Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Not Accepting Returns or Exchanges in Hong Kong
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Extremely good point. Bending policy to suit situation is smart. Works both ways, free out of warranty replacement, bent policy. Denying obvious scalping returns, bent policy. I like!
I'd keep up with this but started conversation with my kitchen wall, and getting further along with that repartee. 
Apple is not required to have consumer rights policies in a country devoid of consumer rights policies. Apple is not required to sell a product with return policies where there is a burgeoning black market in authentic and counterfeit Apple products. Being a "nice guy" doesn't work if someone is pummeling you and kicking you. Therefore in the absence of such consumer rights Apple is. Not required to be the "nice guy" with those rights in a place where they don't exist to begin with.
Who is to blame? Scalpers. Return policy abusers. Black market profiteers. Why aren't you going after them and their practices? Ohhhhh.....because your agenda is against Apple. Not against the people who abuse the system. I forgot.
Carry on.
Yeah I'm due to get on a predeployment call for one of my systems. Going to miss the rest.I'd keep up with this but started conversation with my kitchen wall, and getting further along with that repartee.
Not gonna miss much. Let me give your the short take.
"Apple is wrong, they always wrong and Samsung is best thing since sliced bread by recalling exploding Note 7. All hail Samsung"
Now go to your call.
I'd keep up with this but started conversation with my kitchen wall, and getting further along with that repartee.
Now that reminds me... way back when, we used to have a nickname for someone at work... "Wall".
Totally forgot about it until now. Thanks for the little bit of laughter today
I am glad you realize this. But also realize also that where these rights exist, people have died to obtain them, maybe not in your lifetime, but in a time previous. In a dictatorship, fascist economy or similar, there is no reason for these rights to exist and if we give any government absolute power, these rights will go away.
Hong Kong law disagrees with you.
[doublepost=1474038917][/doublepost]
Then buy another brand? Get a job there and work to change it? Do something besides complain here about what the world needs and how you can save the unwashed masses from themselves?
That's how it works in Hong Kong. After you pay, the sales person will unbox the item, show that all parts are included and let you try it out. You often can get an exchange for legitimately defective products, but at most shops, there's no "buyer's remorse" return or exchange.
A buyer's remorse policy costs real money and the consumers of Hong Kong decided that they rather not pay for it.
No, they don't. For example in the UK you don't. I don't know any place in Europe where you have that right. Most likely not in the USA. Exception is mail order where you couldn't see the product before purchase, defective products, and of course if the seller says you have the right. Which Apple doesn't do here.
And Apple has absolute confidence in the market, they just want to kick the scalpers where it hurts, and everyone completely agrees with that. Capitalism is no excuse for these bloodsucking leeches.
[doublepost=1474039749][/doublepost]
Scalper buys 100 phones (often through mules) and returns the ones they can't sell at profit. Now a scalper buys 100 phones, sells 10 and is stuck with the rest. I think Apple should also register the names of buyers and only give warranties to the original buyers.
[doublepost=1474039860][/doublepost]
Actually, I don't know of any country where you have the legal right to return purchased goods bought in a store just because you changed your mind. That is always done voluntarily by the seller.
[doublepost=1474040003][/doublepost]
Exactly. Scalpers are not customers.
[doublepost=1474040157][/doublepost]
There is definitely a black market in cigarettes, for example in Europe, where tons of cigarettes are illegally moved from countries with low taxes to countries with high taxes. However, in that case the cigarette companies are not concerned, because (a) they don't lose money (they are not the ones who lose money, but the countries charging higher taxes), and (b) it's not enough to distort supply and demand.
[doublepost=1474040405][/doublepost]
Maybe to you, but not to me.
[doublepost=1474040558][/doublepost]
In the USA, consumers usually have fewer rights than in Europe.
You don't have a "right"t to return anything. Unless there is a local law governing returns, it's up to a business to decide what its return policy is.
There is no "US Law" on returns. It's up to businesses to decide. Some places, like Nordstrom's, REI, etc., are very generous and have no limit, but get abused. Some don't take returns. Some, like Amazon, only give you 30 days.
It might help to look into the relevant laws prior to posting something like this.
On a related note, it almost seems like there are two people using your account (no, I don't really think that, it's a metaphor); sometimes you have very insightful posts and sometimes you are quick to jump to conclusions that facts don't support in any way. I'd like to see more of the former from you and less of the latter. Please don't take that as being overly critical, I'm saying that I like many of your posts to the extent that I'm disappointed in things like this.
Use some commonsense. During your anti-Apple rant, did it ever occur to you to wonder why Apple would do this in only one country if they were so evil? Didn't it pop up and make you think that the company that is constantly rated the highest and is renown for their customer service and support might have a good reason? At some point, you'll calm down in the quiet of your home and realize that Apple did this because they were taking care of consumers and trying to stop scalpers from buying up scarce supply. Next time, though, it would help if you slowed down and thought these type of things through before letting your hate overwhelm your reasoning.
Quite recently I read a very interesting article about LL Bean's legendary return policy. They have no limit on returns. You can literally bring something back after 40 years, completely worn out, and say, "I'd like to return this." They will cheerfully process it and provide you store credit (used to be cash but they changed that aspect). Despite obvious abuses they intend to keep this policy in place. The article had a lot of background and strange cases and was a fun read. If someone is interested I'll find a link.
Incorrect. If you pay by credit card, and the transaction is within 100 miles of your home, then you can withhold payment in the event of a dispute, which practically means the merchant has to take it back (or else they lose their goods and money).
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1666i
http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/legal_guides/cr-7.shtml
FWIW, looks like you accidentally included your reply above in the iPhone 7 breakdown thread. I quoted it and brought it back over to this thread.
I'm ambivalent on if there truly is a negative impact from this no return policy. Too many folks familiar with the culture have posted in this thread that "no returns" is status-quo in that region, and Apple Store managers have always had the ability to bend this policy on a case-by-case basis.
I don't know what the permanent fix is, but by waiting literally until launch day to drop this on the HK scalpers, they now have to scramble to organize something overseas, and they're now going to have to pay to ship the phones internationally. It's not nearly as convenient (or inexpensive) as buying in Hong Kong and driving to the border with mainland China.
The OP touches upon the ‘why’. I don’t care about the ‘why’ though, because it is still a loss of consumer privilege and it affects all of their customers there. Hence, I feel free to comment on this, whatever Apple’s reason. I believe that return rights should be upheld everywhere and a decent company should try to adhere to that.
‘Rated the highest’ and ‘renowned for their customer service’? Are we talking about Apple? Has it occurred to you that this might be a highly subjective observation or might not be true in all countries?
By obliging all of their Hong Kong customers to agree that there will be no obligation upon Apple for returning or exchanging goods? They take good care indeed. Some other commenters here have outright said what this is about: to combat scalpers. Don’t even pretend that this is about consumers.
The FTC website says you can only dispute billing errors, or if you have a problem with the quality of the goods or services. It doesn't say anything about returns.
American Express cards offer an "added benefit" of providing limited return protection ($300 per item, up to $1000 per year).
To your point, you can dispute any transaction you want, for any reason. Winning the dispute isn't guaranteed, though? So disputes over return policies generally went in the consumers favor, I don't see why AMEX would offer "return protection" as a feature for their cards?
[doublepost=1474045309][/doublepost]
How does combating scalpers not help the consumers waiting to buy the product?
I do comment on the good things Apple does, but of late, decisions like this are completely baffling.
Shouldn't be too baffling. A lot of people have provide valid reasons and objective opinions. They may differ with your opinion, but keep an open mind and you might see some validity in what others think and say. Most things are not as one sided as you like to make them out to be.
That has nothing to do with a return law. You also don't understand how it works. Just because I can temporarily challenge the charge, doesn't mean I won't ultimately have to pay for it. The temporary hold is simply to allow an investigation to take place by the credit card company, e.g., maybe you didn't receive product, etc. Slow down and think.
It should be noted that this is intended to reverse charges if there is a dispute. It is not a catch all solution to "buyer's remorse" and the purchaser could be liable for the amount later if no justification was found for the reverse. In other words, this is intended to protect you from a situation like mail order goods never arriving or finding a purchased product is dead when unboxed and the merchant being unwilling to do anything about it. Buying a product and later deciding you don't want it, although the credit card company would reverse the charge, could result in a claim against you personally.