Quebec Superior Court authorizes class action against Apple

[Sirmyself]

Yeah.... the article is in french... but it's happening in Quebec, so what did you expect?..

Basically, the Quebec Superior Court authorized a class action against Apple. The people who started the procedure evoked (among other things) planned obsolescence and unfair warranty service, which is expensive and has no benefits over the base legal warranty in Quebec.

 

Google translate actually did a pretty got job in making it readable in English, so you can give it a try: https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1226174/cour-superieure-quebec-autorise-action-collective-apple?fbclid=IwAR2nfP3YoDULxddJfsPmzzwjo31kKmexGnmpLyMQqeTxyCCe6ZwTt05t4Ug

 

Radio-Canada is the name of the news network affiliated to CBC in Quebec. CBC is the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Canada's national public broadcaster.

 

EDIT : 

English translation here: https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1083743-quebec-superior-court-authorizes-class-action-against-apple/?tab=comments#comment-12730172
Thanks to @wkdpaul for providing a translation of the article.

 

[givingtnt]

12 minutes ago, Sirmyself said:

-snip-

Ha !

We finally did something good.

 

Now can we be let in to the giveaways ?

[captain_to_fire]

@wkdpaul? 

[WkdPaul]

4 hours ago, captain_to_fire said:

@wkdpaul? 

I can try to post a translated version for those interested.

 

They're basically asking for some compensation (yet to be determined) and $300 punitive damage per person.

 

Since it was authorized (the class action, not the amounts asked), we'll probably get a registration form available soon I guess.

 

 

4 hours ago, Sirmyself said:

Radio-Canada is the name of the news network affiliated to CBC in Quebec. CBC is the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Canada's national public broadcaster.

It's actually the French division of CBC, and they're all around Canada, though the bulk of their production, and the HQ, is in Quebec. The CBC also operates some Aboriginal content under 'CBC Aboriginal'. Just thought I'd mention it.

 

 

 

EDIT : here's my translation + some explanations ;

https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1083743-quebec-superior-court-authorizes-class-action-against-apple/?tab=comments#comment-12730172

 

Edited July 18, 2019 by wkdpaul

[PixelFray]

Even that is just a drop in the bucket for Apple. So it sounds good on paper (or screen), but I doubt Apple really cares that much.

[Sirmyself]

3 hours ago, wkdpaul said:

I can try to post a translated version for those interested.

 

They're basically asking for some compensation (yet to be determined) and $300 punitive damage per person.

 

Since it was authorized (the class action, not the amounts asked), we'll probably get a registration form available soon I guess.

 

 

It's actually the French division of CBC, and they're all around Canada, though the bulk of their production, and the HQ, is in Quebec. The CBC also operates some Aboriginal content under 'CBC Aboriginal'. Just thought I'd mention it.

 

 

Good point

Edited July 18, 2019 by wkdpaul
cleanup

[Sirmyself]

On 7/18/2019 at 8:33 AM, PixelFray said:

Even that is just a drop in the bucket for Apple. So it sounds good on paper (or screen), but I doubt Apple really cares that much.

I would say they don't care at all, but if the customers win, it would be a good kick. Even if they don't, if the news spread, it may eventually end up motivating other provinces or even countries to allow the same, which will certainly make the bell ring someday and force apple to improve on their service or the lifespan of their products.

[PixelFray]

1 minute ago, Sirmyself said:

I would say they don't care at all, but if the customers win, it would be a good kick. Even if they don't, if the news spreads, it may eventually end up motivating other provinces or even countries to allow the same, which will certainly make the bell ring someday and force apple to improve on their service or the lifespan of their products.

Oh I don't disagree at all. I think it's a needed kick. I'm just on the pessimistic side and doubt it will really change anything unless these lawsuits multiply. (And I hope they do.)

[Guest]

On the "Planned Obsolescence" front I actually think Apple fare better than many of the Android based phones. At least the OS should run for 5 years to a "secure" standard. You cannot say the same about many Android devices especially on ones where side loading is prevented.

 

[Sirmyself]

41 minutes ago, Phill104 said:

On the "Planned Obsolescence" front I actually think Apple fare better than many of the Android based phones. At least the OS should run for 5 years to a "secure" standard. You cannot say the same about many Android devices especially on ones where side loading is prevented.

 

 

I tend to disagree, I had no issue at all with my Sony XPeria m4's battery or system: the earphone finally broke after the phone was dropped too many times, so I had to switch to an LG G6. If it were not for me being clumsy, I would still use my Xperia.

[Stroal]

Just let us repair  i devices without making it so damn hard to get components! My wife has a MacBook pro and that thing has caused me nothing but problems. 

[PixelFray]

1 minute ago, Stroal said:

Just let us repair  i devices without making it so damn hard to get components! My wife has a MacBook pro and that thing has caused me nothing but problems. 

Agreed. Apple's hatred of the independent repair community is nothing but shameful. What's happened with your wife's MBP?

[Stroal]

1 minute ago, PixelFray said:

Agreed. Apple's hatred of the independent repair community is nothing but shameful. What's happened with your wife's MBP?

Hard drive failure, battery issue, Wifi issue, charging port issue (which probably led to the battery issue). 

 

The nearest Apple store is 10 hours away, so it's kinda been a pain. 

[PixelFray]

Just now, Stroal said:

Hard drive failure, battery issue, Wifi issue, charging port issue (which probably led to the battery issue). 

 

The nearest Apple store is 10 hours away, so it's kinda been a pain. 

Ouch! Those issues suck but 10 hours... wow. I feel your pain.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, givingtnt said:

Ha !

We finally did something good.

 

Now can we be let in to the giveaways ?

I bet myself $10 that you'd be the first post.

Now I can't figure out if I won or lost $10...

[givingtnt]

37 minutes ago, Den-Fi said:

I bet myself $10 that you'd be the first post.

Now I can't figure out if I won or lost $10...

[nick name]

Ooooooh class action.  Take 'em to school!

[DrMacintosh]

From what I’ve heard, this class-action is related to batteries.....in which case I say, what do you want Apple to do? Change the laws of physics? Batteries degrade and you can only postpone that degradation for so long. 

[Franck]

39 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

From what I’ve heard, this class-action is related to batteries.....in which case I say, what do you want Apple to do? Change the laws of physics? Batteries degrade and you can only postpone that degradation for so long. 

That part of the claim is about the fact they program updates so that older phone reduce the battery usage and sometime completely shutdown the phone when it is still way above 30% battery life left in it. They have disabled that feature once for couple model like 2 years ago due to complain. I think that was in 2016~ish

[DrMacintosh]

2 minutes ago, Franck said:

That part of the claim is about the fact they program updates so that older phone reduce the battery usage and sometime completely shutdown the phone when it is still way above 30% battery life left in it

Apple made it so that phone with significantly degraded batteries would not shut down unexpectedly shut down. 

 

When an iPhone unexpectedly shuts down when still above 0% battery remaining, that’s because the SoC would overdraw current from the cell, causing a shutdown. In order to stop this Apple would limit the power, and in effect the performance, that the SoC could draw. Apple had been previously implementing this feature as phones aged within software updates. It’s only when word got out, that Apple made this feature optional. 

 

No features have been disabled, the phone will still automatically throttle performance to prevent a shutdown by default.The user has to manually choose if they want an unreliable phone, or a fast one. 

[Franck]

1 minute ago, DrMacintosh said:

Apple made it so that phone with significantly degraded batteries would not shut down unexpectedly shut down. 

 

When an iPhone unexpectedly shuts down when still above 0% battery remaining, that’s because the SoC would overdraw current from the cell, causing a shutdown. In order to stop this Apple would limit the power, and in effect the performance, that the SoC could draw. Apple had been previously implementing this feature as phones aged within software updates. It’s only when word got out, that Apple made this feature optional. 

 

No features have been disabled, the phone will still automatically throttle performance to prevent a shutdown by default.The user has to manually choose if they want an unreliable phone, or a fast one. 

The problem is they did that without telling the users. That's what's the claim is about. Creating a degradation experience without notice.

[DrMacintosh]

3 minutes ago, Franck said:

Creating a degradation experience without notice.

I’d argue that your phone not shutting down unexpectedly is an improvement in experience. But that’s just me. 

[WkdPaul]

For those interested, here's the article translated (it's not perfect, it's partly Google translate followed by my own corrections) ;

 

 

Quote

 

Quebec Superior Court authorizes class action against Apple

An application for a class action suit alleging that Apple has violated the Quebec Consumer Protection Act and that could affect "tens of thousands" of people in Quebec will be able to move forward.

 

The Superior Court of Quebec welcomed the process initiated last December on behalf of two plaintiffs, which evokes, among other things, the notion of planned obsolescence of devices batteries sold by the American giant.

 

Claims for compensatory damages of an amount to be determined and punitive damages of $ 300 per person are claimed.

 

A first group will represent "all consumers who have purchased since December 29, 2014" an iPhone, an Apple Watch, an iPod "and / or" a MacBook computer "with a rechargeable battery".

 

The other group concerns those who have purchased, since December 20, 2015, an extended warranty and "who were not informed of their legal warranty", at the time of purchase, of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

According to the application, "AppleCare" is no more advantageous than the legal warranty under the law and its price is disproportionately high enough to cause objective injury to all AppleCare buyers.

 

The petition had been filed with the courts after Apple had acknowledged that it had slowed down the performance of some iPhone phones.

 

The company has also accepted battery life limits for devices, iPhone 6 and 7.

 

Last March, the Superior Court allowed an application for leave to proceed.

 

The plaintiff alleged a slowdown of his smartphone, an iPhone 5, following an update.

 

This device had not been cited by Apple when the California giant had acknowledged his wrongdoing in 2017 about other smartphones.

 

 

Another point brought up is the legal warranty law that we have here in Quebec.

 

The legal warranty is something that ensures consumers "get what they pay for", while the law doesn't specify product lifetimes, it states that a product life expectancy should be reasonable given the price paid, and the conditions that apply to the use of the product. That means, a 3 years warranty on a $1000 fridge is unreasonable and the consumer can get the company to fix or replace the product even if the manufacturer's warranty doesn't apply anymore. That also means, the more you pay, the longer your'e expecting the product will last before being defective.

 

Also, before selling any extended warranty, the merchant must notify the client (verbally or in writing) of the legal warranty.

 

 

More info here ;

https://www.educaloi.qc.ca/en/capsules/legal-warranty-automatic-protection-consumers

Edited July 18, 2019 by wkdpaul

[Blademaster91]

3 minutes ago, Franck said:

The problem is they did that without telling the users. That's what's the claim is about. Creating a degradation experience without notice.

Exactly, the performance degradation without any notification to the user is really anti-consumer. If its noticeable, most people are just going to buy a new phone. IMO, Apple should be using higher capacity batteries so significantly slowing down devices wouldn't be necessary.

[givingtnt]

1 hour ago, DrMacintosh said:

From what I’ve heard, this class-action is related to batteries.....in which case I say, what do you want Apple to do? Change the laws of physics? Batteries degrade and you can only postpone that degradation for so long. 

It's based on

1. Planned obselesance (slowdowns after updates)

2. Overpriced and ridiculous paid warranties that do not go beyond what Quebec requires manufacturers to give

(Aka making people pay for what they are already owed, not something extra)

 

There may be something about batteries in there, but it's not the major item here.