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 Stores Will Now Decline to Repair iPhones Reported as Missing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I work with hearing aids and if a “lost” and replaced aid is brought in for service we confiscate it and send it back to the manufacturer. Not exactly the same thing but that phone should not be returned to the person bringing it in unless they can prove that they are the owner and didn’t let Apple know it was found.
The problem a lot of people aren’t mentioning is that, let’s say, you buy an iPhone on OfferUp that someone found and resold as their own. You might pay 75% of the price as new and are now left with a phone that’s no good. What we need is a web interface on Apple’s website that lets us safely purchase the device with coverage and allows an owner to prove they were in fact the previous owner. Apple just has little incentive but to punish people for buying used because they benefit very little from the second-hand market (except for App Store commissions and a mostly feigned environmental benefit.)
This is totally false. All of it. Read Alan Wynn’s reply. That is accurate.
Employees, nor any workers, are policeman. The solution is to hand the phone back saying it is not repairable of move on. No one wants to get assaulted over a "missing" phone.
Police forces in some countries, certainly the UK, will sell off goods they have received, likely as unclaimed lost property.
People who buy from the police in that way have good title. Yet it could quite easily happen that the phone had been reported stolen. Quite possibly, the police will be on the ball enough to check its status. But possibly not.
Within one country, it might be resolved relatively easily. Across borders, much more difficult.
This may depend on where you live? As far as I'm aware, in America at least, there's really not a way to legally/legitimately purchase a stolen product, no matter how many hands it passed through first or how long it's been.
I used to work for a small computer store, many years ago. Around Christmas-time, a guy came in wanting to sell the owner a new, but open-box Toshiba laptop. He claimed it was a gift he'd just gotten, but after using it only once or twice, he found out his wife had bought a different one as a surprise gift for him --so he just wanted to get some money back out of this one. My boss photocopied his drivers' license just to be on the safe side, and then paid him cash for it and put it on his shelf to resell.
About a week passed by and the local sheriff showed up at his door, seizing the laptop, claiming it had been recently stolen from a Best Buy and tracked down to our shop having purchased it from the thief. My boss was never compensated for it. He was just told he could sue the thief later, if he wanted to try to get his money back. They were even threatening to arrest my boss until he showed them he had the photocopied drivers' license to prove he purchased it in good faith.
Then whoever bought the phone is criminally liable for posession of stolen property. You should not buy anything that comes from a questionable source.
No, because this argument can be used for rape allegations, and it’s not valid there, so it shouldn’t be valid here.
Yep, definitely agree, not worth the confrontation risk of an Apple Store employee having to tell the customer that they're not giving the phone back. As many have mentioned, they'll likely claim they purchased the phone secondhand (whether they did or not), and in those situations, would be forcing the employee to basically play the "police officer" role... Not to mention the fringe situations where there's some mistake with the database / phone actually is legit, and the person is now out their phone.
For all those reasons, makes much more sense to just say they're not able to repair it, and have the customer move along, even if that situation is allowing the "thief" to keep the stolen device.
I'm curious, in your situation, when you do confiscate the hearing aid, how do those customers bringing it in react? Maybe it's rare enough that there aren't a lot of stories, but have there been any situations of customers causing a scene / risk of violence?
My Omega Speedmaster was stolen some years ago.
At the time, I questioned how Omega could keep a serialized registry but not capture and return stolen watches to their rightful owners when they came in for repair.
Apple is far ahead of Omega.
At the time, I questioned how Omega could keep a serialized registry but not capture and return stolen watches to their rightful owners when they came in for repair.
Apple is far ahead of Omega.
The title stays with the legal owner who it was stolen from even if someone else down the line pays for it. There are probably very special circumstances where the government might be able to transfer the title if they follow “due process of law”.
Before:
Thief - "Here's my iPhone, could you please repair it?"
Apple Genius - "Let me check, hmm I see this is a stolen iPhone, what repair did you want again?"
After:
Thief - "Here's my iPhone, could you please repair it?"
Apple Genius - "Hmm, I see this is a stolen iPhone, sorry you'll have to take it somewhere else"
And this policy is really stupid and may result in substantial civil liability for your company one day. It's considered conversion, a civil tort on par with theft/larceny (the criminal version), to deprive someone of their belongings based on some unilateral theory that the reported loss is accurate. If someone could show that the improper deprivation of their property led to some type of additional harm or damage—such as they got in an accident after having done without their hearing aid—it could be enough for the right lawyer to ensure that a customer in that position bankrupts the company. Sometimes disclaimers for repair don't hold up in court either if another law is broken in the process.
This is also the same reason that Apple has no real motive to interfere; there's far more for them to lose fielding civil judgments than to gain by the added consumer confidence.
Think about how simple reporting a device lost or stolen is. All someone needs is the IMEI, serial, etc. and appropriate authority to access a database. No checks or balances, no guarantee that a recovered item is cleared from the database, no central authority for oversight, and plain incompetence is rampant. There might also be the nefarious use case where someone sells a device and then 60 days later, after the refund period has lapsed, they report it stolen to have it returned to them. There are so many holes in the concept of a simple lost and found database. Someone like Apple could potentially pull it off though seeing that they have a very robust history of devices being linked into iCloud accounts. Still, there will always be enough exceptions to make them think twice about implementing it.
Surprisingly, that's the exact right move for them to make. It just unfortunately slumps the entire secondhand market rather than deterring the theft itself. That's ultimately why I think Apple's goal is 98% profit, 2% protection. The only reason I imagine they don't all but insist on an annual upgrade and recycle program is because that would mean losing out on all of the additional sales that the carriers themselves (and other channels) make by bundling their plans with iPhone. The people on this forum, we'd all just simply go into an Apple Store, but many would just get an Android instead because that's all their company will pay for, etc.
In the before scenario, Apple currently don’t check this database of stolen phones so they don’t know it’s stolen.
I'd hazard a guess that the majority of "stolen" phones are in fact fraudulent insurance claims or financed devices.
Refusing to repair phones marked as lost is different to refusing to repair stolen phones.
Aren't missing phones blocked from networks, let alone Apple repairs ?! (if you're stealing phones would you use Apple to repair it anyway?). It's crazy - why would you report it missing in the first place? All parts/serial numbers in that device should be flagged as stolen/lost property.
I love me some apple. But took my iPhone x in for a repair so I could give phone to dad, face ID not working. Want $900 to fix. It's an old phone you can buy online for $500. The sweetener, offered $250 for trade in once fixed despite no damage.
Don't mind paying a premium but ripped blind is a joke
Don't mind paying a premium but ripped blind is a joke
Reading this thread I'm seeing two common areas of discussion:
1) Why don't Apple confiscate the device?
2) Various arguments to and from about insurance and ownership.
Why is everyone in those discussions assuming that the device was even covered with AppleCare+?
In addition, there's a reason why shops no longer allow employees to stop shoplifters - the risk of resulting physical response or potential costs of legal action just isn't worth the shrinkage.
1) Why don't Apple confiscate the device?
2) Various arguments to and from about insurance and ownership.
Why is everyone in those discussions assuming that the device was even covered with AppleCare+?
In addition, there's a reason why shops no longer allow employees to stop shoplifters - the risk of resulting physical response or potential costs of legal action just isn't worth the shrinkage.
Actually, this is for the best. You should take it to the police and file it as found.
Leaving it at an Apple Store means an employee can embezzle it with very little risk of getting caught.
Of course, this was at a time when iDevices didn’t have Find My / Apple ID registration.
cc @mansplains
I don’t see why Apple would replace a stolen iPhone. They only repair iPhones that are registered with an Apple ID afaik.