Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
55,472
17,815


Apple on Friday reached a $95 million settlement that, pending court approval, will resolve a class action lawsuit that accused the company of violating the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act and other U.S. laws by replacing customers' devices covered by AppleCare with refurbished devices, according to court documents accessed by MacRumors.

iphone-se-black.jpeg

Apple's Repair Terms and Conditions for the U.S. state that, when servicing a customer's product, the company "may use parts or products that are new or refurbished and equivalent to new in performance and reliability." However, plaintiffs in the lawsuit alleged that refurbished or "remanufactured" devices are not "equivalent to new in performance and reliability" and thus sought monetary damages from Apple.

The class includes all U.S. residents who purchased an AppleCare Protection Plan or AppleCare+, either directly or through the iPhone Upgrade Program, on or after July 20, 2012, and received a refurbished replacement device. If approved, the settlement fund will be divided equally among the class members based on the number of refurbished replacement devices they received, according to the court documents.

It is anticipated that the class will receive a total of between $63.4 million and $68.1 million once attorneys' fees and other costs have been deducted. If the settlement is approved, details will be available at ReplacementDeviceLawsuit.com, and class members will also be contacted by email or mail if possible.

Apple "vigorously denied" that refurbished devices are inferior, but it opted to settle with the plaintiffs given the time and costs that would be associated with a continued trial, according to the court documents. Plaintiffs are seeking court approval on October 20 or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard by the judge presiding over the case.

The case, Maldonado et al v. Apple, Inc et al, was first filed in July 2016 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Update: U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick said he will grant preliminary approval of the $95 million settlement, according to Law360.

Article Link: Apple Agrees to Pay $95 Million to Settle Lawsuit Claiming Refurbished Devices Aren't 'Equivalent to New' [Updated]
 
Last edited:

pdaholic

macrumors 68000
Jun 22, 2011
1,515
1,644
Yeah that was always a disappointing approach by Apple—”your relatively new iPhone isn’t working correctly…here’s a refurb.” And I say that as somebody who has bought several items from the refurbished Apple store and been quite happy with the products I received.
 

iGüey

macrumors 6502
Nov 26, 2020
311
304
Mexico City
Yeah that was always a disappointing approach by Apple—”your relatively new iPhone isn’t working correctly…here’s a refurb.” And I say that as somebody who has bought several items from the refurbished Apple store and been quite happy with the products I received.
That’s fine and you are ok with that cause since you have bought your stuff from a refurbished Apple store, you have paid a reduced price. That is fair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660

JPack

macrumors G3
Mar 27, 2017
8,123
13,814
So you think Apple, the actual company, takes liquid damaged devices and brushes them off to send back out as replacement devices?
No, Apple replaces damaged components on the logic board. But sometimes corrosion remains which does not yet affect the functioning of the logic board. Will the device work in the short term? Yes. But I wouldn’t want it for long term reliability.
 

4jasontv

macrumors 603
Jul 31, 2011
5,451
6,386
No, Apple replaces damaged components on the logic board. But sometimes corrosion remains which does not yet affect the functioning of the logic board. The device work in the short term? Yes. But I wouldn’t want it for long term reliability.
Maybe I misunderstood, but it sounds like you disagreed with them and then described exactly what they said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G5isAlive

loby

macrumors 65816
Jul 1, 2010
1,377
930
I think the real issue is that Apple says there is no difference, but the fact that there is, No matter how it functions even if it seems new. They just take parts out of other issued systems that have come back and don’t stock “new” replacement parts. come on, they can’t do that. Yes, maybe some parts might be new, but most are not.

yes, the re-ferbs are decent. But don’t say thst they are equal to “Just like new”. If you have to replace a part in a system then you have to open an replace etc. and are now not like new anymore.

All Apple has to say is directly state if a product is worked on, it will get used or parts from another system. The issue is if a product is bought that does not work or defective, they should just get there money back and buy another. That would resolve it. But it is now too complicated for simple solutions.
 

4jasontv

macrumors 603
Jul 31, 2011
5,451
6,386
I think the real issue is that Apple says there is no difference, but the fact that there is, No matter how it functions even if it seems new. They just take parts out of other issued systems that have come back and don’t stock “new” replacement parts. come on, they can’t do that. Yes, maybe some parts might be new, but most are not.

yes, the re-ferbs are decent. But don’t say thst they are equal to “Just like new”. If you have to replace a part in a system then you have to open an replace etc. and are now not like new anymore.

All Apple has to say is directly state if a product is worked on, it will get used or parts from another system. The issue is if a product is bought that does not work or defective, they should just get there money back and buy another. That would resolve it. But it is now too complicated for simple solutions.
Except that companies say this all the time. I had a GPU start to fail in the first six months and was told the only difference between new and refurb was that refurb units were tested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: loby

Wanted797

macrumors 65816
Oct 28, 2011
1,134
2,264
Australia
This could be a big precedent around the world.

Here in Australia when I bought my iPad min 2nd gen it had dust under the screen. I took it to the store and they tried to tell me because it was so new they had no replacements.

When I asked them if they had new ones they said yes but they couldn’t provide them for warranty. So I asked for a refund. Which they gave me.

Then I bought one of the new ones…
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.