Apple Facing Class Action Lawsuit for Offering Refurbished Replacement Devices Under AppleCare+

[nviz22]

Well, if you think about it, the price for Apple Care goes up if Apple has to crack out new devices for every Apple Care claim. A lot of devices can be discontinued. What if the iPad Air 1 user had an eligible Apple Care coverage plan, yet the model was discontinued? Apple would have to either give someone a discontinued model or credit them with a brand new iPad. With Apple Care the way it is, people must take a like new device and move on.

As much as I want companies to be explicit in their terms and conditions, it's not going to happen. They're not going to reveal their QA testing procedures in details. I have had good service from Apple when my devices crap out on me. Ambulance chasers are a huge problem. How about a 3 strikes and you're out system? 3 frivolous law suits and you're disbarred for life. That would cut down on dumb suits.

 

[Abazigal]

People on here think that the people filing the suit are greedy, but imagine if it happened to you, I know you'll be a hypocrite for defending apple.

I usually don't care about this until it happened to me 3 years ago, I had to get my device replaced 3 times after the first replacement broke down in me (Lower left side of the screen wouldn't get any touch input), the inconvenience of backing up and restoring was a drag... not too much mention nowadays where you have to manually add all your Apple Pay cards and verify them (Sometimes get an error when saving a card), two factor authentication, having an Apple Watch paired, etc.
'Bottom line: new devices should be replaced with faulty ones, replace accidental damages with refurbished unless they have AppleCare+

That's why we don't make the laws. That's why the laws are made by rational and independent third parties, so that we have a standard operating procedure to adhere to for when saner minds can't prevail.

You are right that I would probably be upset if the same thing happened to me. I just sent in my 6S+ to be replaced because of a dead motherboard. Still waiting for the verdict.

It simply makes me irrational, not hypocritical.

 

[2010mini]

I personally hate that Apple gives out refurbished units, I can understand 1 year mandatory warranty doing it but considering you pay for Apple Care it seems like a bunk deal.
Also what is this nonsense that internal components don't get wear and tear? They most definitely do.

So even if their refurbs are put through higher QA than new products, it still no good?

 

[nviz22]

Name one manufacturer on the planet that guarantees in writing that you can bring them a used device for warranty replacement in the U.S. and receive a brand new, off-the-shelf device in return. Companies give people in the U.S. refurbs all the time as warranty replacements. Get a grip.

Microsoft did that for me in a situation, I stress "situation." They wanted to give me a refurb Surface Pro 4 since I had a defect with screen flickering. But their refurbs were going to take 2 months to come in. After reasoning with customer service, I got a brand new model from a nearby Microsoft Store.

T-Mobile gives brand new devices early if no refurbs exist. Companies want to give refurbs since they replenish stock when people return devices (in buyer's remorse or through warranty exchanges). In addition, you can't sell opened items returned during buyer's remorse as a brand new sealed device. Hence the "scratch and dent" term or "open boxed" term. If you can't get a refurb to a customer, places want to take care of people with a brand new device so customers don't have headaches while a happy customer is likely to be a future repetitive patron and share their experiences by word of mouth or through social media.

 

[techwhiz]

No, you misread my post. I paid for an upgrade to an SSD when I purchased the machine, which ran blazingly quick. Apple when replacing my logic board the second time in a 4 week window somehow determined my SSD was 'bad' (it wasn't) and replaced that as well, with a refurbished part that was clearly slower, benchmarks or day to day use.

They don't remanufacture SSD.
They may have given you a brand from one of their other suppliers.

 

[dyn]

I think these people, or should I say their no doubt pushy lawyers, were emboldened by that recent judgement in the Netherlands, where a judge sided with the plaintiff in an almost identical case.

There is nothing comparable to that case.

• It's in a completely different country with different laws
• The woman did not buy any form of AppleCare
• Apple broke a Dutch law

None of this is applicable to this case because:

• USA has completely different consumer law
• Apple did not break a law
• This is about AppleCare+
• According to the plaintiffs Apple broke its own agreement.

Anyone using a case from a completely different country with completely different laws as an example for a case of their own in their own country is just a complete idiot. There are simply no words for that kind of stupidity.

This is a case of its own and you need to treat it that way. The main thing in this case is how one should define "equivalent to new". It may very well be somewhere between refurbished and new or refurbished or actually new. Whatever the outcome, this simply shows that any human on this planet wants to exercise his rights. Something we all need to respect and may even take as an example because some people actually do stand up against wrongdoing instead of looking the other way.

 

[Deuce on the Clock]

Many "refurbs" are just returns. Unlike other retailers, Apple doesn't sell returns as "open-box" or put them back out as "new." They go through QC and get new batteries.

This statement is not true at all.
[doublepost=1469057328][/doublepost]

They're phrasing it like the consumers just don't like refurbished devices, and I don't see the wording saying it's new. It says right there, "equivalent to new," not "new." Don't like it? Don't agree to it.

Unfortunately you cannot use Apples new payment plan without purchasing Applecare+. That is their gimmick to sell more warranties.

 

[sudo1996]

Many "refurbs" are just returns. Unlike other retailers, Apple doesn't sell returns as "open-box" or put them back out as "new." They go through QC and get new batteries.

This reminds me... We once bought a NEW iPod touch from the Apple Retail Store and got something that was definitely returned and/or refurbished. It was still logged into someone's Apple ID. But it worked fine, and we were too lazy to go complain about something we didn't have real proof of.

 

[avanpelt]

Microsoft did that for me in a situation, I stress "situation." They wanted to give me a refurb Surface Pro 4 since I had a defect with screen flickering. But their refurbs were going to take 2 months to come in. After reasoning with customer service, I got a brand new model from a nearby Microsoft Store.

T-Mobile gives brand new devices early if no refurbs exist. Companies want to give refurbs since they replenish stock when people return devices (in buyer's remorse or through warranty exchanges). In addition, you can't sell opened items returned during buyer's remorse as a brand new sealed device. Hence the "scratch and dent" term or "open boxed" term. If you can't get a refurb to a customer, places want to take care of people with a brand new device so customers don't have headaches while a happy customer is likely to be a future repetitive patron and share their experiences by word of mouth or through social media.

Right, but @BarcelonaPaul was saying that Apple should give new phones to people who bring in their used phones for warranty replacement because Apple "is the richest company in the world" and has consumers who have worked so hard to afford Apple products in the first place. His logic may be accepted as rational in Spain (where I assume he's from), but it doesn't apply in the U.S., which is where this class-action suit is happening.

 

[Kkspire]

Apple is facing a new class action lawsuit, levied today by customers in California who are unhappy that their iPhones and iPads were replaced with refurbished devices under Apple's AppleCare or AppleCare+ warranty plan.

Filed by Vicky Maldonado and Joanne McRight, the lawsuit, first shared by Cult of Mac, accuses Apple of failing to provide replacement devices that are "equivalent to new in performance and reliability" as stated in the company's terms and conditions.

Both plaintiffs purchased replacement devices under AppleCare protection plans and were given refurbished devices rather than new devices, which they claim is a violation of the aforementioned line in the AppleCare Terms and Conditions.

The plaintiffs claim they were deprived of the "use and value" of their original devices when Apple replaced them with refurbished devices, suffering an economic loss in the amount of the cost of the AppleCare plans, the loss of value of their original non-refurbished devices, and the purchase cost and replacement cost paid to Apple.

Apple is being accused of breach of contract, breach of warranty, concealing information from the public, deceptive marketing, violating labeling requirements, and unfair competitive practices. The lawsuit covers all customers who purchased an AppleCare or AppleCare+ plan for an iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch after July 11, 2011.

The plaintiffs are seeking damages, attorneys fees, an order that would prevent Apple from replacing damaged or defective iOS devices with refurbished devices in the future, updated AppleCare+ terms and conditions, and an option to get a refund for a broken device instead of a repair.

Article Link: Apple Facing Class Action Lawsuit for Offering Refurbished Replacement Devices Under AppleCare+

You mean to tell me I can have my phone for 2 years and can't ask for a brand new one? Your kidding me. If your device is new within 14 days I'm sure they would replace it for you with a new one. Why are so Ma any people after apple. Possibly one of the most generous company's I kno. Maybe they should tell you to go to hell more often and stop being so nice

 

[sinsin07]

snip... Can't tell you how many iPhone replacements I've received with wear and tear on the sides. Scratches on the screen. Once the phone had the old users Apple ID logged in.

Damn, what the freak are you doing that you need so many replacements.
Would seem you need to worry less about replacements and more about taking care of what you have.

 

[larrylaffer]

The funny thing is you never really get much with class action lawsuits anyway. Maybe $20 at most. It's not worth all the hassle.

It's the lawyers who get rich, and I'm sure helped instigate this.

The $250 check I got from the iPod water sensor lawsuit disagrees with you.

 

[gnasher729]

A refurbished device tends to be in the iPhone and iPad cases a water damaged device that has gone under some form of repair, and these devices are not as strong and some component are fragile and in any case the flash storage is degraded as they is so many read or write cycles for flash storage. If you ever drop a refurbished iPad in most cases it will brake due to no protection surrounding on most of the vital chips in it as it was scraped off during the PCB repair were a new iPad would survive 100% a drop on it's back. Apple refurbished replacements are poor quality, but what you don't know can't hurt you is Apple's view and that is just not on. Apple should repair the item or replace with new, it is Apple's fualt they made it so hard to repair their own stuff, Apple you are IDOTS

What a nice rant. Any evidence for your ridiculous claims?

Well, if you are right, then surely we will see one of these poor quality refurbished devices opened up in court by an expert, and Apple will get their ass handed to them. On the other hand, there is the tiny bit of the slightest possibility that you are just making this **** up, and the plaintiffs will lose their case.

 

[Bluestrike2]

The funny thing is you never really get much with class action lawsuits anyway. Maybe $20 at most. It's not worth all the hassle.

It's the lawyers who get rich, and I'm sure helped instigate this.

To be fair, class action suits are not about compensating the individual members of the class. It never has been, and never will be. Instead, they're about leveraging the large number of members to force a change in behavior. That's especially important when the damages on an individual basis are limited to the point that it would be far less expensive to maintain the behavior in question and just settle the random suit that comes along.

Class action suits in particular are especially complex, time-consuming, and expensive to litigate. Those expenses, and all of the significant risk involved, are shifted to the lawyers rather than the class members. The only alternative to the lawyers walking away with a percentage of the final settlement is not filing suit in the first place. When you consider that, for instance, most of the most significant environmental successes at court have been the result of class action suits, it becomes readily apparent that such an alternative isn't desirable.

Contingency fees give people unable to pay for the costs of litigation the ability to access the courts. Without them, they'd be unable to afford legal representation. I'd rather some lawyers "get rich" than the poor be unable to seek justice and compensation. Thankfully, the legal system agrees. It might suck to sign over ~30% of a settlement, but you're still better off than if you were never able to file in the first place. And there's a good chance you'd probably wind up paying the same or more on an hourly basis anyhow. That said, there are checks in place to prevent abuse: contingency agreements have been successfully challenged in court on a number of occasions for being 'unreasonable.' If the lawyers involved can't justify their fees, there's a very good chance that the courts may modify the agreement on that basis. Between that and the threat of sanctions, most reputable law firms are pretty cautious with their fee agreements.

That said, this is a pretty ridiculous case at first glance. There's nothing to suggest that companies have to replace used devices with new ones under warranty. Repair, yes. Replace with new, no. This is little more than a nuisance suit, getting headlines because it's a class-action.

 

[Alexrat1996]

I thought all the parts that receive wear and tear were new parts?

- New case
- New screen
- New battery
- New buttons
- New connectors

Basically the only thing that could be "used" is the PCB inside? Something that doesn't suffer wear and tear at all?

People are either idiots, or greedy. I'm gonna vote for the latter mostly.

i never had a perfect iphone its used the 6 i got replaced i rather have a new one iphone
[doublepost=1469057972][/doublepost]i Hope it happens something new would be better than refurbished

 

[rocknblogger]

And there you have it, the Dutch aren't the only people in the world wanting a new device instead of refurbished. I think some people need to be far more critical as to what a refurbished device is (is it really as good or even better than a new device or is it something you want it to be?) but also that if a company says you get A they'll also give you A and not B.

I'll be honest my first iPhone was a 4S that needed to be replaced within about 3 months or so and I was pretty surprised and upset that I wasn't getting a new replacement. It ended up being fine except for a loose power button. I kept it because I was worried that the next one might have been worse.

 

[gnasher729]

their own lawsuit is flawed: "equivalent to new" does in fact mean refurbished.
how many times the word refurbished is marketing, but not illegal.

as someone who has either received for himself or his family apple's "equivalent to new" replacements, over the past years, there has been absolutely nothing wrong with these replacements, not even a tiny scratch. i don't know how they do it, but they obviously have a great system in place.

Some people have posted that they received devices with scratches etc. If your refurbished device comes with scratches, then it is not "equivalent to new", so you replace it immediately with one without scratches.

 

[pubwvj]

Greed is spelled L. A. W. Y. E. R.

 

[AndrewR23]

Damn, what the freak are you doing that you need so many replacements.
Would seem you need to worry less about replacements and more about taking care of what you have.

what a ignorant comment.

First replacement...battery issues

Second (refurb)....home button stopped working...button actually got stuck in the phone

Third....yellow screen..pixel issues...also a refurb.

Fourth...refurb....pixels (didn't even leave the store yet)

Fifth....5S.....touch ID ring came loose after 6 months. so the replacement they gave me had a loose screen after a few weeks.

Thats 5 replacements in 3 years.....since then I've had 0. I take care of all my items. All 5 of those refurb replacements had wear and tear of the sides, scratches. My last 5S had some other users apple id popping up.

 

[Alexrat1996]

my experience with apple care horrible first iPhone it rattled the vibration,then power button was not working fine,then they replaced due to the iPhone not turning on,then vibration was loud,then again vibration was so loud,then the last one replaced due to the camera having dust

I rather have a brand new iiPhone

 

[44267547]

Another Apple law suit? They must have a HUGE litigation team. No shortage in jobs in this department.

 

[sinsin07]

what a ignorant comment.

First replacement...battery issues

Second (refurb)....home button stopped working...button actually got stuck in the phone

Third....yellow screen..pixel issues...also a refurb.

Fourth...refurb....pixels (didn't even leave the store yet)

Fifth....5S.....touch ID ring came loose after 6 months. so the replacement they gave me had a loose screen after a few weeks.

Thats 5 replacements in 3 years.....since then I've had 0. I take care of all my items. All 5 of those refurb replacements had wear and tear of the sides, scratches. My last 5S had some other users apple id popping up.

You have bad luck. That must suck.

 

[Cineplex]

Well if Apple just fixed the devices....this wouldn't be an issue. Oh, that's right.....they like to use glue and tape now. $600+ for glue and tape.

I don't always mind the refurbished replacement, but I would prefer to get a 1 year warranty on the refurbished item. Seems like a fair trade off if they are too lazy to fix the issue. You've already been inconvenienced by a failed product, a little extra warranty wouldn't kill them.

 

[AndrewR23]

my experience with apple care horrible first iPhone it rattled the vibration,then power button was not working fine,then they replaced due to the iPhone not turning on,then vibration was loud,then again vibration was so loud,then the last one replaced due to the camera having dust

I rather have a brand new iiPhone

Not to mention I remember the hundreds of threads on here about peoples iPhone 6 replacements having a loose screen in the corners. New ones didn't have it.

 

[cylack]

I have to side with these consumers on this one. I bought a refurbished Macbook Air from Apple’s website and it gave me so many headaches with wonky pixels. Yet, it was supposed to have undergone Apple’s “good as new” examination process. AppleCare certainly isn’t cheap, so Apple should be giving flawless products in return and not refurbished products that could fail.