How to make Apple test ip67 condition on iPhone 7 and 7+?

[Newtons Apple]

Good luck on fighting Apple. Their pockets are deep.

 

[MacBH928]

whats the point of advertising something as waterproof and then not covering it by warranty? This is like advertising 4K display but really it is only 1080p

 

[err404]

whats the point of advertising something as waterproof and then not covering it by warranty? This is like advertising 4K display but really it is only 1080p

As has already been said in this thread. The conundrum Apple has is that it is very hard to determine the cause of liquid damage. It is easy to exceed the design limits to force a failure and we know there are plenty of people who would take advantage of that fact for free replacements.
However that does not absolve Apple from needing to meet the advertised specs. The trick is how can a consumer prove the damage was caused by normal use? In OPs case, using the phone in the rain should have been fine. But how can he prove that was the cause?

 

[kawa636r]

Didn't you just create a thread on this a week ago, telling us the same thing? I think you did.

Yes, but now the question is different; read it better please.
[doublepost=1478256872][/doublepost]

As has already been said in this thread. The conundrum Apple has is that it is very hard to determine the cause of liquid damage. It is easy to exceed the design limits to force a failure and we know there are plenty of people who would take advantage of that fact for free replacements.
However that does not absolve Apple from needing to meet the advertised specs. The trick is how can a consumer prove the damage was caused by normal use? In OPs case, using the phone in the rain should have been fine. But how can he prove that was the cause?

They should make a diagnose, inside the store or inside their factories, to make this kinda of ip67 test possible.

 

[44267547]

Yes, but now the question is different; read it better please.
[doublepost=1478256872][/doublepost]

They should make a diagnose, inside the store or inside their factories, to make this kinda of ip67 test possible.

I hope you have a big bank account. Your gonna need it against a billion dollar company, with your "Five" faulty iPhones. Your going to need a lot of documentation.

 

[kawa636r]

I hope you have a big bank account. Your gonna need it against a billion dollar company, with your "Five" faulty iPhones. Your going to need a lot of documentation.

If i changed 5 iphones was because defective products; i have no time to loose and all the other users in this forum are clearly talking also about yellow screens, hissing issues, and water resistance issues (like mine).

Also, i want to inform you that you don't need to have got a big bank account to claim a warranty defect, neither a lot of documentation; as told by another forum user "they really shouldn't be advertising water resistance properties of the phone, in particular when those same circumstances portrayed in ads can lead to failure that they then won't cover or do anything about (yet still benefit from advertising)", so, use a little more your brain instead of attacking me.

 

[JT2002TJ]

Apple's policy reminds me of Jeep commercials. They all show jeeps off-roading, but when you bring it in for warranty, they wont cover anything as a result of off-roading. They even try to find ways to not cover non-off-roading issues if they can get away with it.

 

[44267547]

If i changed 5 iphones was because defective products; i have no time to loose and all the other users in this forum are clearly talking also about yellow screens, hissing issues, and water resistance issues (like mine).

Also, i want to inform you that you don't need to have got a big bank account to claim a warranty defect, neither a lot of documentation; as told by another forum user "they really shouldn't be advertising water resistance properties of the phone, in particular when those same circumstances portrayed in ads can lead to failure that they then won't cover or do anything about (yet still benefit from advertising)", so, use a little more your brain instead of attacking me.

I personally don't believe you or any your five iPhone claims. And if you have no time to lose, then why are you on here arguing with other forum Members? Good luck with your law suit! Please report back with your results.

 

[T48]

Not sure how that works with "regardless how they are advertising" really.

Just meant that every ad for the iP7 shows it in water of some sort. Though all of the fine print clearly states liquid damage not covered under warranty. Which is why I mentioned Apples use at your own risk stance regardless how they are advertising.

 

[C DM]

Just meant that every ad for the iP7 shows it in water of some sort. Though all of the fine print clearly states liquid damage not covered under warranty. Which is why I mentioned Apples use at your own risk stance regardless how they are advertising.

And I'm saying that I don't really think anything could be shown just as long as some fine print is put up somewhere to say something otherwise to excuse it and say that what was shown essentially might or might not be true.

 

[Hanzu Lao]

If he was running in the rain and that's all he did Apple is full of **** and should just do the right thing. Apple can't have it both ways. Use it as a feature and advertise it and at the same time say sorry liquid damage piss off.

Doesn't work that way.

 

[ssong]

While Apple says that they won't cover water damage, they are still obligated to meet the IP67 rating that is advertised.

They have enough legal warnings in place for that regardless how they are advertising the device. No amount of user testing will change any of that.

Well, if user testing can indeed prove that the iPhone 7 doesn't live up to its IP67 standards then (as mentioned above) it could be interpreted as a manufacturing defect, in addition to false advertising. If all those claims are agreed by the court then OP could recover the costs as they were incurred due to false advertising on Apple's part. If OP were to proceed with this as an individual case then he/she may need to prove that the use case under which the damage happened was within the limits covered by IP67, that may be tricky but the use of a barometer as mentioned by another user would be good.

Alternatively if OP was to proceed with the manufacturing angle defect then they would not have to prove their individual use case and only prove that the iPhones were never truly met IP67 standards. At the same time, OP may want to find out what the testing procedure is to get the IP67 certification and conduct the same experiment to see if the devices pass the test.

I actually saw one of the advertisements and it had a disclaimer below much like when drugs are being advertised in the same medium (television).

That disclaimer is mentioned at the very end of the ad quoted below but it pretty much states the same in their warranty, that water damage isn't covered.

If he was running in the rain and that's all he did Apple is full of **** and should just do the right thing. Apple can't have it both ways. Use it as a feature and advertise it and at the same time say sorry liquid damage piss off.

Doesn't work that way.

Although this is the ad that predominantly highlights the water-resistant features it never actually shows the device being used in rain, so that may be a minor problem. That said it still does highlight in bold words 'water resistant'.

In this ad around the 1min 36 mark, you actually see the device being used under the rain (again this ad too has a disclaimer in the back) so this could further ad case for false advertising if OP manages to prove that the iPhone is not as water resistant as advertised.

This is the small text from Apple's iPhone page with regards to the water resistant features:

1. iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus are splash, water, and dust resistant and were tested under controlled laboratory conditions with a rating of IP67 under IEC standard 60529. Splash, water, and dust resistance are not permanent conditions and resistance might decrease as a result of normal wear. Do not attempt to charge a wet iPhone; refer to the user guide for cleaning and drying instructions. Liquid damage not covered under warranty.

The bold bit that's highlighted is another thing OP might want to consider. A) what constitutes 'normal wear' and how long the features are meant to last and B) did OP try to charge a wet iPhone?

https://www.nema.org/Standards/ComplimentaryDocuments/ANSI-IEC-60529.pdf - This is the document that will highlight in more detail the testing methods and certification standards for Apple's iPhone.

Now you may want to find a lawyer that has a good sense of your local law, the EU law, and tech in general (to understand the barometer bit). But all in all, there is enough in the EU consumer and marketing law to build a case based on misleading advertisement for deceiving the intended audience of the ads, and not holding up its end of the sales contract of ensuring that its products conform to the descriptions it sets out.

But all of that is dependant on whether or not you can prove that the iPhones are truly IP67. You may also want to try filing a Freedom of Information request to Apple regarding its IP67 certification and tests.

But please do consult a lawyer as I'm no legal expert and I'm just a graduate student that really doesn't want to do his assignments

 

[LKN]

After reading through the thread...

My conclusion is that you have paid for a replacement already right? So youhave given Apple the water damaged one back and have taken another iPhone from them. So how do yoi fight or prove your case now?

Apple have probably taken your water damged phone away and taken it apart or its dismantled somewhere in a lab to be recycled!

Anyway my point is if you had refused to exchange your phone and hung onto it then got a third party or even Apple to do a water test normal IP67 laboratary test to find out if it had failed somehow then maybe you would have a case. But since you no longer have the damaged handset, how do you plan on taking legal action when you dont have the faulty handset.

 

[ssong]

After reading through the thread...

My conclusion is that you have paid for a replacement already right? So youhave given Apple the water damaged one back and have taken another iPhone from them. So how do yoi fight or prove your case now?

Apple have probably taken your water damged phone away and taken it apart or its dismantled somewhere in a lab to be recycled!

Anyway my point is if you had refused to exchange your phone and hung onto it then got a third party or even Apple to do a water test normal IP67 laboratary test to find out if it had failed somehow then maybe you would have a case. But since you no longer have the damaged handset, how do you plan on taking legal action when you dont have the faulty handset.

Taking a legal action using the original phone would have been more difficult IMO as OP would have had to prove that there was no wrong doing on OPs part. Would be easier to prove that it's not up to IP67 standards.

 

[RiddlaBronc]

They also claim the apple watch (1st) is water resistant but wont cocer water damage. Yet apple tells you to wash it under running water when the digital crown starts to get stuck. Mine has been flawless so far, had it since release day and I have been cleaning it under very slight running water after a sweaty run.

I would be pissed if it fails after cleaning it.

 

[rijc99]

You need to talk to a consumer fraud and product liability attorney. A disclaimer isn't an end all. Talk to an attorney. At least ask for a consultation and see if anything develops.

 

[Superrjamz54]

I had got my first iPhone 7+ water damaged because i have taken it to run with me under the rain, and apple refused to repair me on warranty.

I've paid the out of warranty replacement and now i'm making a legal action to ask them to refund me that cost, because the mobile never went over the ip67 specifications.

Now, how can i make apple test the impermeability condition of my device?

This year the quality check is very worst (4 iPhone changed, 3 with hissing and 1 water damaged) and i don't know if Apple implemented a way to test the water resistance of the device, like a diagnose.

Just out of curiosity, did you ever remove the SIM card before it got water damaged?

 

[C DM]

They also claim the apple watch (1st) is water resistant but wont cocer water damage. Yet apple tells you to wash it under running water when the digital crown starts to get stuck. Mine has been flawless so far, had it since release day and I have been cleaning it under very slight running water after a sweaty run.

I would be pissed if it fails after cleaning it.

Seems like they do cover water damage with the watch.

 

[Mlrollin91]

They also claim the apple watch (1st) is water resistant but wont cocer water damage. Yet apple tells you to wash it under running water when the digital crown starts to get stuck. Mine has been flawless so far, had it since release day and I have been cleaning it under very slight running water after a sweaty run.

I would be pissed if it fails after cleaning it.

Water damage IS covered under Apple Watch warranty.

 

[kawa636r]

I personally don't believe you or any your five iPhone claims. And if you have no time to lose, then why are you on here arguing with other forum Members? Good luck with your law suit! Please report back with your results.

i'm not arguing, if you don't believe in you are both offending and you can easily ignore my topics.

Thanks
[doublepost=1478339703][/doublepost]

Just out of curiosity, did you ever remove the SIM card before it got water damaged?

no, just only the first time.

water entered from cámara microphone and got inside the device
[doublepost=1478339837][/doublepost]

After reading through the thread...

My conclusion is that you have paid for a replacement already right? So youhave given Apple the water damaged one back and have taken another iPhone from them. So how do yoi fight or prove your case now?

Apple have probably taken your water damged phone away and taken it apart or its dismantled somewhere in a lab to be recycled!

Anyway my point is if you had refused to exchange your phone and hung onto it then got a third party or even Apple to do a water test normal IP67 laboratary test to find out if it had failed somehow then maybe you would have a case. But since you no longer have the damaged handset, how do you plan on taking legal action when you dont have the faulty handset.

i want to make a test with a new one, just making a video opening the closed package, taking the iphone 7 plus and drop it into the water for 1 minutes.

if it fails again (like my first one, apple quality check is now inexistant due the hurrying of manufacturing ) i will take all and start a claim.

 

[kawa636r]

I just received a call from an Apple Customer Relationship guy; the call was about my out-of-warranty replacement due to water damage and they will refund me the 381,10€ paid. I will see the refund in next days, directly in my credit card.

So, i'm now more satisfied about Apple Customer Service.

 

[ssong]

I just received a call from an Apple Customer Relationship guy; the call was about my out-of-warranty replacement due to water damage and they will refund me the 381,10€ paid. I will see the refund in next days, directly in my credit card.

So, i'm now more satisfied about Apple Customer Service.

Just wondering, how did you manage to get that? Did you contact them about it again?

 

[kawa636r]

they received the european procedure opened on monday 31 octuber and just replied to me today, with a call.

 

[fatalogic]

I believe the OP I'm just afraid apple has all there bases covered. Some journalists and youtuber have had a similar issue when testing the IP67 rating. All of them have stated they had to pay for the water damage. This is unfortunate because you won't know your Iphone is defective until it gets wet. I see a class action lawsuit coming in the next few months.

Youtuber with similar issues

 

[cmdrdredd]

Personally I don't care what the rating is. A phone isn't a device made to be used under water so I treat it as such. This just basically means to me that if I drop it in a puddle it will probably survive. I have no reasons to test the conditions it can handle. It's quite pointless to me.