Here we go again: Apple's iPhone battery service terms igniting complaints from users

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 45
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,720member
    I think your attempt here to defend Apple on this one is incredibly weak. There's also a few commenters who seem to misunderstand the complaints.

    No-one is saying that when they give their phone to Apple for a £29 battery replacement, Apple should also fix any and all other problems with the phone, within that £29 price. What they are saying, is that it is unreasonable of Apple to reject a £29 battery replacement, unless you do this other repair for £200.

    OK, you provide a fairly reasonable explanation for why Apple might not want to do the repair if the display assembly has a small chip: the display might crack during the replacement process. But the other one - what possible affect could a faulty speaker and/or mic have on the battery replacement?

    Apple is being totally unreasonable here. They should highlight the risks to the customer, and then let them decide. In the two specific cases highlighted it would be:

    For the chipped phone: Apple informs the customer that attempting to replace the battery may cause further damage to the screen, including a full crack across its face - and if that happens, it'll cost £200 to remedy. Now, the customer can decide - request they change the battery, and if they don't break the screen, it'll cost £29, but if they do break the screen and have to replace that too, it'll cost £229.

    For the faulty speaker: Apple informs the customer that diagnostics have identified a fault in the speaker/microphone. If Apple replaces the battery, the speaker/microphone may not work afterwards. Replacing just the battery, with the risk of speaker damage is £29. Replacing the battery and the speaker is £150 (or whatever, not sure I saw a price quoted for that).
    edited May 2018 muthuk_vanalingamfeudalist
  • Reply 22 of 45
    jdwjdw Posts: 742member
    airnerd said:
    nunzy said:
    Other companies do this all the time, but they pick unfairly on Apple. Typical.
    This weekend I had a windshield chip repaired.  They told me before they started there is a chance as they are trying to fix it that the crack will spread and require a new windshield.  I signed that I acknowledged that risk.  Is that what Apple is worried about as well, that they may cause more damage when trying to open/repair?  If so couldn't they have that option of a waiver signed before they open a dented case or chipped screen?

    I fully get why they won't bother with that hassle, but seems they could make these annoying trolls shut up if they were willing to pass the risk to the customer in some minor instances.  If the screen is spider-webbed then no chance, but that little nick could probably still be opened without doing more damage.  
    They could do that sure, and that's what the third-parties generally do. They just choose not to.
    Which is why a large number of Apple customers would likely do better to avoid Apple altogether and just go directly to a third-party repair shop and hope the shop has access to required parts, in spite of Apple trying to hinder the success of third party repair businesses.  Third party repair shops repair broken items in accordance with how the customer wants it repaired. But again, these shops face threats and other obstacles from Apple.

    Overblown? Not at all. Consider this recent case in Norway:

    http://www.alphr.com/apple/1009082/apple-sued-tiny-norwegian-repair-shop-lost-court-case

    But that article unfortunately does not go on to say that the independent repair shop in Norway received broken iPhones from customers which had the defective screens, and then he sent them off in bulk to China to have the cover glass replaced and then shipped back to him. So in fact nothing was being counterfeited at all and only the broken glass was being replaced, yet Apple tried to stop the repaired screens from returning to Norway.

    So independent repair shops do face rather unthinkable issues from Apple in order to, in many cases, offer better service than Apple offers insofar as the independent repair shops will repair  Apple devices in accordance with how the customer wants it to be repaired, dents, scratches, cracks and all.  

    Third-party repair shops can avoid trouble with Apple and more easily obtain certified Apple repair parts by simply becoming an Apple Authorized Service Provider,  but to do that requires payment of fees to Apple and also acceptance of Apple’s repair restrictions — the very restrictions that many customers want to get around by going to third parties in the first place. 

    Apple has every right to reject devices that are not in pristine condition, but the issue gets much murkier when they try to put a stop to third-party repair shops from offering repair services that Apple refuses.  If Apple would simply loosen their policy and allow customers to sign the legal disclaimer that the problem might be made worse if they repair only the core issue and not other issues, all of this fighting with third-party repair shops would likely go away, and more people would probably go to Apple rather than third-party repair shops.

    So Apple has the power to solve the problem quite easily. But as you said, “it chooses not to.“
    edited May 2018 muthuk_vanalingamfeudalist
  • Reply 23 of 45
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,566administrator
    mr. h said:
    I think your attempt here to defend Apple on this one is incredibly weak. There's also a few commenters who seem to misunderstand the complaints.

    No-one is saying that when they give their phone to Apple for a £29 battery replacement, Apple should also fix any and all other problems with the phone, within that £29 price. What they are saying, is that it is unreasonable of Apple to reject a £29 battery replacement, unless you do this other repair for £200.

    OK, you provide a fairly reasonable explanation for why Apple might not want to do the repair if the display assembly has a small chip: the display might crack during the replacement process. But the other one - what possible affect could a faulty speaker and/or mic have on the battery replacement?

    Apple is being totally unreasonable here. They should highlight the risks to the customer, and then let them decide. In the two specific cases highlighted it would be:

    For the chipped phone: Apple informs the customer that attempting to replace the battery may cause further damage to the screen, including a full crack across its face - and if that happens, it'll cost £200 to remedy. Now, the customer can decide - request they change the battery, and if they don't break the screen, it'll cost £29, but if they do break the screen and have to replace that too, it'll cost £229.

    For the faulty speaker: Apple informs the customer that diagnostics have identified a fault in the speaker/microphone. If Apple replaces the battery, the speaker/microphone may not work afterwards. Replacing just the battery, with the risk of speaker damage is £29. Replacing the battery and the speaker is £150 (or whatever, not sure I saw a price quoted for that).
    Nope - I covered that. The faulty speaker and mic is an accountability issue. Here, two quick sentences for you, that technicians the world around hear all the time:

    "But it worked fine before I sent it in, and now a week after I have my [z] back, it doesn't work right anymore. You broke it!"

    And like I said: Apple could do that. They have just chosen to not do it. Even with the disclaimer, it is still a legal nightmare.

    I'm sure that Apple told the customer that the speaker and the microphone failed testing. That's the modus operandi, and the procedure for it. He just chose to not do the repair, and go to a third party -- which is his right.
    edited May 2018
  • Reply 24 of 45
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,720member

    I'm sure that Apple told the customer that the speaker and the battery were failed. That's the modus operandi, and the procedure for it. He just chose to not do the repair, and go to a third party -- which is his right.
    Apple didn't give him a choice, they said that he *must* pay them to fix the speaker and microphone, in order for them to also replace the battery for £29. I say that this is exceptionally poor customer service and it's disappointing that you defend such a move.

    It's very simple, Apple gets the customer to sign an acknowledgement that they have been informed that there's a problem with the speaker/mic, and that if the customer gets Apple to replace the battery, Apple can't be held responsible for what happens to the speaker/mic. Apple being difficult with all customers, to protect themselves from the odd unreasonable/balshy customer, is not acceptable IMHO.
    muthuk_vanalingamfeudalistsingularity
  • Reply 25 of 45
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,566administrator
    mr. h said:

    I'm sure that Apple told the customer that the speaker and the battery were failed. That's the modus operandi, and the procedure for it. He just chose to not do the repair, and go to a third party -- which is his right.
    Apple didn't give him a choice, they said that he *must* pay them to fix the speaker and microphone, in order for them to also replace the battery for £29. I say that this is exceptionally poor customer service and it's disappointing that you defend such a move.

    It's very simple, Apple gets the customer to sign an acknowledgement that they have been informed that there's a problem with the speaker/mic, and that if the customer gets Apple to replace the battery, Apple can't be held responsible for what happens to the speaker/mic. Apple being difficult with all customers, to protect themselves from the odd unreasonable/balshy customer, is not acceptable IMHO.
    I'm not defending Apple per se. This is my opinion having worked service for a long time, just the same as disapproving of Apple killing the AirPort was as well from a consumer perspective was mine as well.

    It just takes a certain amount of jerks spewing "YOU BROKE IT" nonsense, or somebody else trying to slip by "this is a warranty failure!" when it's clearly water damage or similar to change your mind. There are repairs that it isn't worth you doing, and letting somebody else handle, at every level of business. Difficult service customers aren't uncommon -- nobody likes to have broken gear.

    It's very simple on a single-store scale. It is notably less so on a 503-store and online service options one.
    edited May 2018
  • Reply 26 of 45
    TheStemGroupTheStemGroup Posts: 3unconfirmed, member
    I am finding Appleinsider very pro-Apple corporate and very Anti-Apple User as of late.. have to wonder why! I own one of those 3rd party repair depots you folks continually throw under the bus like we are mouth breathing luddites. Let me tell you of my over 20 years of experience supporting and fixing nearly every single product Apple has brought to market. From LC series to Xserves, 3GS iPhones to Retina MacBook Pros. I have more knowledge then the vast majority of those Genius bar folks. I have worked for multiple authorized dealers, I've even owned my own Value Added Reseller even. I started a "3rd Party Repair Depot" solely because of the ridiculous restrictions Apple puts on repairs. I have to ask, at what point are you going to finally think Apple has gone to far? How about instead of spouting off about rules and such, you try to identify with the customer for a second. No matter what the customer did, there should be some solution from Apple. That iMac Pro situation mention is absolute highway robbery! It is completely unacceptable that Apple refuses to fix that thing. Regardless of who touched it, there is no way they should simply deny service all together. It would hurt absolutely NO ONE to repair that unit and charge the customer up the backside for it. This is why companies and parties like me are in support of Right To Repair Laws... because companies are becoming very overbearing when it comes to repairing their stuff. WE as the public bought it, WE should have the right to have it fixed. Now, I'm not an idiot, if a customer brings in a DIY repair, I tell them straight up, there is a chance you may have damaged it further, so there is no promise I can fix it... but AT LEAST I TRY. You can talk about tolerances and such till you are blue in the face, deal with all the issues and charge the customer for it... but don't be [email protected]@holes about it. I'm sorry, but a chip and a small dent WILL not affect the battery. No will the speakers or microphone. What will? A damaged docking connector a broken screen perhaps. But this is like refusing to replace the customers taillight because there is a dent in the front bumper. For the record, there are plenty of 3rd party outfits out there not worth a salt, but there are others like myself that have even more expertise then the Apple Stores themselves. I have another fellow out here that is an absolute magician with micro-soldering, he can resurrect pretty much any liquid damaged system, he has circuit board diagrams and devices he's made himself that allow him to help customers FAR more then the Apple Store ever will. It's time Appleinsider give 3rd party repair depots the respect many of us deserve.
    jdwmuthuk_vanalingamHabi_tweetfeudalist
  • Reply 27 of 45
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,566administrator
    I am finding Appleinsider very pro-Apple corporate and very Anti-Apple User as of late.. have to wonder why! I own one of those 3rd party repair depots you folks continually throw under the bus like we are mouth breathing luddites. Let me tell you of my over 20 years of experience supporting and fixing nearly every single product Apple has brought to market. From LC series to Xserves, 3GS iPhones to Retina MacBook Pros. I have more knowledge then the vast majority of those Genius bar folks. I have worked for multiple authorized dealers, I've even owned my own Value Added Reseller even. I started a "3rd Party Repair Depot" solely because of the ridiculous restrictions Apple puts on repairs. I have to ask, at what point are you going to finally think Apple has gone to far? How about instead of spouting off about rules and such, you try to identify with the customer for a second. No matter what the customer did, there should be some solution from Apple. That iMac Pro situation mention is absolute highway robbery! It is completely unacceptable that Apple refuses to fix that thing. Regardless of who touched it, there is no way they should simply deny service all together. It would hurt absolutely NO ONE to repair that unit and charge the customer up the backside for it. This is why companies and parties like me are in support of Right To Repair Laws... because companies are becoming very overbearing when it comes to repairing their stuff. WE as the public bought it, WE should have the right to have it fixed. Now, I'm not an idiot, if a customer brings in a DIY repair, I tell them straight up, there is a chance you may have damaged it further, so there is no promise I can fix it... but AT LEAST I TRY. You can talk about tolerances and such till you are blue in the face, deal with all the issues and charge the customer for it... but don't be [email protected]@holes about it. I'm sorry, but a chip and a small dent WILL not affect the battery. No will the speakers or microphone. What will? A damaged docking connector a broken screen perhaps. But this is like refusing to replace the customers taillight because there is a dent in the front bumper. For the record, there are plenty of 3rd party outfits out there not worth a salt, but there are others like myself that have even more expertise then the Apple Stores themselves. I have another fellow out here that is an absolute magician with micro-soldering, he can resurrect pretty much any liquid damaged system, he has circuit board diagrams and devices he's made himself that allow him to help customers FAR more then the Apple Store ever will. It's time Appleinsider give 3rd party repair depots the respect many of us deserve.
    I've worked at many third-party repair shops, and I have never called you "mouth-breathing luddites" nor have I inferred it. It's great that you have a magician with micro-soldering, and have the experience. I know who you are, what you've done, what you can do -- and have for some time.

    All this is great. It's good that you have the experience and an opinion about it. But here's the thing -- I do too. I've been in the shops, facing the same customers, and dealing with the same problems including accountability issues with a customer not telling the whole story, or trying to slip one by to save a few bucks.

    The bottom line is Apple drew the line on what they'll service and when. You may not like it, and you're welcome to not like it -- but that's the way it is. I drew the same lines when I was making the decisions in the bays at the third party shops, and for the same reasons.

    Apple does have a solution. It's the third party shops like you. The same ones that they suggested Linus go to, and the same ones that the people in the BBC story went to.

    Also, before you start casting stones, read the commenting guidelines. We take zero money from Apple. Please don't do it again.
    edited May 2018
  • Reply 28 of 45
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,720member
    I'm not defending Apple per se. This is my opinion having worked service for a long time, just the same as disapproving of Apple killing the AirPort was as well from a consumer perspective was mine as well.

    It just takes a certain amount of jerks spewing "YOU BROKE IT" nonsense, or somebody else trying to slip by "this is a warranty failure!" when it's clearly water damage or similar to change your mind. There are repairs that it isn't worth you doing, and letting somebody else handle, at every level of business. Difficult service customers aren't uncommon -- nobody likes to have broken gear.
    It's very simple on a single-store scale. It is notably less so on a 503-store and online service options one.
    Oh come on now. Apple have astronomical margins, and literally make more money than they know what to do with. I don't begrudge them their margins or their cash horde, as long as they deliver products and customer service that is second to none. But they are failing here on the latter. They could do much, much better. They are taking the "super easy" route, when there's an only slightly more difficult path for them which would make their customers' lives much easier.

    And, you suggest that there's always the option of third-party repair, when you know full well that Apple go out of their way to make it hard for third-party repair shops to offer the best service they could. See: right-to-repair.
    edited May 2018 gatorguymuthuk_vanalingamsingularity
  • Reply 29 of 45
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,720member
    I am finding Appleinsider very pro-Apple corporate and very Anti-Apple User as of late.. have to wonder why!

    I own one of those 3rd party repair depots you folks continually throw under the bus like we are mouth breathing luddites. Let me tell you of my over 20 years of experience supporting and fixing nearly every single product Apple has brought to market. From LC series to Xserves, 3GS iPhones to Retina MacBook Pros. I have more knowledge then the vast majority of those Genius bar folks. I have worked for multiple authorized dealers, I've even owned my own Value Added Reseller even.

    I started a "3rd Party Repair Depot" solely because of the ridiculous restrictions Apple puts on repairs. I have to ask, at what point are you going to finally think Apple has gone to far? How about instead of spouting off about rules and such, you try to identify with the customer for a second. No matter what the customer did, there should be some solution from Apple.

    That iMac Pro situation mentioned is absolute highway robbery! It is completely unacceptable that Apple refuses to fix that thing. Regardless of who touched it, there is no way they should simply deny service altogether. It would hurt absolutely NO ONE to repair that unit and charge the customer up the backside for it.

    This is why companies and parties like me are in support of Right To Repair Laws... because companies are becoming very overbearing when it comes to repairing their stuff. WE as the public bought it, WE should have the right to have it fixed. Now, I'm not an idiot, if a customer brings in a DIY repair, I tell them straight up, there is a chance you may have damaged it further, so there is no promise I can fix it... but AT LEAST I TRY. You can talk about tolerances and such till you are blue in the face, deal with all the issues and charge the customer for it... but don't be [email protected]@holes about it.

    I'm sorry, but a chip and a small dent WILL not affect the battery. Nor will the speakers or microphone. What will? A damaged docking connector or a broken screen perhaps. But this is like refusing to replace the customers taillight because there is a dent in the front bumper.

    For the record, there are plenty of 3rd party outfits out there not worth a salt, but there are others like myself that have even more expertise then the Apple Stores themselves. I have another fellow out here that is an absolute magician with micro-soldering, he can resurrect pretty much any liquid damaged system, he has circuit board diagrams and devices he's made himself that allow him to help customers FAR more then the Apple Store ever will. It's time Appleinsider give 3rd party repair depots the respect many of us deserve.
    Hear! Hear! Well said - except - paragraphs are your (and especially the reader's) friend! I fixed it for you.
    gatorguy
  • Reply 30 of 45
    mike54mike54 Posts: 328member
    Apple being so picky stems from the "suing and litigation" culture in the US, which thankfully, not as yet anyway, the rest of the world hasn't copied.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 31 of 45
    Habi_tweetHabi_tweet Posts: 74member
    mike54 said:
    Apple being so picky stems from the "suing and litigation" culture in the US, which thankfully, not as yet anyway, the rest of the world hasn't copied.
    Ok, so how will that work outside the US where the opposite might happen? Private customers have better rights outside the US and protection with dealing with big companies (active measures helping private customers). Is this a cultural thing that is hard to understand for some US companies (their leaders), since its pretty well known outside US how things are there and expectations differ? Its not always optimal to solve two problems with one policy, especially if the targets are so widespread. Here Apple has drawn the line closer to US policy and are in trouble (and have been for years) because its further from expectations "outside US" == eg. EU from a legal point of view.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 32 of 45
     Appleinsider said:
    Leaving damaged parts inside an iPhone, even if the customer wants them to stay in there, is problematic from a service accountability standpoint. Failures of, say, a motherboard, after a battery repair job are often blamed on a service provider well after the repair job is over -- and there's no good way for the service provider to disprove the claim.
    OR, Apple could do what every Car Repair shop does for Car Insurance repairs... do a pre-inspection report? Just like Car Rental too, the company and the renter agree to a condition report before and after rental. This would solve any and all questions of future damage and liability.
    edited May 2018
  • Reply 33 of 45
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,566administrator
    adm1 said:
     Appleinsider said:
    Leaving damaged parts inside an iPhone, even if the customer wants them to stay in there, is problematic from a service accountability standpoint. Failures of, say, a motherboard, after a battery repair job are often blamed on a service provider well after the repair job is over -- and there's no good way for the service provider to disprove the claim.
    OR, Apple could do what every Car Repair shop does for Car Insurance repairs... do a pre-inspection report? Just like Car Rental too, the company and the renter agree to a condition report before and after rental. This would solve any and all questions of future damage and liability.
    This would be a better solution than having the front-house check it in, and it not get looked over until the service guys in back get it. This is harder to do in the second BBC example, when the device was a mail-in for service.
  • Reply 34 of 45
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 2,138member
    " Apple rejecting the repair on the grounds of a "small dent" —which Apple would fix for 200 ($272) if he had opted to do so. Landsburgh turned to a third-party repair shop to replace the battery, leaving the dented case intact." Apparently the iPhone owner, DROPPED his/her phone and was too lazy or naive to spend $50-60 for an ounce of prevention for their $400-$600 phone! Oh well! Learn to protect and take better care of stuff you buy! Otherwise, Cest' La Vie!
    Expecting all customers to spend extra money on a case to cover Apple's "beautiful design" means the device isn't designed for normal usage (calling question to fitness for purpose).

    At this point, iPhones should come with cases ... or just be designed a little more ruggedly (and more substantially, so that it doesn't slip out of a user's hand so easily, and less thin, so we don't feel the need to add cases to make them more comfortable in the hand).

    The problem is in the design. An outer shell design that is modified and completely covered by a majority of owners being compelled to put cases on them is a bad design.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 35 of 45
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,755member
    When I changed the iPhone 6 battery out of warranty at an Apple retail store, the front end staff carried out a diagnostic test followed by a visual inspection for  damage (including water damage). All of this with me overseeing the process. After that I was told it could go into the backroom for change. When I agreed to the swap, almost at the same time, I was informed of the 'buts'. They were:

    1. If any danage was found upon opening the unit I had to agree to a swap for another phone at an 'agreed' price set by Apple (already stipulated in the battery swap paperwork).

    2. The same would apply if Apple broke the phone on trying to open it or once opened. They could not guarantee that wouldn't happen due to the way the phones are designed.

    In the end everything went well and after a two hour trip to the store, a five hour wait and another two hour trip back home, the only issues I had were with how things were commumcated to me and the approx 100€ hole in my pocket.

    If batteries are going to need changing during the life of the phone, the phones should be designed with that in mind. Making something 'doable' if necessary (but with higher risk of damage during the process) is not the same as a making something 'doable' with far lower risk of damage through design.
    muthuk_vanalingamfeudalist
  • Reply 36 of 45
    fred1fred1 Posts: 316member
    Incredibly pro-Apple journalism and incredibly pro-Apple and anti-British comments. Just what I expect when I read things here. Anything anyone who isn’t American does is immediately suspect and evil and Apple can do no wrong.

    Yes, I can stop reading these articles, but I love the humor of the bias. 

    “Here we go again”, indeed.

    edited May 2018
  • Reply 37 of 45
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,566administrator
    fred1 said:
    Incredibly pro-Apple journalism and incredibly pro-Apple and anti-British comments. Just what I expect when I read things here. Anything anyone who isn’t American does is immediately suspect and evil and Apple can do no wrong.

    Yes, I can stop reading these articles, but I love the humor of the bias. 

    “Here we go again”, indeed.

    Gee, if only we hadn't taken issue with Apple discontinuing the airport, weren't the first to get numbers on the "bendgate" thing, and not done research on 2016 MacBook Pro keyboard failures! Plus, this is an editorial. Your opinion may vary.

    And, this has nothing to do with the British -- just the BBC piece on the matter.
    edited May 2018 macxpress
  • Reply 38 of 45
    airnerd said:
    nunzy said:
    Other companies do this all the time, but they pick unfairly on Apple. Typical.
    This weekend I had a windshield chip repaired.  They told me before they started there is a chance as they are trying to fix it that the crack will spread and require a new windshield.  I signed that I acknowledged that risk.  Is that what Apple is worried about as well, that they may cause more damage when trying to open/repair?  If so couldn't they have that option of a waiver signed before they open a dented case or chipped screen?

    I fully get why they won't bother with that hassle, but seems they could make these annoying trolls shut up if they were willing to pass the risk to the customer in some minor instances.  If the screen is spider-webbed then no chance, but that little nick could probably still be opened without doing more damage.  
    They could do that sure, and that's what the third-parties generally do. They just choose not to.
    Hey, Mike.  Sometimes, Apple DOES do just that.  We had an iPhone, with minor screen damage, that needed its battery replaced.  The Apple Store had no problem replacing the battery for $29, but we had to sign a waiver agreement that the screen might not survive and then we would need to pay for a screen replacement too.  (As I recall, they would not have proceeded with a screen replacement without getting further permission from us--if that became necessary.)  The waiver seemed like a very reasonable request, so we signed it.  They were able to replace the battery without further damage to the screen, and there was no additional charge.
  • Reply 39 of 45
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,566administrator
    airnerd said:
    nunzy said:
    Other companies do this all the time, but they pick unfairly on Apple. Typical.
    This weekend I had a windshield chip repaired.  They told me before they started there is a chance as they are trying to fix it that the crack will spread and require a new windshield.  I signed that I acknowledged that risk.  Is that what Apple is worried about as well, that they may cause more damage when trying to open/repair?  If so couldn't they have that option of a waiver signed before they open a dented case or chipped screen?

    I fully get why they won't bother with that hassle, but seems they could make these annoying trolls shut up if they were willing to pass the risk to the customer in some minor instances.  If the screen is spider-webbed then no chance, but that little nick could probably still be opened without doing more damage.  
    They could do that sure, and that's what the third-parties generally do. They just choose not to.
    Hey, Mike.  Sometimes, Apple DOES do just that.  We had an iPhone, with minor screen damage, that needed its battery replaced.  The Apple Store had no problem replacing the battery for $29, but we had to sign a waiver agreement that the screen might not survive and then we would need to pay for a screen replacement too.  (As I recall, they would not have proceeded with a screen replacement without getting further permission from us--if that became necessary.)  The waiver seemed like a very reasonable request, so we signed it.  They were able to replace the battery without further damage to the screen, and there was no additional charge.
    That's excellent. The 11 stores, and two corporate sources I called before I wrote the editorial say that they don't, but it's good that at least some do. That sounds similar to an account from earlier in the thread.
    edited May 2018
  • Reply 40 of 45
    toltol Posts: 8member
    I took an iPhone for the battery replacement.  When I returned to pick it up I was told that when removing the battery the tabs broke off and it was no longer safe to complete the repair.  The solution was they gave me a replacement iPhone.  Some of Apple's concern over accepting damaged phones come from safety concerns.  I recall a story about a fire starting in an apple store a while back while a battery was being replaced.  Just because a local repair shop is willing to take a risk does not mean that a 800B company that is taking care of its employees and customers, and certain to be sued should take the same risk.  Perhaps that was not the situation in this case? but everything seems to be generalized. 
    macxpress
Sign In or Register to comment.