Apple Fined Another $260,000 By Italian Regulators Over AppleCare Practices

[cosmichobo]

Apple obviously know that their products will last 3 years without failure - most of the time - hence their selling AppleCare in the first place. Rather than respecting civilised nations' consumer protection laws, they choose to attempt to us pay their insurance against the percentage of products that do fail in that time.

Clever business management...

Even cleverer that they've convinced so many that it's a good idea.

Of course, some nations lack strong consumer protection, placing more importance on businesses being able to do whatever they like, regardless of their citizens.

For the record, yep, that's you, United States of America.

[HelveticaRoman]

Any company that is selling electronic goods they expect might not last for two two years really should not be in business at all. To then profit from it seems doubly perverse.

[SimonTheSoundMa]

Originally Posted by rmwebs

I had an argument with an employee in the London (Oxford Street) Apple store when buying my last mac from there. He was adamant that I would only be covered for a year without Applecare, and refused to acknowledge that there is a 2 year warranty as per EU law.

The Apple sales assistant was totally correct.

You totally misunderstand all of this.

It is not an EU law, but a Directive. A Directive is between the EU and governments, not between you and the retailer.

Sales of Goods Act is between you and the retailer, and it is not a guarantee in any way, it basically keeps a binding contract with you and the retailer for 6 years, if a fault occurs they must fix it but not always for free. Apple offer repair for free for the first 1 year for any fault, which is above and beyond SOGA already, and you can make this 3 years with Apple Care.

A product under SOGA however must be "durable", this is where SOGA becomes a grey area. A £1,500 MacBook should last longer than one year, perhaps 2, or 3. If it was to break down after 3 years and you went to the small claims court and stated Apple MacBooks are premium products, you believe should last longer than 3 years, you used the product in a normal manner, then you may win the case. If it was a £20 pair of Apple earbuds you probably wont win. If the MacBook was 5 years old, your chances of winning may be as low as the earbuds.

[applesith]

Between the extended warranty entitlement, VAT and other taxes; Europeans on here wonder why the prices are more than a straight conversion?

[MarcelEdward]

Originally Posted by Kaibelf

Oh for the love of GOD. Can't the EU inform their OWN citizen about such a major law? Instead they have their hands out because Apple isn't doing it for them? Apple's not lying by offering an extended warranty, and there needs to be a limit before people should expect to at least do SOMETHING to be aware of the laws in their own country.

The 2 year is the minimum period for a warranty in every european state, so when a device gets broken in this time the company has to replace it, privided it was not the customers fault it went broken.
If the customer and the company can't get to an agreement the customer can file a complaint with ecc wich can lead to a fine for the company when it broke the law.
It looks like some italian customers were informed about their rights and took approporiate action to get their right.

[inscrewtable]

Looks like Apple will need to dip into the petty cash tin.

[brdeveloper]

Originally Posted by macsmurf

Apple should just buy Italy.

Berlusconi should just buy Apple...

...or maybe Armani. Imagine an apple with an Armani logo in the center.

[cgc]

Originally Posted by gpat

Uh, they are already covering that fine by selling 16GB iPhones 5 at 739€ ($973) over here.

Most other corporations do the same and pass their costs on to the consumer. Do you think you ever truly get something for nothing?

[gpat]

Originally Posted by cgc

Most other corporations do the same and pass their costs on to the consumer. Do you think you ever truly get something for nothing?

Well, your argument makes sense, but the thing is that Apple products over here are just plainly overpriced. By a lot.
I bought a Galaxy Note 2 for 480€, and that includes sales tax. I don't think Apple couldn't afford a similar pricing, but they prefer to bloat prices in order to lock you up in 30-month contracts with carriers.
That's nothing like the Apple I liked once.

[cosmichobo]

Originally Posted by gpat

Well, your argument makes sense, but the thing is that Apple products over here are just plainly overpriced. By a lot.
I bought a Galaxy Note 2 for 480€, and that includes sales tax. I don't think Apple couldn't afford a similar pricing, but they prefer to bloat prices in order to lock you up in 30-month contracts with carriers.
That's nothing like the Apple I liked once.

Really?

Here in Australia, Apple products have always come at a premium price tag.

Only in the past year or 2 have they at least been comparatively priced to the US - though still a very much premium product compared to other tech companies offerings.

[gpat]

Originally Posted by cosmichobo

Really?

Here in Australia, Apple products have always come at a premium price tag.

Only in the past year or 2 have they at least been comparatively priced to the US - though still a very much premium product compared to other tech companies offerings.

That's not it.
I can take pricing a step over the competition, but I could buy 3 Galaxy Note 3s for the price of 2 iPhone 5s. And I would still have leftover money.
And the progress of the Apple products is not light years ahead of the competition like it once was. Considering that, I would expect a different type of pricing.
Everything changed. For the worst.

[steveza]

Originally Posted by charlieegan3

I got shot down in flames the last time I suggested this but...

I think there should be a separate legal 'blog' that covers all of these disputes.

Brilliant idea ... you would need to prove that you have a law degree before posting there too

[charlieegan3]

Originally Posted by steveza

Brilliant idea ... you would need to prove that you have a law degree before posting there too

Sarcasm aside, what would be so wrong with a legal case blog?

[steveza]

Originally Posted by charlieegan3

Sarcasm aside, what would be so wrong with a legal case blog?

No sarcasm intended - a number of people post complete garbage on threads like these and while the debate is interesting at a certain level, it would be better if people without any clue at all didn't comment. Maybe the law degree bit is somewhat excessive but something along those lines just to weed out the nutters

[Plutonius]

Originally Posted by DerSnap

I for one think a company with profits well in the billions should be obligated to follow the laws that are set force in the market they agree to sell in.

So now the Italian customers get a 90 day Apple warranty, can't purchase Applecare even if they want to, and can't get a product fixed after 6 months unless they can prove a prior defect in the product. I agree 100% that Apple needs to obey the laws of the country so I can't argue with the outcome. I do however think that it's a lose for the Italian customer.

[gnasher729]

Originally Posted by Plutonius

So now the Italian customers get a 90 day Apple warranty, can't purchase Applecare even if they want to, and can't get a product fixed after 6 months unless they can prove a prior defect in the product. I agree 100% that Apple needs to obey the laws of the country so I can't argue with the outcome. I do however think that it's a lose for the Italian customer.

What about Italian Dell customers? While Apple _has_ displayed references to Italians consumer laws on its website, Dell does no such thing. They sell you extended warranties on top of their one year manufacturer's warranty without mentioning any consumer laws. In addition, consumer laws are about the relationship between consumer and seller; Apple or Sony are sometimes the seller and sometimes they are not, a company like Samsung is never the seller (as far as I know), but Dell is _always_ the seller. You can't buy a Dell product unless you buy from Dell. Therefore, consumer laws _always_ apply when you buy a Dell product, but Dell _never_ tells you.

[k995]

Originally Posted by bma

It's correct. It comes with a 2 year warranty, but a 1 year "Apple Limited Warranty".

The two are very different things - the EU warranty is similar to the warranty provided by the Sale of Goods Act in the UK - we're covered for 6 years, but you try claiming anything after 6 months - it's near on impossible, takes ages, and requires you to "prove" there was an inherent fault.

That's the key different - Apple's warranty (1 year) provides cover for all faults that develop - the EU warranty provides coverage for 2 years for faults that were present at the time of purchase. I think the italian regulator just needed some $$$.

Noty true, my 6 month old iphone 3g with the fine cracks (an product fault as many had simular issues) was not replaced under warrenty

The warranty by apple in the EU is a lot less then in the USA. I think its mainly because the EU has a lot more apple resellers and a lot less apple stores. APpe and the resellers play a blame the other game wich leaves a customer with either a heavy bill or a faulty product.

Wich is why i practicly stopped buying apple products .

----------

Originally Posted by gnasher729

What about Italian Dell customers? While Apple _has_ displayed references to Italians consumer laws on its website, Dell does no such thing. They sell you extended warranties on top of their one year manufacturer's warranty without mentioning any consumer laws.

Doesnt matter they sell extra on site warrenty, wich is something different.

The apple warranty is the one you already have, its in fact paying twice for the same. APple if they want can sell the same on site warrenty without a problem.

[Tee1up]

LOL! Awesome.

Originally Posted by gpat

I love it when fanboys bash an entire country for enforcing a law that's beneficial to customers.

[throttlemeister]

Originally Posted by weckart

If that is the case, then NL law differs markedly from that in in most of the EU in that the burden of proof does not shift from the seller to the buyer after six months. In most other countries, a simple statement from the buyer that the product has not been misused is not enough. Not all misuse leading to failure is apparent and may require independent examination. In other words, hassle, cost and delay in obtaining redress.

Since this is a consumer protection law, and consumers are not experts able to determine the cause of a problem nor can they expected to be, the lawmaker and courts assume that any apparatus that fails within the minimum expected life while being subjected to normal every day use of said device, must have had a fault already present at the time of sale unless the seller can prove mis-use or damage caused by the consumer.

You could argue for or against consumer protection laws, but if you are going to have consumer protection laws, imo this is the way to go. Making consumers jump through hoops or make them prove facts they are in no position to judge against big corporations with their high dollar lawyers is not exactly consumer protection.

[iMikeT]

Originally Posted by weckart

Your first order of business should be to get an education. The Vatican is an independent state. It is not "in" Italy so you would not be getting a piece of Italy.

Vatican City is a landlocked sovereignty, an independent state within a state, that Constantine gave them within the borders of Italy. Contrary to your point, it is in fact inside Italy.

[gnasher729]

Originally Posted by k995

Doesnt matter they sell extra on site warrenty, wich is something different.

The apple warranty is the one you already have, its in fact paying twice for the same. APple if they want can sell the same on site warrenty without a problem.

Doesn't matter, because Dell sells longer (2 year) warranty without telling people that they may have the right to a free repair anyway. That's the whole argument between Italy and Apple: When Apple sells Apple Care, the customer should be told exactly what they are paying for, and they are paying for the difference between their rights through standard manufacturer's warranty plus consumer rights on one side, and Apple Care on the other side.

The same applies to Dell, you get manufacturer's warranty automatically, and then you can buy for extended warranty. Many people will not care for the "on site" part but just want the extra time, and they get cheated. What I can't quite understand is why you are defending Dell here, who is clearly acting worse than Apple, but apparently nobody in Italy cares. Or they do care, but any fines against Dell don't make the news. Which is also quite possible.

Originally Posted by MarcelEdward

The 2 year is the minimum period for a warranty in every european state, so when a device gets broken in this time the company has to replace it, privided it was not the customers fault it went broken.

You need to be a bit more precise.

If you buy an iPhone, and three days later some thug grabs your phone, throws it hard on the ground, and smashes it, that is clearly not the customer's fault, but Apple is clearly under no obligation to replace it. The _seller_ (not the manufacturer) has to fix it if the fault _was present_ when you received the device ("fault" means "badly made", not doesn't work. A part designed to work for three years that is badly manufactured and therefore breaks after 15 months is faulty from day one). And there is the small detail that after more than six months the customer has to prove the fault was there.

You don't have the right to a replacement; the device can be repaired, and if it can't be repaired, you can get your money back with possibly a deduction for the use that you had.

Calling your consumer rights "warranty" is very, very misleading. "Warranty" is what a company gives you voluntarily. It is totally independent of your statutory rights that you have as a consumer against the seller. That is always confusing people.

And a very important point: Who is "the company" that you are talking about? If you go to an Apple Store and buy an iPad and an Epson printer, and then you go to PCWorld and buy a Mac Mini and a Samsung monitor, who is "the company"? In this situation, Apple, Epson and Samsung will be each giving you some amount of manufacturer's warranty. Completely voluntarily. On the other hand, the Apple Store and the PCWorld store are responsible for your statutory rights.

Originally Posted by theelysium

This doesn't make sense. If their countries have a national law that states all products have 2 year warranties, then what does Apple need to advertise? Everyone should already know it's law that ALL their products have 2 year warranties.

It's more complicated than that, but not much. First, Apple doesn't have to give any warranty. The _seller_ of a product on the other hand is responsible that products are useful for a reasonable time. And you are supposed to know that as a consumer. The problem is selling extended warranties or Apple Care. Apple Care doesn't actually give you three years warranty: It gives you three years warranty, minus whatever rights you had anyway. Therefore a company must tell customers about their rights _when they sell additional warranty or Apple Care_. (I don't know if they do it, but for exactly the same reason companies selling insurance for your phone should probably tell you that your phone might be covered by your home insurance, by travel insurance etc. )

[Ronin72]

Originally Posted by ikramerica

That's the crux. AppleCare offers 2 years of phone support, 2 years of "bring it in and we will repair it or just replace it", 2 years of advice. The original warranty offers various lengths of that from 90 days to 1 year.

The EU, Italian, UK warranties are not the same. Apple is not required to offer 2 years of free phone support, let alone 1. Nor is walk-in service required. There is a bare minimum Apple must do under those laws, generally far lower a standard than their own warranty.

Apple's problem is that they need to make clear that the EU (others) offers a very limited extended warranty in terms of scope and remedy. Then offer to sell a more COMPREHENSIVE warranty with better terms.

And make no mistake, AppleCare and AppleCare plus are very good programs, very much a "no questions asked" service unless there are clear signs of abuse or damage that obviously caused the problem. I've had plenty of dinged and dented laptops taken in for repair without question because it was obvious that the dings and dents didn't cause the issue. In my experience, they have one of the best extended warranties of any company for anything.

Edit: What the Italian regulators have done is what many governments do -- in the name of protecting citizens, they have instead harmed them by limiting options. Now AppleCare is not available in Italy, and customers are stuck with 90 days to a year from Apple + a crappy 2-year warranty from Italy. No other options. Knowing what I know about the Italian coverage, I'd still choose AppleCare...

right! i am italian and i preferr apple care program plus than standard 2 years warranty by law. on the other hand it is correct apple must say there is 2 years standardwarranty according law: firs one is due by apple as device producer; the second one is on the retailer's head. so apple must recognize the second one only if apple himself has sold device

[charlieegan3]

Originally Posted by steveza

No sarcasm intended - a number of people post complete garbage on threads like these and while the debate is interesting at a certain level, it would be better if people without any clue at all didn't comment. Maybe the law degree bit is somewhat excessive but something along those lines just to weed out the nutters

I don't see why there aren't more 'no newbie' forums. Just need 100 posts or something.

The other option (vbulletin permitting) with be to hide comment that get a large number of down votes ('the comment is hidden due to a largely negative response').

That brings in to issue with people with minority view points/views that aren't the standard/accepted ones - rather than them just being dumb.

I don't know if you can do this again but a minimum post length would help make the threads more interesting due to more developed arguments.

I certainly think there is room for a little more control on many of the forums.

[MarcelEdward]

You need to be a bit more precise.

If you buy an iPhone, and three days later some thug grabs your phone, throws it hard on the ground, and smashes it, that is clearly not the customer's fault, but Apple is clearly under no obligation to replace it. The _seller_ (not the manufacturer) has to fix it if the fault _was present_ when you received the device ("fault" means "badly made", not doesn't work. A part designed to work for three years that is badly manufactured and therefore breaks after 15 months is faulty from day one). And there is the small detail that after more than six months the customer has to prove the fault was there.

You don't have the right to a replacement; the device can be repaired, and if it can't be repaired, you can get your money back with possibly a deduction for the use that you had.

Calling your consumer rights "warranty" is very, very misleading. "Warranty" is what a company gives you voluntarily. It is totally independent of your statutory rights that you have as a consumer against the seller. That is always confusing people.

And a very important point: Who is "the company" that you are talking about? If you go to an Apple Store and buy an iPad and an Epson printer, and then you go to PCWorld and buy a Mac Mini and a Samsung monitor, who is "the company"? In this situation, Apple, Epson and Samsung will be each giving you some amount of manufacturer's warranty. Completely voluntarily. On the other hand, the Apple Store and the PCWorld store are responsible for your statutory rights.




It's more complicated than that, but not much. First, Apple doesn't have to give any warranty. The _seller_ of a product on the other hand is responsible that products are useful for a reasonable time. And you are supposed to know that as a consumer. The problem is selling extended warranties or Apple Care. Apple Care doesn't actually give you three years warranty: It gives you three years warranty, minus whatever rights you had anyway. Therefore a company must tell customers about their rights _when they sell additional warranty or Apple Care_. (I don't know if they do it, but for exactly the same reason companies selling insurance for your phone should probably tell you that your phone might be covered by your home insurance, by travel insurance etc. )

When a thug smashes your iphone, than it is the thug who is responsible for that. A theretical the thug would have to pay for it. (but thugs almost never pay, they will probably run away) Some insurances will cover such event though. I do not think apple got fined cause thay refused to replace or repair a molested iphone. It is more likely they got the fine cause they refused to replace or repair an 1,5 year old iphone with a faulty accu or memory.

The company is the company where you bought the device. It does not really matter though since EU consumer protection law apply's to all companies doing business in the EU.

[Chlloret]

Originally Posted by MarcelEdward

The 2 year is the minimum period for a warranty in every european state, so when a device gets broken in this time the company has to replace it, privided it was not the customers fault it went broken.
If the customer and the company can't get to an agreement the customer can file a complaint with ecc wich can lead to a fine for the company when it broke the law.
It looks like some italian customers were informed about their rights and took approporiate action to get their right.

All of this is compleatly wrong. Just read the directive.