Apple Will Soon Send Payments for $95 Million Refurbished Device Class Action Lawsuit

[deathcab]

Had to laugh at that statement. Why settle for $95M if it isn't true? 😄

It's not at all unlikely that defending a single class action case will cost a company like Apple well in excess of $100M if it goes all the way to trial / judgment / appeal. Then you have the risk (no matter how low) that you lose and end up having incurred those costs plus having to pay a massive judgment.

Companies and/or their insurance carriers commonly make the business decision to settle legal matters -- even if they are almost certain to win -- where the cost of doing so is likely to be less than the cost of proceeding to trial and winning (or even worse, losing, as outlined above).

It's a logical business decision to make, but also part of the reason the courts get filled with frivolous lawsuits like this one as plaintiffs' attorneys pursue what is often referred to as "settlement value" (the delta resulting from that risk/reward analysis).

 

[JPack]

Cause a jury could potentially award a lot more

Why would a jury award anything if Apple had the technical evidence to defend it? Apple has a $1B annual legal budget for some of the best lawyers.

$100M is nothing for Apple. They literally paid Jony Ive $100M for doing nothing after he left Apple except for PR.

 

[deathcab]

This lawsuit may hold more water with other companies, but Apple's refurbs are the closest things to brand new devices that I've ever seen. I buy Apple refurb virtually 100% of the time if they are available and have any meaningful cost savings compared to brand new.

 

[GuruZac]

Then this is crap, more lawyer BS.

Yeah, I have purchased several refurbished products over the years, and never had an issue. Product looked new, came in original packaging. And a refurbished device is better than the device you sent to Apple.

 

[JPack]

It's not at all unlikely that defending a single class action case will cost a company like Apple well in excess of $100M if it goes all the way to trial / judgment / appeal. Then you have the risk (no matter how low) that you lose and end up having incurred those costs plus having to pay a massive judgment.

Companies and/or their insurance carriers commonly make the business decision to settle legal matters -- even if they are almost certain to win -- where the cost of doing so is likely to be less than the cost of proceeding to trial and winning (or even worse, losing, as outlined above).

It's a logical business decision to make, but also part of the reason the courts get filled with frivolous lawsuits like this one as plaintiffs' attorneys pursue what is often referred to as "settlement value" (the delta resulting from that risk/reward analysis).

Apple values PR more than anything else. They sued Qualcomm knowing they would likely lose and ended up paying at least $4.5B.

If Apple had a shred of evidence to defend themselves, they would have continued the court battle.

 

[JM]

Ohhhhhh BOY! $28! Wooooooo!

Lawyers win again. Lol

 

[NY Guitarist]

This happened to me a long time ago with a Powerbook screen gone bad.
AppleCare was great about sending me a box to ship it back but when it was returned the top cover was replaced along with the screen, which I understand, but it was clearly USED and looked terrible.

Another call to AppleCare and it was escalated to the point they took it back and replaced it again.

 

[Edsel]

Beneficiaries of class action lawsuits are usually the lawyers. I once received a check for $1.50 on an airline class action. I didn't cash it. I framed it next to my framed 100 Trillion Zimbabwe dollar note. OTH, I did receive 80% reimbursement on a class action against BMW for their horrible 5 Series engineering.

 

[Apleeseed84]

So that email i got saying I’ll get 58 is accurate, hahahaha hello iphone 14 pro max case LULZ, iI thought it was spam!!! It’s from noreply@eqippay.com

According to our records, you are eligible to receive a payment of $57.80 in the settlement for the matter entitled Maldonado, et al. v. Apple Inc., et al., Case No. 3:16-CV-04067-WHO.

As Settlement Administrator for the matter, we’re sending you this courtesy email to inform you that by August 30, 2022, you will receive a payment notification email that contains a link to claim your payment electronically. Once you receive that email, you will have until November 28, 2022 to claim your payment.

Please monitor your email inbox carefully for our next email. Additional details about this matter are available at www.ReplacementDeviceLawsuit.com or by contacting us via one of the following methods:

 

[Scoob Redux]

Too bad it was only $95M. Apple gets off easy by settling. I'd like to see them go to trial and have a jury award closer to $1B or more. Of course, that's why Apple settles - they can screw over consumers with shady practices, and then pay a small settlement while raking in billions in savings from giving out used replacements.

 

[Rookwood]

Nice to hear this wasn't a phishing email. Sure could be: these class-action-suites are always sending email from brand-new-just-for-the-suite domains, so it's hard to tell what is legit. Real opportunity for data gathering for nefarious purposes using class-action-settlement as a ruse.

And yes, the specific amount is not the same for all people, but individually calculated. Probably from Apple's records, which they associate with AppleID. The email came to my email that I use solely for AppleID, so they must have gotten that from Apple.

 

[NervousFish2]

Got my email today. They're giving me $43.35!

 

[crisss1205]

So that email i got saying I’ll get 58 is accurate, hahahaha hello iphone 14 pro max case LULZ, iI thought it was spam!!! It’s from noreply@eqippay.com

According to our records, you are eligible to receive a payment of $57.80 in the settlement for the matter entitled Maldonado, et al. v. Apple Inc., et al., Case No. 3:16-CV-04067-WHO.

As Settlement Administrator for the matter, we’re sending you this courtesy email to inform you that by August 30, 2022, you will receive a payment notification email that contains a link to claim your payment electronically. Once you receive that email, you will have until November 28, 2022 to claim your payment.

Please monitor your email inbox carefully for our next email. Additional details about this matter are available at www.ReplacementDeviceLawsuit.com or by contacting us via one of the following methods:

Same, I guess that means I had 2 devices that qualified at $28.90 each.

 

[erikkfi]

I don't agree that the refurbs you get as part of a repair are equivalent to new. If they're equivalent to new, why doesn't Apple give you a new device?

Anecdotal, but: earlier this year when I did a "battery replacement" for my iPad, they just gave me a replacement. The digitizer died within 24 hours. Tell me that unit wasn't returned for a faulty digitizer back when it was sold new, I dare ya!

 

[CWallace]

Had to laugh at that statement. Why settle for $95M if it isn't true? 😄

They probably felt it would cost them more than that to fully litigate the case through all the appeals (if they lost) and, as you and others have noted, the potential PR hit was more important than the financial.

And that PR hit is why companies often settle and the lawyers who bring these lawsuits are counting on that fact for a relatively quick and easy paycheck.

I’ve only had a few devices repaired or replaced under AppleCare+. One was literally the day after I received it, on launch and it was the 11. So I knew I was getting a new device as replacement, because refurbishing hadn’t started yet.

But I was wondering if the replacements after a certain amount of time were new that they put aside for replacing, or refurbished.

My iPhone 6 Plus blew it's cellular antenna about two years in and I received a refurbished model. Had better battery life and worked fine for the year or so I had it before upgrading to a new model.

 

[jimbobb24]

Had to laugh at that statement. Why settle for $95M if it isn't true? 😄

Sorry, but any refurb that likely uses a salvaged logic board or other component won't be as reliable as a new one. This is true physically and electronically. Issues like the iPhone X green lines and iPhone 7 audio IC are related to drops. Someone in a refurbishment facility would need to examine it using a high powered microscope. That simply isn't possible due to economics.

Terms of AppleCare explicitly say refurbishment items mays be used. Read the thread.

 

[kevinruan26]

I'm guessing US only?

 

[mikethemartian]

Logic board, display, and all other components are salvaged from other devices.

Board level component repairs for liquid damage is performed, but the board will never be as reliable as new. This is because materials like epoxy underfill, which help keep the chips in place, are never replaced.

As a EE I have seen plenty of reworked boards and I would never accept one as new.

 

[mikethemartian]

This lawsuit may hold more water with other companies, but Apple's refurbs are the closest things to brand new devices that I've ever seen. I buy Apple refurb virtually 100% of the time if they are available and have any meaningful cost savings compared to brand new.

There you are specifically being told it is a refurb and getting a discount for it.

 

[JPack]

For anyone keeping track, Apple has now removed the claim from their U.S. page, "equivalent to new in performance and reliability" and replaced it with "tested and passed Apple functional requirements."

Legal - Repair Terms and Conditions - Apple

www.apple.com

 

[Luposian]

I've once had my iPhone 7 replaced 3 times under apple care and every time there was something with the phone. so no refurbeshed is not good as new.

My iPhone 5c worked perfectly, til the day I took it into a 3rd party place to replace the battery. They took my money and ruined my iPhone 5c in the process. I took it into Verizon (where I originally bought it from) and they gave me a replacement. Within months, it was acting like it was going bananas! I couldn't make a call, because it kept trying to take pictures and would cancel the call. My phone was quickly becoming entirely useless! It was, of course, a refurb. Ended up having to upgrade to a iPhone 6S, which is now begining to show it's age, battery-wise. However, as iOS 16 will likely not work on an iPhone 6S and I've already faced a situatioin where I HAD to update my iOS version for iBotta to even function, I realize I need to consider upgrading my phone, to even keep using some apps. "FORCED obsolescence" strikes again! Not a fun situation to have to face, but that's life when you play in Apple's sandbox...

 

[JPack]

Terms of AppleCare explicitly say refurbishment items mays be used. Read the thread.

You should take your own advice. Apple doesn't say that at all. And that's why they had to settle.

Apple stated, they use "parts or products that are new or equivalent to new in performance and reliability." Refurb parts are definitely not equivalent to new.

 

[Luposian]

For anyone keeping track, Apple has now removed the claim from their U.S. page, "equivalent to new in performance and reliability" and replaced it with "tested and passed Apple functional requirements."

Legal - Repair Terms and Conditions - Apple

www.apple.com

It's all in the wording... had they simply said that, to begin with, they could have saved themselves $95 million dollars! Stupid is as stupid does! 😆

 

[rpmurray]

Whenever there is a class-action lawsuit, the lawyers that win the case should be required to divulge the amount of the payout that is going into their pockets.

 

[antiprotest]

I never believed them when they told me that the American justice system was broken.

The $12 million going to my lawyers and the $0.93 jingling in my pocket is proof that corporations cannot keep taking advantage of consumers with impunity.

The paralegal even drove me home in her new BMW because she didn't want me to lose all my settlement money even before I got home by taking the bus.

I am taking my kid to Taco Bell tonight to celebrate. The $0.93 should cover at least 1/5 of the tax.