Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Still Facing Criticism Over Warranty Issues in Europe as Lawsuits Spread to More Countries

MarkHarrisonUK said:
No, they've been fined precisely because they DIDN'T comply with (Italian) law.
Click to expand...

Proven in what court of law? Every thing published about this whole affair has read that they were brought up on possible charges with zero proof that they ever refused service, as the seller, of an applicable and proven defect. But agreed to pay the finds 'no contest' because it was quicker and cheaper than dealing with the lawsuits. Including finally just saying to hell with Italy and pulling Apple Care out of stores and not talking about it anymore. Anyone gripes and Apple will send them to the government as they should.
 
charlituna said:
First, where is your iron clad proof of what Apple staff is claiming. Seems to me that you a believing the reports which are often fifth hand and have no proof either way.

Second. Apple Care is (for computers) two more years of what Apple as the manufacturer of tens. It is not now nor has ever claimed to have jack to do with local laws including these 'lemon' laws
Click to expand...

I really don't see how this concerns you, as you are from CA - USA. It would seem you are happy with your lot in USA. You don't live in EU and have in my honest opinion no right to question our laws.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
charlituna said:
First, where is your iron clad proof of what Apple staff is claiming. Seems to me that you a believing the reports which are often fifth hand and have no proof either way.

Second. Apple Care is (for computers) two more years of what Apple as the manufacturer of tens. It is not now nor has ever claimed to have jack to do with local laws including these 'lemon' laws
Click to expand...

Not sure if you think we operate kangeroo courts over in this socialist hell-hole but if there was no evidence that Apple were breaking local laws then a) there would be no fines levied and b) they'd have appealed. No?
 
flat five said:
apple gets sued when they are doing illegal and/or abusive things..
Click to expand...

No, that's not how lawyers work.

They try to find someone rich to sue, for any reason, and hope for a settlement. It costs companies a lot of money to FIGHT lawsuits. If Apple knows they are guilty, they would settle out of court for less money than go to court and pay more money just to fight and try to win. Apple goes to court more often than not, so clearly, Apple thinks they can win.
 
Vip said:
I really don't see how this concerns you, as you are from CA - USA. It would seem you are happy with your lot in USA. You don't live in EU and have in my honest opinion no right to question our laws.
Click to expand...

It's certainly intriguing why some of those based in the States get so bent out of shape whenever this sort of news crops up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Retrofire said:
Apple.


That's your first error. We talk about Apple, not about Samsung.
Click to expand...

He was showing an example of a company that is NOT being sued by the EU that is offering world-wide policies that vary; in order to disprove the person who insisted they would have to be uniform world-wide. I don't think there was an error there; the counterexample was solid.
 
BillyBobBongo said:
This is simply wrong. If my headphone jack breaks after the year period is over I state in my complaint that the product is quite simply 'not fit for purpose'. A product should be able to be used as intended for a reasonable period of time. If Apple object I bring in the Office of Fair Trade (UK example). .
Click to expand...

You might want to check those facts because you can't just scream replace it and toss out the name of some law and that's that. Even the Office of Fair Trade is going to tell you that you may have to prove the issue was a known defect at time of purchase at your own cost, take them to court etc. just saying 'its not fit' isn't always enough depending on what it is and what happened to it. If Apple can show that the issue might have been caused by you mishandling your device and you can't prove that that is 100% not the case or a possible cause, you can lose.
 
Vip said:
That would be the redneck solution i suppose...
Click to expand...

It might stop the EU member states bashing Apple at every given moment though, and may actually make them realise how hopelessly inadequate their consumer protection is 95% of the time.
 
Carniphage said:
You may not have noticed. But Apple is a retailer.
And where it is a retailer, it misrepresents the statutory protection, in order to convince the buyer to take out Apple Care.
Click to expand...

Is Apple doing so or is this more a case that the consumer has no idea what the statutory protection actually covers? If you don't know the difference between a manufacturer's warranty and the guarantee afforded to consumers under the Sale of Goods Act in the UK (or your own country's equivalent legislation) as so many here clearly do not, how are you to judge?

Under UK legislation (in accordance with the EU directive of 1999) you only have six months of effective cover for faults discovered after purchase (other issues such as 'fit for purpose' are less limited). After this, you are free to take the retailer to court for up to six years after purchase and plead your case at your expense, which is not refundable even if you win. That is your statutory protection.

Apple as a manufacturer gives you further protection for up to one year including phone support for three months. That does not fall under 'statutory protection'.

I am not supporting Apple, DSG or any other outfit that goes out of its way to flog extended warranties that most people do not need, which is an issue all in itself, but I rarely find any journalist reporting on these issues that even has a basic understanding of consumer law. It is not as if the law in question is particularly difficult to understand, either.
 
Brian Y said:
It might stop the EU member states bashing Apple at every given moment though, and may actually make them realise how hopelessly inadequate their consumer protection is 95% of the time.
Click to expand...

Oh get a grip man. We have laws to protect the consumer, whether it is Apple or any other company. Example, when you buy a washing machine/Fridge/TV in the UK, you get 2 year warranty as standard (indeed if you purchase a TV at Costco you get 5 yrs warranty in the UK as standard!). Now as far as I know a washing machine has far more moving parts and is more likely to require repair than any Apple Kit. It is done free of charge within the first 2 years NO Questions asked. So what is wrong in requiring Apple or for that matter any reputable company "to put their money where their mouth is"?
 
weckart said:
Is Apple doing so or is this more a case that the consumer has no idea what the statutory protection actually covers?
Click to expand...

Apple is doing so. When trying to sell Apple Care in its stores, they misrepresent the default amount of cover and thereby oversell the benefit of the product.

I have had direct experience of this.

Interestingly, I have not heard of Apple actually denying people the statutory protection.
 
Vip said:
I really don't see how this concerns you, as you are from CA - USA. It would seem you are happy with your lot in USA. You don't live in EU and have in my honest opinion no right to question our laws.
Click to expand...

Given as we have the right to express our opinions in the USA, and tend to exercise that right freely (something you may be uncomfortable with, but there's the cultural difference): let me say that many Americans do have a keen interest in business and the way it works. As a result we tend to be highly sensitive to the distinction between necessary consumer protection and bureaucratic overreach. In this particular case, the EU rule is quite poorly designed and inflexible. Apple happens to offer, in my experience, one of the best post-sales support products on the planet. The EU rule is that they must provide something cheaper and crappier; furthermore, the EU rule seems to have confused many of you, as you seems to be equating the crappy mandated service with AppleCare. Not a well-designed rule, and hardly necessary. And, BTW, there's no jingoism here; our government has on occasion done things as bad or worse. Nor am I of the right-wing persuasion-- there are plenty of instances where government regulation and consumer protection are highly desirable. This just doesn't seem to be one of them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Besides cost silliness, why don't they just bump their standard warranty to 2 years? They do have some semblance of pride in the quality of their products right?
 
Mr. Retrofire said:
Judge, i raped this 14 year old girl last light. The reason was, that i “try to maintain uniform world-wide support policies”. That makes the rape legal. Not!?

;-)
Click to expand...

Ret, are you arguing with yourself again? :rolleyes:

----------
TheIguana said:
Besides cost silliness, why don't they just bump their standard warranty to 2 years? They do have some semblance of pride in the quality of their products right?
Click to expand...

Yes, the reason is indeed "cost silliness."

I guess I would ask why EU citizens just don't buy AppleCare. Is it also "cost silliness?"
 
Mr. Retrofire said:
Has nothing to do with lawyers.

If you break the law, you must pay for your crime. Not very difficult to understand.
Click to expand...

If you break the law, you

(a) must be CAUGHT
(b) must be PROVEN GUILTY or ACCEPT A PLEA

to pay for your crime. Both of which involve money and lawyers. Not very difficult to understand.
 
Vip said:
Oh get a grip man. We have laws to protect the consumer, whether it is Apple or any other company. Example, when you buy a washing machine/Fridge/TV in the UK, you get 2 year warranty as standard (indeed if you purchase a TV at Costco you get 5 yrs warranty in the UK as standard!). Now as far as I know a washing machine has far more moving parts and is more likely to require repair than any Apple Kit. It is done free of charge within the first 2 years NO Questions asked. So what is wrong in requiring Apple or for that matter any reputable company "to put their money where their mouth is"?
Click to expand...

No, I won't "get a grip" as you say.

That isn't the law though. That is the company offering a warranty on top. There's a difference between what a company does do, and what it is legally required to do. In the UK, we have the Sale of Goods Act, which actually trumps most EU laws. We're covered for 6 years (or a reasonable period of time), not 2 as in the rest of the EU.

However, legally, a company is only responsible after 6 months if you can prove that there was an inherent fault that was present when you purchased it. That's what the law means. It's not a 2/6 year no questions asked warranty - far from it.

The onus is switched in the first 6 months though - it's down to the seller to prove that there wasn't an inherent fault (i.e. prove you've dropped it, etc).

I suggest you read up on this law before telling me to get a grip.
 
Gasu E. said:
Yes, the reason is indeed "cost silliness."

I guess I would ask why EU citizens just don't buy AppleCare. Is it also "cost silliness?"
Click to expand...

Call me old-fashioned but I do like it when a company stands behind their product with a nice long warranty. ;)
 
Gasu E. said:
Apple happens to offer, in my experience, one of the best post-sales support products on the planet
Click to expand...
And one of the shortest at that (at least in Europe):
Samsung offers two years, Sony offers two years, etc. etc...

Gasu E. said:
The EU rule is that they must provide something cheaper and crappier
Click to expand...
The EU rule just state minimum warranty requirements for sellers. Nothing more, nothing less. Apple can offer what they desire to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back