Apple Care v Sale of Goods Act (UK)

[AnotherFanBoy]

Your implication here is that the "inherent fault" had to have been detected upon purchase, which it does not (again, with legal precedent).

No no, that was never my implication and I'm sorry you misunderstood me. The fault, caused by a manufacturing process, inferior materials or a faulty component does not have to be detected upon purchase, but it does have to be there.of legal

You speak of legal precedent, can you find some cases to highlight this point?

 

[MacModMachine]

No no, that was never my implication and I'm sorry you misunderstood me. The fault, caused by a manufacturing process, inferior materials or a faulty component does not have to be detected upon purchase, but it does have to be there.of legal

You speak of legal precedent, can you find some cases to highlight this point?

you are wasting your time with this guy....

just move it on.

 

[AnotherFanBoy]

you are wasting your time with this guy....

just move it on.

yeh but it's not about beating this guy in an argument, it's more about stopping him and his supporters from misleading people who don't know otherwise, who may go on to forego applecare thinking they are protected, and then be landed with a huge bill.

but yah, i'm done, believe what you want

 

[Jobsian]

Apologies for the delay, I've been working and so on and so forth

Use google - there are a lot of individual cases on forums etc eg: http://www.monikie.org.uk/yourrights.htm

If a store refuses to take responsibility for a faulty product, currently the only way to seek redress is through legal action, which involves proving the goods are faulty. And this is exactly what Which? reader Brenda Robertshaw did when electrical giant Currys refused to fix her £400 washing machine free of charge, when it broke down after only 18 months and ruined some clothes (see 'Currys taken to the cleaners', Which?, October 1999, p4). Brenda won the cost of repairs, compensation and expenses, totalling £190. The judge ruled that it was reasonable to expect a £400 washing machine to last longer than 18 months. Sadly, though, some stores don't seem to have learned from Currys' ruling.

Some other links that are relevant and interesting:

http://www.ralpharama.co.uk/item.ph...Sale+of+Goods+Act,+a+Cooker,+some+frustration

http://ec.europa.eu/publications/booklets/move/64/index_en.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2006/jun/01/yourrights.legal4

 

[AnotherFanBoy]

I thank you for your research, a true lawyers quality. I haven't seen the full facts of the case but I'm assuming that the Judge ruled based on the fact that he believed if all the components were in full working order at the time of sale, the machine would have lasted longer than 18 months. That's just an educated guess and I would need to say his ratio decidendi (reason for deciding) or obiter dictum (other (non binding) things he said) before I could make a comment based on anything other than speculation.

This is probably just going to have to be a time where we agree to disagree, I'm sure I could dig up hundreds of cases that were lost whilst trying to use the Act.

 

[Jobsian]

I thank you for your research, a true lawyers quality.

No problem, google is a teeming hive of small claims court cases documented in true lawyers quality. In fact it's the annals of peer-reviewed law journals

Joking aside, are you the one who said he was a law student? If so you should be able to log in to Lexis from your campus without a subscription if you want to see full-text peer-reviewed law journals (indexing is of variable quality).

If not then you'll usually have to do with abstracts.

I haven't seen the full facts of the case but I'm assuming that the Judge ruled based on the fact that he believed if all the components were in full working order at the time of sale, the machine would have lasted longer than 18 months

True, but that's nothing beyond whirring on semantics. The conclusion is the same - the retailer loses. Extending your logical conclusion, one may also say that if a Macbook Pro's components were in full working order at the time of the sale, the machine would have lasted longer than 18 months.

ie longer than the 1-year manufacturers' warranty.

 

[peanut-]

The problem you've got with the Sale of Goods Act is that it's a legal issue. There is no procedure within Apple's service department for responding to your claim that the Sale of Goods Act entitles you to free service.

As soon as you mention the law they will shut down, absolutely refuse to help you and just refer you to Apple's legal department. Because the Geniuses and Applecare operators are in no position to assess the validity of your claim or the position of the law and could get in a lot of trouble if they say the wrong thing.

Chances are you'd get your laptop fixed in the end, but you would have to be prepared to actively correspond with the legal department or to take it to Small Claims. Applecare might be expensive but it's probably easier.

 

[WolfHook]

I am currently in correspondence with Apple over a MacBook purchased in December 2008 which just stopped working. Turned my back one day and returned to my desk, MacBook was dead. It's life span was a year and seven months.

I have paid for a Apple service provider to examine the machine and it is due to a faulty Logic Board.

Just researching "Random Shutdown Syndrome" on the web will give you numerous consumer blogs and tech blogs all discussing the problem and Apple reacted by issuing a software update to combat the problem, this is surely an admission of the fault?

Also, roughly two weeks after purchasing my MacBook Apple released a software update to try and fix the keyboard issues with MacBooks and MacBook Pros. Is this not another admission?

To me this is evidence enough that Apple were selling MacBooks and MacBook Pros with suspect build quality in that time period and I have no problems with taking them to a small claims court.

I have written four letters to Apple, have trading standards involved, contacted BBC Watchdog and also posted all sent and received letters online at www.complaints.com.

Regardless of all the legalese that people are getting into in this thread, I think I have a good case against Apple and all I want is a working MacBook.

I am prepared to loose but think I will win, it is worth fighting if you feel you have a case.

 

[Logga]

I am currently in correspondence with Apple over a MacBook purchased in December 2008 which just stopped working. Turned my back one day and returned to my desk, MacBook was dead. It's life span was a year and seven months.

I have paid for a Apple service provider to examine the machine and it is due to a faulty Logic Board.

Just researching "Random Shutdown Syndrome" on the web will give you numerous consumer blogs and tech blogs all discussing the problem and Apple reacted by issuing a software update to combat the problem, this is surely an admission of the fault?

Also, roughly two weeks after purchasing my MacBook Apple released a software update to try and fix the keyboard issues with MacBooks and MacBook Pros. Is this not another admission?

To me this is evidence enough that Apple were selling MacBooks and MacBook Pros with suspect build quality in that time period and I have no problems with taking them to a small claims court.

I have written four letters to Apple, have trading standards involved, contacted BBC Watchdog and also posted all sent and received letters online at www.complaints.com.

Regardless of all the legalese that people are getting into in this thread, I think I have a good case against Apple and all I want is a working MacBook.

I am prepared to loose but think I will win, it is worth fighting if you feel you have a case.

I had the almost exact same issue, a late 2013 macbook pro - trackpad was not working, display had smudge marks from the AG display rubbing off. Took it to an OFFICIAL Apple store not one of the authorised repair shops. Apple ran some diagnostics and repaired it free of charge. The value of the charge was £840 ish. They were so helpful and friendly, they knew it was out of Apple's warranty and I didn't even have to mention UK consumer laws. Call apple support directly, tell them what's happened and that under UK consumer law you have a right for this to be fixed as it's a manufacturing default. The guy I called told me all about UK consumer law and all of my rights, so I was armed to the teeth with information when I took it to the Apple store to get fixed. 4 days later I had a pretty much brand new machine. The whole top case, keyboard, display, display case was replaced, it looked and felt brand new. All thanks to SOGA (sales of goods act)

My solution to you is... take it to a proper Apple store, mention the sales of goods act and I promise you they will replace it. If you're near the bullring go there, they are so friendly, I've had 3 products replaced there quite recently. The authorised repair centres are different, very different because they have to foot the intial bill, then claim it back from Apple. Whereas at the apple store they have all the replacement products out the back and they've already ordered them in, so they need to be used before they go out of date so to speak. So with laptops coming in from 2013 they are well prepared to fix them. Even logic boards. I've had a macbook pro 2011 logic board fail on me, they replaced it 6 months out of warranty.

So, go to Apple directly! Don't email, don't mess around just book an appointment and go! Don't leave until they replace it. Trust me, they will.

 

[iMacDragon]

So, go to Apple directly! Don't email, don't mess around just book an appointment and go! Don't leave until they replace it. Trust me, they will.

Remember this technically only applies if you actually bought it from Apple directly, whether online or instore, if bought from anywhere else, then they have no legal need to directly deal with you after official warranty is over, and you will likely have to take it up with where you purchased from instead! ( unless they're feeling kind of course )