1,075member
    entropys said:
    Understandable if the iPhone was only a few weeks old (which I suspect is what happens anyway), but up to two years? What a joke!
    One approach is that Apple could issue the owner a beat up old iphone 4S loaner while they repaired the iphone with the problem. Just like a car dealership would do.
    What is wrong a decent consumer law that gives the consumer 2 years of warranty?
    The lame 90 days warranty in some countries is an absolute joke. 

  • Reply 62 of 71
    croprcropr Posts: 1,075member
    apple ][ said:
    Apple's refurbs are among the best in the business.

    I've purchased a few Apple refurbs from Apple.com throughout the years, and all of them were basically flawless, like new.

    If that is not good enough for the danes, or any other euroheads, then Apple should just repair their iPhone, and give it back exactly like it came in, scratches and all, and with the same damn battery. Then nobody will have anything to complain about.
    Danish consumers law is among the best in the world.  It protects all of us, by giving us basic rights as a consumer 

    The quality if the refurbs of Apple is here totally irrelevant.

    If you fail to understand that consumer rights are beneficial for all consumers, including you, then you are very lucky.  Because consumer law also protects the less intelligent people.
  • Reply 63 of 71
    I have never had any experience with Apple refurbished products so I don't know how well they perform but I have never had good experience with factory repaired or refurbished electronics. I usually continue to have problems crop up where I need to get the unit replaced or repaired again and again. I would rather just get back a prorated credit that I could apply to a new purchase. I had such a bad experience with Samsung authorized warranty repairs a few years ago that if a new TV I bought broke down during the warranty period that I would just toss it and buy a new TV because all the time and expense I spent dealing with the Samsung was more than the cost of buying a new TV.
  • Reply 64 of 71
    I have a friend who works "refurbishing" Apple iOS products in Elk Grove, CA. These are not "repaired" devices, but meticulously inspected devices. Apparently, these generally come from Apple brick-and-mortar stores, or from returns where there is "buyers remorse". In effect, brand new devices that haven't been used.

    There are others that come in that, my friend says, have clearly had a hard life. These do not "make the cut".

    So the term "refurbished" is pretty misleading, IMHO. These are spotless products, according to my friend. If not, they go a different route. As an example, apparently even the most minute scratch, front or back, sees the product failing to pass inspection.

    If a product never came out of it's box, gets inspected, and passes the inspection, it's "new" IMHO, even if it was manufactured a year earlier. Maybe that's the approach Apple should take....

  • Reply 65 of 71
    In reading the courts resume, I noticed that the plaintiff and the consumer agency had an IT-expert to review the phone—some modules new, some non-new—but all functionally new (basically no problem, no case)!
    Though, in a legal sense, the unit had a reduced resale value (!)

    I have no legal authority, but this seems to be the crux of the case—the interpretation of the law, specifically about the terms "new" and "value" etc.

    As I read the court's resume, the IT-expert validated the unit as a on-standard replacement.

    It also seems as Apple went to court without any legal justification—the law is not new nor is it rarely invoked—in short: the court decision can't/shouldn't come as a surprise!

    As others have pointed out, this law protects the consumer.
    But the government has failed to explain the law to us Danes, as most of us mistake the law as a 24 month insurance!
    In reality the burden of proofing that a defect was present at the date of purchase, shifts from the seller to the consumer during the covered 24 months.

    Nothing would be easier than label my fellow countryman as a jerk, hell bent on a crusade against big capitalism!
    But I think we should acknowledge the greater good any court case provides: less doubt, more actual, public knowledge—sometimes a lesson to the big company, sometimes a reason to review the law and how it is interpreted and whether the practice follows the intentions behind the law?
    —as the resume states, at present, there is no possibility to consider of the environmental aspects in the current law!
  • Reply 66 of 71
    apple ][ said:
    Apple's refurbs are among the best in the business.

    I've purchased a few Apple refurbs from Apple.com throughout the years, and all of them were basically flawless, like new.

    If that is not good enough for the danes, or any other euroheads, then Apple should just repair their iPhone, and give it back exactly like it came in, scratches and all, and with the same damn battery. Then nobody will have anything to complain about.
    Well I tought so too. I was in a skiing accident in Åre and was run over by a newbie boarder who couldnt control his board. My phone got bent like a centimeter. Well the insurance company got me the exchange to a refurb for 379€ . It lasted about 5 months. just about a half a year out of warranty. Never dropped. Sealed in a lifeproof drop/waterproof case. it just froze in my hand and when force restarted gives me an apple logo and nothing more. The phone is unrepearable and they want a new 379€ for a NEW REFURB. Never in a milion years am I going to take any refurb phone. Just forget it. I have no knowledge what kind of action the refurb has been in. It might have dropped 5 meters and barely sruvivied with a broken screen. Apple change the screen and case and refurbs the phone. Motherboard fucked up it stops in some months... Who is to blame?

    And the battery was shit, though apple thinks it was good and not worthy of a replacement.
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 67 of 71
    sog35 said:
    This is pretty dumb.

    This is like buying a car. Then your car has a recall 2 years latter. And you demand a brand new car.
    1- I think Apple should rather offer a repair than a refurb or a new item. You bought an item. It has a flaw, which makes it Apple's fault. They fix it and remove the flaw. Problem fixed, everybody happy.
    2- If Apple cannot fix it (either real impossibility or financial preference, which is theirs to decide as a private business), then they should indeed give out a new device. It is not the consumer's fault if they left a flaw in the device. If I wanted flaws in my devices I'd buy Microsoft's Surface.
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 68 of 71
    Notsofast said:
    Good. If I was Apple, I would henceforth tell all Danes that instead of giving them a refurbished phone with a new battery, new shell, and completely reconditioned with a new warranty, we will simply hold on to your phone and repair it under warranty and then send your repaired phone back to you with its old, up to two year old battery, scratched case and non-reconditioned with whatever is left of your old warranty.

    While it sounds less valuable, it sounds more fair to me. Why would you get a refurb instead of the phone you really bought? It has a flaw, once fixed the problem is solved, no reason to get a refurb. It's neither fair to Apple nor to the consumer to give them a (possibly more valuable, or possibly issue-riddled) refurb item. It actually sounds like "hey, we made a mistake, so you get to launch the Wheel of Fortune and either win a million or lose the game." to me...

    In my opinion, the only reason to get a new device would be Apple not wanting/being able to fix it, on which case you should get a brand new unit, since they consciously decide to change your device instead of fixing it. Obviously in all cases, I'm thinking "if your device's failure was due to an Apple flaw", not "I dropped my phone in the water while at Miami Beach, plsfixit"...

    Of course others may see the world differently ^^
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 69 of 71
    lkrupp said:
    sunman42 said:
    I don't even play a lawyer on TV, much less speak Danish, but what remedy would the judges suggest if someone brought in a one year, 364 day old phone for warranty replacement? A brand new phone, or a refurb?
    What about just repairing the device, no replacement needed? Hey, you might be without a phone for a few days but it honors the warranty. Most warranties state that repair or replacement is at the discretion of the manufacturer. All I’m saying is be careful of what you ask for.

    Bingo. People just don't understand that complaining about something can result in making things worse for everyone. When faced with giving everyone more or taking it away, many companies will simply go the route of taking things away (in this case, over the counter replacements).

    This, exactly.  Keeping the phone and repairing it seems like it complies with the law in this case, and frankly, I wouldn't blame Apple a bit if their policy changed from immediate replacement with a refurb to "OK, it falls under warranty, so we'll fix it.  See you in a couple weeks!"
  • Reply 70 of 71
    apple ][ said:
    sog35 said:

    You already got the benefit of using the phone for 2 years. There is no reason to give you a new phone.

    It is absolutely ridiculous that somebody can use a phone for a full 2 years and then go and trade it in for a brand new one.

    That makes no business sense at all.

    What kind of anti-business retards come up with and make these kind of rules? 

    the kind of pro-consumer "retards" we have in Europe, where they focus on the customer more than the fat-cat rich companies. Rules like this are put in place to protect customers, if you splash out a decent sum of money on something you expect it to work like new for a decent amount of time, the general timespan agreed upon was 24months and applies to most things sold across Europe; electronics, appliances etc. This is nothing new and companies that do business in Europe, should and will know about these rules. The trouble is most of the time, the customer has to complain, then take it further with regulators or ombudsman to get the company to comply with the law.
Sign In or Register to comment.