Dutch court forces Apple to refund Iphone

[CaptainGazzz]

Quote

Who to buys an iPhone that is showing defects within the warranty period, does not have to accept a replacement refurbished model. The court of Amsterdam determined that. Apple needs to refund a woman the price of a new iPhone.

The Amsterdam Subdistrict Court granted the woman the right on Friday. "A buyer should not expect that a 799 euro Iphone fails after 8 months beyond repair," said the court. What also played a part, is the fact that Apple has not disputed the fact that the problem lays with the iPhone itself.

The Subdistrict made the judgement that Apple must pay the full amount of 799 euros to the woman, as the sale was legally dissolved. Apple also has to pay the legal fees.

I agree, Apple should not refund a Iphone that failed beyond repair with a refurbished model. You never know how the previous owner used his device. Your own Iphone should be repaired and of that is not possible you should get a new one, or the current price of your device. I feel that now that the warranty period is 2 years by law the consumer is well protected against bad products.

 

What do you think?

 

Translated

Original (Dutch)

 

[goodtofufriday]

The fact they replace phones in warranty periods with refurbs always bothered me. Hope this sets precedent in america. 

[samcool55]

If it's broken and they can't repair it they should give you a new one tbh...

That's what i think the best option, the customer gets proper warranty cover with that and the manufacturer doesn't potentially lose a customer.

 

I won't be suprised that the customer buys something else when he/she receives a refund.

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

13 minutes ago, CaptainGazzz said:

I agree, Apple should not refund a Iphone that failed beyond repair with a refurbished model. You never know how the previous owner used his device. Your own Iphone should be repaired and of that is not possible you should get a new one, or the current price of your device. I feel that now that the warranty period is 2 years by law the consumer is well protected against bad products.

 

What do you think?

 

Translated

Original (Dutch)

 

I would rather have them give me a brand new unit instead if they've repaired it once and it still fails within the warranty period. If it you bought a refurbished unit, same thing applies except the replacement will be with another refurbished unit. In fact, this shouldn't even be a topic of discussion. That is how RMAs should've been done in the first place.

[CaptainGazzz]

2 minutes ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

I would rather have them give me a brand new unit instead if they've repaired it once and it still fails within the warranty period. If it you bought a refurbished unit, same thing applies except the replacement will be with another refurbished unit.

I think this goes a bit too far. If people want a new one they will just break it on purpose.

[AresKrieger]

I think apple should just burn to the ground so we can have a nice bonfire at their headquarters  

 

But really you should not have to accept a refurbished model if they can't fix yours, apple can suck it.

2 minutes ago, CaptainGazzz said:

I think this goes a bit too far. If people want a new one they will just break it on purpose.

Same can be said for a full refund

[CaptainGazzz]

5 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

If it's broken and they can't repair it they should give you a new one tbh...

That's what i think the best option, the customer gets proper warranty cover with that and the manufacturer doesn't potentially lose a customer.

 

I won't be suprised that the customer buys something else when he/she receives a refund.

Wouldn't that be better, if you had bad experiences with a brand you should buy from another brand. It kinda forces Apple to have a good refunding process, if its not good people will use the money to buy another phone. 

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

4 minutes ago, CaptainGazzz said:

I think this goes a bit too far. If people want a new one they will just break it on purpose.

If they break it on purpose, that sort of damage won't be covered under warranty. So cosmetic, and water damage for example is definitely not covered.

[goodtofufriday]

5 minutes ago, CaptainGazzz said:

I think this goes a bit too far. If people want a new one they will just break it on purpose.

Good luck breaking it in a way that falls under apples warranty. Even accidental warranty coverage its hard to prove it was an accident with severe damage

[laminutederire]

7 minutes ago, CaptainGazzz said:

I think this goes a bit too far. If people want a new one they will just break it on purpose.

Warranty doesn't apply if you break it on purpose!

[CaptainGazzz]

3 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

I think apple should just burn to the ground so we can have a nice bonfire at their headquarters  

 

But really you should not have to accept a refurbished model if they can't fix yours, apple can suck it.

Same can be said for a full refund

That is true, but I think the court kinda did it as a punishment for Apple. They should just give a new device, they don't have to give a full refund.

[samcool55]

2 minutes ago, CaptainGazzz said:

Wouldn't that be better, if you had bad experiences with a brand you should buy from another brand. It kinda forces Apple to have a good refunding process, if its not good people will use the money to buy another phone. 

Yea it would be for the consumer, but i'm not sure it would be ideal...

I won't be suprised if the refund thing was how it should be done a lot of stuff that is completely broken won't be recognized as completely broken or it's the users fault.

 

I don't know but i'm not completely sure if refunding would work properly... Would be good for the consumer tho.

[GER_T4IGA]

Poll has no option for:
They should always repair your device and give it back to you, if not possible a brand new device or a refund
A completely new device would be fine. Anything below is just unlawful and also dick move. To be fair I woudl prefere money in that case just so I would never have to own a device that might die on my BEYOND REPAIR 8 MONTHS AFTER PURCHASE!

[Sors]

35 minutes ago, GER_T4IGA said:

Poll has no option for:
They should always repair your device and give it back to you, if not possible a brand new device or a refund

This should be the way they deal with warranties.    I bet that even if they gave 2 phones to someone they would still not be losing money.

[Sauron]

I disagree with the decision. Factory defects happen. Unless the phone has an engineering flaw that makes it not as advertised or causes predictable failures, the customer has no right to a refund. You send the defective phone in and you get in return exactly what you purchased.

 

A refurbished phone is functionally identical to a new one, most of the time aesthetically as well. There is no ground upon which to demand a refund - refunds should only be given if the product is not as advertised. Furthermore it's much faster to get a different phone that was refurbished than to wait for yours to be repaired, and I don't think a lot of people here would be willing to wait for a week without their phone.

39 minutes ago, GER_T4IGA said:

Poll has no option for:
They should always repair your device and give it back to you, if not possible a brand new device or a refund
A completely new device would be fine. Anything below is just unlawful and also dick move. To be fair I woudl prefere money in that case just so I would never have to own a device that might die on my BEYOND REPAIR 8 MONTHS AFTER PURCHASE!

Why should you get a new one? You used the phone for 8 months, did you not? Why should you expect something better than what you hand in (aside from not being broken)?

 

Of course if something like this happened to me I'd like to get a new device or a refund (so I could even buy a newer model), but that doesn't mean I should.

 

I also love how the court brought in the price, as if just the high cost was a 100% guarantee that it could not have a factory defect. If people buy stuff based on how high the price is they deserve all the garbage they get.

[NumLock21]

Any Dutch here to do a better translation? Google translates sucks, and it sounds like the woman bought a new phone but it was defective, and Apple fail to resolve the problem until 8 months later, by giving the woman a refurbished unit instead.

 

Quote

"The case involved a woman who bought an iPhone 6 Plus in December 2014 for 799 euros. The smartphone did not start in August 2015.Apple failed to fix the device, after which the company offered the woman a refurbished model instead. "

 

If that's how it went, i want a brand new phone too or a complete refund.

[TetraSky]

Don't most manufacturer give you a refurb unit when you RMA something? I thought this was normal to do, they either repair your unit or give you another one that was fully repaired and free of defect.

In any case, I fear that this may create a precedent that may end up affecting other manufacturers too. This could result in price increase for nearly everything if they always have to give you a brand new unit each time you RMA something... Either that or we might see warranty periods drastically cut down.

Just imagine a PC component manufacturer, considering how small a profit margin they already make on each unit, this would kill them if they had to give you a brand new video card when yours failed after 2 and a half years, with the card having a 3 years warranty.

[BuckGup]

They make so much on them they can spare giving you another

[CaptainGazzz]

24 minutes ago, Sauron said:

I disagree with the decision. Factory defects happen. Unless the phone has an engineering flaw that makes it not as advertised or causes predictable failures, the customer has no right to a refund. You send the defective phone in and you get in return exactly what you purchased.

 

A refurbished phone is functionally identical to a new one, most of the time aesthetically as well. There is no ground upon which to demand a refund - refunds should only be given if the product is not as advertised. Furthermore it's much faster to get a different phone that was refurbished than to wait for yours to be repaired, and I don't think a lot of people here would be willing to wait for a week without their phone.

-snip-

Why should you get a new one? You used the phone for 8 months, did you not? Why should you expect something better than what you hand in (aside from not being broken)?

 

Of course if something like this happened to me I'd like to get a new device or a refund (so I could even buy a newer model), but that doesn't mean I should.

 

I also love how the court brought in the price, as if just the high cost was a 100% guarantee that it could not have a factory defect. If people buy stuff based on how high the price is they deserve all the garbage they get.

A refurbished phone may be functionally the same, but electronics tend to fail faster when they are used more intensively. You wouldn't want to swap your GPU for a gpu that was used for 24/7 bitcoin mining. 

 

I agree that they shouldn't have brought in the price. It doesn't matter, the same law applies to a $50 phone. I think the judge tried to make a point.

I may have not made this clear in the post, but I don't think you need to get a refund, a new device would suffice by law.

[CaptainGazzz]

8 minutes ago, TetraSky said:

Don't most manufacturer give you a refurb unit when you RMA something? I thought this was normal to do, either repair your unit or give you another one that was fully repaired and free of defect.

In any case, I fear that this may create a precedent that may end up affecting other manufacturers too. This could result in price increase for nearly everything if they always have to give you a brand new unit each time you RMA something... Either that or we might see warranty periods drastically cut down.

Yep, i'm pretty sure it is.

I agree, the price would probably increase. The manufacturer would also be left with a bunch of refurbished devices that they can't sell.

[Sauron]

26 minutes ago, CaptainGazzz said:

A refurbished phone may be functionally the same, but electronics tend to fail faster when they are used more intensively. You wouldn't want to swap your GPU for a gpu that was used for 24/7 bitcoin mining. 

 

I agree that they shouldn't have brought in the price. It doesn't matter, the same law applies to a $50 phone. I think the judge tried to make a point.

I may have not made this clear in the post, but I don't think you need to get a refund, a new device would suffice by law.

You gave in an used phone, why should you get anything other than a used (but working) phone? Phones aren't used for bitcoin and the chances of its electronics failing only because of prolonged usage are incredibly low. Even gpus used for mining would probably be just fine and trustworthy if they hadn't been overheating. As linus showed in a recent video there is no measurable performance or functionality degradation in their 6 year old gtx 480, a card that has been used and tortured to the extreme.

 

Let's not make a fuss about a refurbished phone. It even helps the environment, if only a little.

[othertomperson]

56 minutes ago, Sauron said:

I disagree with the decision. Factory defects happen. Unless the phone has an engineering flaw that makes it not as advertised or causes predictable failures, the customer has no right to a refund. You send the defective phone in and you get in return exactly what you purchased.

 

So if I buy a CPU from Intel, or a GPU from MSI and that arrives to me already dead, I should not have recourse for a refund because "factory defects happen"? Under the law this thing could stop working for any reason during the first year of ownership bar me destroying it myself and I am entitled to a refund.

[NumLock21]

Lots of details are missing from the article.

[elfensky]

Wait, they give you refurb units instead of new ones when you come for a repair? Whatthefuck.jpg. Every single company I ever went to either repaired my own device or gave me a sealed new item.

[THawkSonYo]

If it starts bad it has a high likely hood of ending bad, therefore if the item is straight up defective out of the box, just get a refund, not attempts at repairs thank you. Being a defective unit who knows what else may be defective in the said unit, why take the chance. As the customer they want your money, and one should never settle for anything less than 100%, and a fixed defective unit is not 100% (it could be a ticking time bomb). When they receive their payment for the item i am sure it is going to be 100% right and not refurbished etc. Stand up for your rights. i come for new and pay for new, give me new, not a fixed new which by definition is refurbished.

 

They can take it, fix it and sell it as a refurbished unit after i get my money back, or they replace it with a brand new unit.

 

Money back or Replacement with new unit.