Apple's $95 Million Settlement Over Refurbished Replacement Devices Not Being 'Equivalent to New' Moves Forward

[MacRumors]

Back in October, Apple agreed to pay $95 million to settle an ongoing class action lawsuit that accused the company of violating various U.S. laws and regulations by providing customers with refurbished replacement devices instead of new devices when repairs were required under AppleCare.

Administrators handling the case have now updated the "Replacement Device Lawsuit" website with details on the settlement, and have started sending out emails to customers who might be eligible for a payment after the settlement is finalized.

Customers who purchased an AppleCare Protection Plan or AppleCare+ for an iPhone or iPad between July 20, 2012 and September, 30, 2021 and who received a refurbished replacement device from Apple are included in the lawsuit.

Apple's Repair Terms and Conditions in the United States make it clear that the company might use "parts or products that are new or refurbished and equivalent to new in performance and reliability" when repairing or replacing a device, but the lawsuit claimed that refurbished devices are "not equivalent to new in performance and reliability."

The lawsuit was seeking compensation for iPhone, iPad, and iPod owners who purchased AppleCare or AppleCare+ coverage and were unhappy with receiving an "inferior" refurbished device instead of a device that works "like new."

Apple has opted to settle the lawsuit with a $95 million payment because it has already spanned six years and would only result in additional legal fees, but the company has admitted no wrong doing and "vigorously" denies that refurbished devices are inferior to new devices.

The $95 million settlement has already received preliminary approval, and Apple customers now have an option to exclude themselves from the settlement or object, which can be done on the lawsuit website. The website also includes a form for those who are interested in making sure that they're included in the settlement.

A final fairness hearing is set to take place on April 27, 2022, and after that is when class members can expect to begin receiving payments. After attorneys' fees and other expenses, the class members could receive somewhere between $63.4 million and $68.1 million, with that amount split up between those affected.

(Thanks, Daniel!)

Article Link: Apple's $95 Million Settlement Over Refurbished Replacement Devices Not Being 'Equivalent to New' Moves Forward

 

[saudor]

nice. So the lawyers get tens of millions as usual and everyone else gets $1.99 each

 

[planteater]

I’d be unhappy as hell if I received a refurbished machine replacement. Especially after paying for AppleCare. Apple is wrong on this one.

 

[bulbousnub]

Still waiting on that Batterygate Class Action payout....

 

[Ceecephous]

I really get their point, i really do. But maan do we need more electronic waste ?

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

I’d be unhappy as hell if I received a refurbished machine replacement. Especially after paying for AppleCare. Apple is wrong on this one.

I agree. Well, it does come with a one-year warranty. But it is still wrong since AppleCare is expensive.

 

[CWallace]

My iPhone 6 Plus was replaced towards the final year of my AppleCare because the cellular modem died on it and I never expected them to hand me a new iPhone 6 Plus.

For the record, the refurb I received looked and worked flawlessly.

And I buy plenty of refurbished Mac desktops and laptops and they have all been cosmetically and functionally perfect.

 

[justperry]

You get a new device where I live, that is, if it's not repairable.

 

[NBAasDOGG]

In the Netherlands, Apple already lost a lawsuit few years ago regarding refurbished replacement products.

Here, if your product breaks within 2 years of normal use, they always have to give you a new one.

 

[1284814]

I really get their point, i really do. But maan do we need more electronic waste ?

What ? If you payed for a service - you need to be served right. If Apple is so worried about e waste they would make repair easier and convenient.

 

[JPack]

If Apple thought they were right, they wouldn't settle. There's no way legal fees would exceed $95 million.

 

[0924487]

I really get their point, i really do. But maan do we need more electronic waste ?

They sell them to 3rd world countries or donate them to public schools.

 

[Bandaman]

I'd be bothered by this normally because most refurbishes suck, except that I usually buy refurb anyway from Apple because it's generally BETTER than new, at least in Apple's case. I can't tell it's used at all and everything has been diagnosed and fixed so you can be sure nothing is wrong with it and still comes with a one year warranty. Even peeling off the factory sticky plastic still feels new.

But I still think replacements should be new.

 

[appleArticulate]

If Apple thought they were right, they wouldn't settle. There's no way legal fees would exceed $95 million.

Well if you read the whole article, it looks like legal fees are around 30 million already.

 

[justperry]

In the Netherlands, Apple already lost a lawsuit few years ago regarding refurbished replacement products.

Here, if your product breaks within 2 years of normal use, they always have to give you a new one.

If it's unrepairable.

 

[now i see it]

There’s a certain satisfaction to all this.
Company A (the richest company in the world) tries to make even more money by pulling a fast one on its customers.
Customers say F U and sue the company for $95 million.

 

[appleArticulate]

I'd be bothered by this normally because most refurbishes suck, except that I usually buy refurb anyway from Apple because it's generally BETTER than new. I can't tell it's used at all and everything has been diagnosed and fixed so you can be sure nothing is wrong with it and still comes with a on year warranty. Even peeling off the factory sticky plastic still feels new.

But I still think replacements should be new.

I really can't imagine being upset by this, unless of course your device is brand new. Most people's devices are not brand new when seeking warranty replacement, so it hardly seems reasonable to expect a brand new device to replace your used device. Especially since Apple refurbished devices are in some cases better than new, as they've had various fixes applied that new devices don't have.

 

[Bandaman]

I really can't imagine being upset by this, unless of course your device is brand new. Most people's devices are not brand new when seeking warranty replacement, so it hardly seems reasonable to expect a brand new device to replace your used device. Especially since Apple refurbished devices are in some cases better than new, as they've had various fixes applied that new devices don't have.

While I agree, I've always gotten new replacements when I use my warranty on literally anything from TVs to game consoles to whatever. In Apple's case, they can give me refurbs all day because I know how reliable in quality they are.

 

[appleArticulate]

There’s a certain satisfaction to all this.
Company A (the richest company in the world) tries to make even more money by pulling a fast one on its customers.
Customers say F U and sue the company for $95 million.

Lol. no.

Company A saves untold millions (or billions) by providing refurb instead if new replacements for a long period of time.
Customers sue, company A settles for $95 million. Lawyers get $30 million. Customers lucky if they get 99 cents out of the settlement.
Meanwhile, nothing about this forces Apple to start replacing devices with new ones.

 

[appleArticulate]

While I agree, I've always gotten new replacements when I use my warranty on literally anything from TVs to game consoles to whatever. In Apple's case, they can give me refurbs all day because I know how reliable in quality they are.

In most of those cases refurb products don't exist, or don't meet the standard to qualify as a replacement. Apple's do.

 

[Bandaman]

In most of those cases refurb products don't exist, or don't meet the standard to qualify as a replacement. Apple's do.

Yes. I'd be pissed getting a refurb from anywhere else.

 

[Populus]

I’d be unhappy as hell if I received a refurbished machine replacement. Especially after paying for AppleCare. Apple is wrong on this one.

And not only under AppleCare. I replaced my old 2010 13" MacBook Pro screen because of an accident the glass had a crack. I went to the Apple Store Genius Bar and I paid what they asked me for replacing the top case with the screen.

The new screen had washed out colours, and the overall quality was worse. Also, the hinge made a light, cracking sound each time I opened and closed the lid. This happened in 2013 or 2014 I can't remember.

This replacement part cost me a lot, because Apple repairs are pretty expensive. It is not fair that the replacement part was a lower quality part compared to new ones.

EDIT: Ok, @appleArticulate you can disagree all you want, what I am telling is true, and you're not changing that. You're free to not believe me, of course, but there hasn't been a Class action lawsuit for nothing. People don't make up this stories, we don't have nothing to gain from this.

 

[JPack]

Well if you read the whole article, it looks like legal fees are around 30 million already.

Those are contingency fees, not legal fees. They're what the plaintiffs agreed their lawyers could take (30-40%) from the settlement. Actual legal fees aren't going to cost more than a few million dollars.

 

[StupidOpinion]

I really get their point, i really do. But maan do we need more electronic waste ?

if they have refurblished components, then they can sell those components as refurblished.

 

[JM]

nice. So the lawyers get tens of millions as usual and everyone else gets $1.99 each

Just enough for an AppStore purchase. ?