Lawsuit over refurbished Apple service replacements heading to trial in August

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 27
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    I suspect that many of these so called "used, refurbished" phones are really ones that were returned to Apple during the 14 day return period and what most stores would call "open box".  Yeh, technically they are 'used' -- but not really.

    After all, I have never seen a refurbished Apple product with even the tiniest of nicks or scratches on its case -- and I find it highly unlikely that Apple is replacing screens & cases or that a used phone never got a scuff, scrape or scratch on any part of it.
  • Reply 22 of 27
    sflocal said:
    The level of entitlement that people have (and the lawyers) is just staggering.  

    I guess my mindset is just different.  If I received a refurbished model and it doesn't work, my wiring will have me go back to Apple and get another one that works.  Never would I seek a lawyer and expect a class-action lawsuit.  WTF?
    Those that can do (do what you say).
    Those that can't sue, sue and sue again
    That is the American way.

  • Reply 23 of 27
    I purchased a new iPhone that was dead after 24 hours. When I went to the Apple Store they wanted to replace it with a refurbished one instead of a new one. You think that after forking out $2K where I’m at, I am somehow entitled for wanting a new replacement!????

    Sounds like BS to me.  Why didn't you just say. "Fine, I'm returning this for a refund.  Oh and please ring of this new one for me."  Or, in this imaginary scenario, you ask "let me see the one you're proposing to give me; you look it over carefully and if there is the slightest blemish, you ask for a different one."  Is opening a shrink wrapped box that important to you?
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 24 of 27
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,924member
    I did a bit more research on this - the suit is making the claim that refurbished can never be ‘equivalent to new’ so Apple is therefore in breach of contract. Honestly, I’m not sure exactly how either side would go about proving their case. 

    not surprisingly this case is being brought by a firm that specializes in class action suits. Essentially a troll firm. 
  • Reply 25 of 27
    maximaramaximara Posts: 409member
    MplsP said:
    Totally agree with the comments above - If the warranty and/or Apple Care explicitly state that you may receive a remanufactured device then there shouldn't be much of a case. Besides - you're bringing in a used device to get it fixed, right? Why should you necessarily get a new device to replace a used one?
    I looked it up online.  Here is what Apple's main warranty says:

    "If a defect arises during the Warranty Period, Apple, at its option and to the extent permitted by law will (1) repair the product at no charge using new parts or parts that are equivalent to new in performance and reliability, (2) exchange the product with a functionally equivalent product that is new or equivalent to new in performance and reliability, or (3) refund the original purchase price. This warranty excludes damage resulting from abuse, accident, modifications or other causes that are not defects in materials and workmanship."

    The legal version says this:

    "1.3 Parts and Labor. In servicing your product, Apple may use parts or products that are new or refurbished and equivalent to new in performance and reliability."

    The use of refurbished is spelled out and the claim back in 2016 of "The word "refurbished" appears only once in the AppleCare+ terms and conditions even though the printed booklet is 33 pages long." is more misleading BS as you can see from the number this is in the third paragraph.

    More the way that is worded it heavily implies the warranty is 33 pages long. No company would ever give a warranty that is 33 normal sized pages long, not even if they were totally unhinged. In fact, the old 2005 AppleCare warranty is still online and it is at best only 5 normal sized pages long.

    The version of AppleCare quoted back then was: "If during the Coverage Period, you submit a valid claim by notifying Apple that (i) a defect in materials and workmanship has arisen in the Covered Equipment, or (ii) the capacity of a covered battery to hold an electrical charge is less than eighty percent (80%) of its original specifications, Apple will either (a) repair the defect at no charge, using new or refurbished parts that are equivalent to new in performance and reliability, or (b) exchange the Covered Equipment with a replacement product that is new or equivalent to new in performance and reliability, and is at least functionally equivalent to the original product. If Apple exchanges the Covered Equipment, the original product becomes Apple’s property and the replacement product is your property with coverage for the remaining period of the Plan."
    edited March 2021
  • Reply 26 of 27
    nicholfdnicholfd Posts: 824member
    seankill said:
    If it fails in 3 months..... I want a new one (because I bought a NEW phone). After that, refurb is fine.
    Sorry, but after 3 months your device is not new.  it is 3 months old.  You might even get lucky and get a "newer" refurbished that was only 1 month old.
  • Reply 27 of 27
    DogpersonDogperson Posts: 145member
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    So people who had their devices replaced by refurbished ones instead of a brand new one are pissed? Why? Where does the warranty agreement state that new replacements are guaranteed?
    It’s called something for nothing.
    But are the “chicks for free”?
    No, but the checks will be /s
Sign In or Register to comment.