Family seeks additional $600,000 from Apple above insurance payment after blaming iPhone c...
A family in British Columbia has demanded Apple pay it $600,000 to help cover uninsured losses endured from a farmhouse fire in October 2016, one claimed to have been started by an overheating cable used to charge an iPhone 6.
Remains of iPhone charging cable, from the Township of Langley Fire Department Field Report
Cathy and Ian Finley of Langley, B.C. were forced to close their farm business after the late-2016 house fire, which they blame on the cable and the three-month-old iPhone 6, which was left charging in their living room, reports CBC. Cathy Finley advises it was charging unattended, as she plugged it in before leaving the building to feed goats, later spotting the house on fire.
On arriving back to the house, the fire was too large to get neat to the structure, forcing Mrs. Finley to go to a neighbor for assistance.
There has yet to be an official determination for what caused the fire, but officials investigating the blaze found the iPhone charger and cable in the building's remains. A report from the investigators states "it would appear that the phone or charger generated enough heat to ignite" a chair at the point of ignition.
The farm business previously provided sustainable farming tours and hosted kids camps, as well as providing food and other services to the local community. Following the fire, the family claim they were too overwhelmed to continue operating their vegetable delivery program, refunding customers who could not be provided the service, as well as cancelling plans for celebrity chef dinners and school tours.
The family started to build a new home on the site in August 2017, but despite working to dig trenches and divert power and water, Mrs. Finley worries there are not enough financial resources to complete the construction. "We might lose this house that we are building with our own hands," she suggests.
So far, the family has received an insurance payout of $600,000, but this reportedly did not cover all costs. It is claimed the uninsured losses, including loss of revenue from the farm and tour business, building costs, and mediation, total another $600,000, which the family wants Apple to pay.
Mrs. Finley started to ask Apple for help since February 2017, but says she has failed to get anywhere with the company after multiple conversations with Apple's case worker. The Finleys claim that an adversarial relationship has erupted between the insurers, The Co-operators, and Apple regarding the incident, with Apple refusing to engage further until it gets an opportunity to examine the iPhone and charging gear that is currently being held by a third-party forensics company.
After a year of communicating directly with Apple and not getting a result, the family has since turned to taking Apple to task in public to try and get a satisfactory result. The attention-getting methods include a Change.org petition that is said to have hit 1,700 signatures within a few days of launch, and at the time of publication has exceeded 2,300 signees, as well as some interest from Facebook users.
Apple has yet to publicly comment on the affair, but did confirm to the CBC that it was looking into the couple's situation.
Remains of iPhone charging cable, from the Township of Langley Fire Department Field Report
Cathy and Ian Finley of Langley, B.C. were forced to close their farm business after the late-2016 house fire, which they blame on the cable and the three-month-old iPhone 6, which was left charging in their living room, reports CBC. Cathy Finley advises it was charging unattended, as she plugged it in before leaving the building to feed goats, later spotting the house on fire.
On arriving back to the house, the fire was too large to get neat to the structure, forcing Mrs. Finley to go to a neighbor for assistance.
There has yet to be an official determination for what caused the fire, but officials investigating the blaze found the iPhone charger and cable in the building's remains. A report from the investigators states "it would appear that the phone or charger generated enough heat to ignite" a chair at the point of ignition.
The farm business previously provided sustainable farming tours and hosted kids camps, as well as providing food and other services to the local community. Following the fire, the family claim they were too overwhelmed to continue operating their vegetable delivery program, refunding customers who could not be provided the service, as well as cancelling plans for celebrity chef dinners and school tours.
The family started to build a new home on the site in August 2017, but despite working to dig trenches and divert power and water, Mrs. Finley worries there are not enough financial resources to complete the construction. "We might lose this house that we are building with our own hands," she suggests.
So far, the family has received an insurance payout of $600,000, but this reportedly did not cover all costs. It is claimed the uninsured losses, including loss of revenue from the farm and tour business, building costs, and mediation, total another $600,000, which the family wants Apple to pay.
Mrs. Finley started to ask Apple for help since February 2017, but says she has failed to get anywhere with the company after multiple conversations with Apple's case worker. The Finleys claim that an adversarial relationship has erupted between the insurers, The Co-operators, and Apple regarding the incident, with Apple refusing to engage further until it gets an opportunity to examine the iPhone and charging gear that is currently being held by a third-party forensics company.
After a year of communicating directly with Apple and not getting a result, the family has since turned to taking Apple to task in public to try and get a satisfactory result. The attention-getting methods include a Change.org petition that is said to have hit 1,700 signatures within a few days of launch, and at the time of publication has exceeded 2,300 signees, as well as some interest from Facebook users.
Apple has yet to publicly comment on the affair, but did confirm to the CBC that it was looking into the couple's situation.
Comments
Without a doubt, Apple should offer a free cable. They should not have their customer continue to use bogus 3rd party cables. If they don't let Apple see it, one might assume that's the case.
edit* this article states the cause of fire is as yet undetermined, yet the family claim to have a fire report explicitly blaming the iphone left on charge? hmmm
OMG, how incredibly unreasonable! Apple should just write them a check. Who are they to ask to see the evidence that they are at fault? /s
Edit: ah, I suppose the theory is that the charger sent too much power to the phone and the phone overheated not that the charger itself overheated. That seems plausible.
Note: I've worked with Transport Canada in the past doing vehicle fire investigations, so have some experience in this and also in the language fire department officials use and what it means.
The iPhone is in the possession of an "independent forensics company" and Apple has indeed not had a chance to examine it yet. If they refuse to hand over the iPhone it's probably because they know it wasn't the cause. If they had determined the iPhone was in fact faulty, then I'm quite sure they would have released that information. For now the cause is "undetermined". I wonder if this company even has the engineering expertise to examine something as complex as an iPhone and even come up with a cause.
When we finished an investigation (which would be very well documented since we know we might not get another chance to examine the vehicle) we never prevented others from looking at it. In fact, at times there might be more than one investigation. I've been at an insurance facility looking at a vehicle when another investigator from a different firm showed up to also do their own investigation. We weren't allowed to talk to each other to avoid influence, but at no time did I ever come across a situation where access would be denied.
This forensics company could allow Apple to send an engineer to examine it in their presence if they wanted. This is also a common practice I've witnessed before when dealing with independent insurance companies. Bottom line: There's absolutely no excuse to prevent Apple from also having a look at this device.
There was also a notebook involved, "it would appear that the phone or charger generated enough heat to ignite the leather chair and notebook and start the fire." This comment was followed up by "The cellphone was on a combustible surface while charging. It was in the area of origin but was not ruled out or determined to be the igniting object or direct cause of the fire,". They like to focus on the first part of the comment while ignoring the clarification made later. I can't find further details on exactly how the notebook was involved, but it's an interesting fact many people are leaving out. Were the iPhone and notebook stacked on top of each other?
Product liability is typically only limited to the value of the product itself. Exceptions to this would include product defects. In the automotive trade a vehicle fire would be paid out by the insurance company. They may (depending on circumstances) ask for a detailed analysis of the fire and if there's a defect (perhaps a precursor to a full recall), then the insurance company may go after the manufacturer for their costs. The majority of the time insurance just pays out the claim for the fire and leaves it at that. That said, if the iPhone did in fact cause the fire, Apple would not be responsible unless it can be proven that there's a known defect with the iPhone that makes them more dangerous than similar products. This will be practically impossible to prove given the very low incidents of fires and the hundreds of millions of iPhones out there.
This will go nowhere for this family. While I feel bad for what happened, they should have had additional insurance coverage to cover their business. Now they're just lashing out trying to shame Apple into helping them out.
If you have information that can help them then why are you posting here instead of giving a deposition?
It also sounds like the family failed to have proper insurance to cover the property and did not have insure for lose of incoming due to the business these are all common insurance to have.
Going after Apple on this is going to be tough since it is no difference in a wires and plugs in your wall, they fail all of the time, and you can not sue them unless you can prove the manufacturer had design defect, not a break down on the material from normal usage.