Class Action lawsuit filed against Apple

[Stratus Fear]

I have mixed feelings about this lawsuit myself, but some of you are oversimplifying things rather ridiculously.

The best (or worst) example is the constant refrain that dissatisfied customers should simply return their phones. Will Apple compensate you for the hours you waited in line to buy the phone? The time it takes for you to return the product? Your inconvenience at having to go without a phone after said return? Your early termination fee (and subsequent reactivation fee) if you changed carriers to buy the iPhone? Get real -- there are many hidden costs here you aren't considering.

Also, spare me this talk about how all advertising exaggerates. There is a difference between mere puffery like "best product ever" and objectively quantifiable claims like "twice as fast."

Regarding the bolded parts above: no one is entitled to compensation from Apple for these things. None of those were within Apple's control, but were completely within the purchaser's control to avoid. They aren't responsible for your decisions there. That's why your options are return, repair, replace. That's not oversimplified, that's just how it is. All these lawsuits are about is just a bunch of self-important people that feel they're entitled. They're not. All Apple owes them, should they decided to purchase the phone and therefore accept all return, purchase and warranty policies thereof, are a) a working phone, b) should situation "a" not happen or not be possible, a return for refund within 30 days, or a repair/replacement (if possible) thereafter. If neither of those can happen, they owe you an alternate form of compensation. Point is, everyone has this information available to them at point of sale.

Now, if you want to argue that Apple has to take responsibility and make sure they repair or replace broken phones, I couldn't agree more, and should they be unable to, even outside of the return period, then some form of alternate compensation is in order. But in my opinion, it seems like they're already working on fixing things, and people ought to go with those options then. Lawsuits are only needed if a) Apple can't and won't fix the phone and they b) refuse to make things right by an alternate form if situation "a" is the case.

 

[bigmouth]

Hours waiting in line: Your choice to do that, Apple didn't force you to get one in the first few weeks of its arrival.

Saying it's my choice just begs the question. But for Apple's alleged lies, I never would have made that choice.

Returning the product: That's a hassle for sure, but I don't know of any companies or businesses that would compensate you for that. Some offer to pay return shipping, so that may be a close example.

Why is that relevant? These other companies didn't lie to induce my purchases...

Your inconvenience. Sounds the same as the 'returning the product' issue.

Then see my response above.

Early termination fee: Your choice to break contract with your previous carrier. Why should Apple compensate you for that?

Because Apple's alleged lie induced me to break that contract.

Activation fee: AT&T should refund that if you're not satisfied with the performance of the phone/network combination.

I'm talking about the fee to (re)activate service with an alternative carrier. That's money I wouldn't have had to spend but for Apple's lies.

My data speed is twice as fast. More than twice, in fact. I don't see how anyone can say that claim is false.

Mine too. But how do we know we aren't just lucky?

I, too, wish the 3G performance was better/more robust. But, I don't drop calls and things pretty much work as advertised for me. While I sympathize with people having more problems than me, I also disagree with the notion or implication that all or most iPhone 3Gs are failures.

I actually agree. I just don't agree that this renders the lawsuit frivolous. I'm sure the vast majority of Ford Pintos never erupted in flames...

 

[bluenoise]

Regarding the bolded parts above: no one is entitled to compensation from Apple for these things. None of those were within Apple's control, but were completely within the purchaser's control to avoid. They aren't responsible for your decisions there. That's why your options are return, repair, replace. That's not oversimplified, that's just how it is. All these lawsuits are about is just a bunch of self-important people that feel they're entitled. They're not. All Apple owes them, should they decided to purchase the phone and therefore accept all return, purchase and warranty policies thereof, are a) a working phone, b) should situation "a" not happen or not be possible, a return for refund within 30 days, or a repair/replacement (if possible) thereafter. If neither of those can happen, they owe you an alternate form of compensation. Point is, everyone has this information available to them at point of sale.

Now, if you want to argue that Apple has to take responsibility and make sure they repair or replace broken phones, I couldn't agree more, and should they be unable to, even outside of the return period, then some form of alternate compensation is in order. But in my opinion, it seems like they're already working on fixing things, and people ought to go with those options then. Lawsuits are only needed if a) Apple can't and won't fix the phone and they b) refuse to make things right by an alternate form if situation "a" is the case.

Well said.

 

[bluenoise]

Saying it's my choice just begs the question. But for Apple's alleged lies, I never would have made that choice.

Why is that relevant? These other companies didn't lie to induce my purchases...

Then see my response above.

Because Apple's alleged lie induced me to break that contract.

I'm talking about the fee to (re)activate service with an alternative carrier. That's money I wouldn't have had to spend but for Apple's lies.

Mine too. But how do we know we aren't just lucky?

I actually agree. I just don't buy most of the arguments being advanced above.

What lies did Apple say that made you stand in line to get an iPhone 3G near launch?

 

[Stratus Fear]

Sitting here and talking about Apple's "lies" isn't going to further anything. Some people's phones work, other's don't. Clearly, calling it "lies" is therefore highly debatable, and ultimately irrelevant to the situation at hand.

 

[bigmouth]

Regarding the bolded parts above: no one is entitled to compensation from Apple for these things. None of those were within Apple's control, but were completely within the purchaser's control to avoid. They aren't responsible for your decisions there.

Nonsense. If they lied -- and I agree that's a big if -- then Apple should be responsible for any choices I made in reasonable reliance on the lie.

Sitting here and talking about Apple's "lies" isn't going to further anything. Some people's phones work, other's don't. Clearly, calling it "lies" is therefore highly debatable, and ultimately irrelevant to the situation at hand.

Calling it a "lie" is indeed debatable but far from irrelevant to the question at hand.

What lies did Apple say that made you stand in line to get an iPhone 3G near launch?

That the iPhone 3G is twice as fast as the prior model. Again, I'm not saying that this is definitely a lie. Just that things aren't as simple as saying "it was your choice" to incur the costs I mentioned.

 

[Stratus Fear]

Nonsense. If they lied -- and I agree that's a big if -- then Apple should be responsible for any choices I made in reliance on the lie.

No, they'd be responsible for giving you your money back on the phone and any punishment due on false advertising, but they certainly aren't responsible for your choices made before you give them your credit card at point of sale.

That the iPhone 3G is twice as fast as the prior model. Again, I'm not saying that this is definitely a lie. Just that things aren't as simple as saying "it was your choice" to incur the costs I mentioned.

Said costs could be avoided by not buying the phone. The reason warranties exist, for example, is there's always an implicit expectation that something very well may go wrong with your purchased item. If you read any warranty or return policy text, it's probably pretty explicitly laid out what the seller's/manufacturer's responsibility is. I'm pretty sure part of that isn't paying you for your time. You accept purchase of a product knowing you may need to spend time exercising your warranty rights. Sure, it's not fun, but I don't think anyone would tell you otherwise.

Calling it a "lie" is indeed debatable but far from irrelevant to the question at hand.

No, simply the fact that it's subjective and not cold, hard fact makes it pretty irrelevant. No court is going to call it a lie with a significant number of owners out there that have a product working as advertised. So, I say irrelevant.

 

[Trajectory]

No court is going to call it a lie with a significant number of owners out there that have a product working as advertised. So, I say irrelevant.

Exactly. Some people think the world revolves around their iPhone.

 

[mcdj]

Regarding the bolded parts above: no one is entitled to compensation from Apple for these things. None of those were within Apple's control, but were completely within the purchaser's control to avoid. They aren't responsible for your decisions there. That's why your options are return, repair, replace. That's not oversimplified, that's just how it is. All these lawsuits are about is just a bunch of self-important people that feel they're entitled. They're not. All Apple owes them, should they decided to purchase the phone and therefore accept all return, purchase and warranty policies thereof, are a) a working phone, b) should situation "a" not happen or not be possible, a return for refund within 30 days, or a repair/replacement (if possible) thereafter. If neither of those can happen, they owe you an alternate form of compensation. Point is, everyone has this information available to them at point of sale.

Now, if you want to argue that Apple has to take responsibility and make sure they repair or replace broken phones, I couldn't agree more, and should they be unable to, even outside of the return period, then some form of alternate compensation is in order. But in my opinion, it seems like they're already working on fixing things, and people ought to go with those options then. Lawsuits are only needed if a) Apple can't and won't fix the phone and they b) refuse to make things right by an alternate form if situation "a" is the case.

Well said.

Agreed. People who demand restitution without giving Apple a chance to make good via updates or recalls, like many others who instigate class action litigation against product manufacturers, merely cast themselves as pipedreaming remora, hoping to become rich while getting a free product.

 

[bluenoise]

I do feel bad for all the people affected with these problems. I'd be incredibly frustrated and disappointed if I was having these issues. I hope Apple and/or AT&T are able to provide a fix for everyone. I just disagree that a lawsuit is the way to achieve satisfaction.

 

[Stratus Fear]

I do feel bad for all the people affected with these problems. I'd be incredibly frustrated and disappointed if I was having these issues. I hope Apple and/or AT&T are able to provide a fix for everyone. I just disagree that a lawsuit is the way to achieve satisfaction.

I second that. For those with problems, Apple most likely will make it right. If it's an engineering issue, fixes for that don't happen overnight. Phone's been out a little over a month, I think some patience would be good.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

This whole lawsuit is completely BS. It's actually AT&T's fault, in the U.S. at least, for poor 3G. Apple shouldn't be sued for this, AT&T should, if any lawsuits at all, for building their 3G network right before the release of the iPhone 3G. They shouldn't be sued for the poor network, they didn't manufacture the Infineon chip, which picks up 3G signals.... So this person is fully of baloney, or it's just me. My friends who own iPhone 3Gs have problems, but their parents or relatives who use 3G dont get better reception, on the same network, same plan and all. 3G isn't a handset-only issue, its the network and the receiver chip, in this case, Infineon. I agree there are problems from Apple's end, no doubt about it. But no company is perfect, Apple is pretty good as a whole. Suing them for compensation is like me suing my teacher who gives us extra homework, and this puts stress on me, therefore I might go insane. It's simply ridiculous. And besides, the phrase "twice as fast" has a disclaimer on the bottom, have fun Mrs. Smith-ur-ass ,trying to get around that.

 

[milani]

This whole lawsuit is completely BS. It's actually AT&T's fault, in the U.S. at least, for poor 3G.

I think it's been pretty much accepted that the iPhone is defective, and has an inability to connect to or stay connected to 3G networks. It really has nothing to do with AT&T - or any other 3G network - in this case.

 

[wreckshop]

They shouldn't be sued for the poor network, they didn't manufacture the Infineon chip, which picks up 3G signals.... So this person is fully of baloney, or it's just me.

No, it's just you. If the lawsuit is BS, as you say, it will surely get dismissed. I think it has merit, and if anything this lawsuit will reveal all sorts of information we wouldn't have been able to find out since Apple is so secretive.

I'm totally convinced that if Apple just had admitted from the very beginning that the chip was defective and laid out a plan on how to fix the problem, there wouldn't be a lawsuit. Instead Apple is keeping everyone in the dark and not admitting there is a widespread problem because iphone sales will surely suffer a big hit.

Sad to say, but that's how big corporations work. They will not do right by their loyal customers who bought their defective products. Instead they'll deny that there is any problem or say only a small percentage have been experiencing problems. They'll stall for as long as possible until they are forced to address the issue because of bad PR or a threat of a lawsuit.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

I think it's been pretty much accepted that the iPhone is defective, and has an inability to connect to or stay connected to 3G networks. It really has nothing to do with AT&T - or any other 3G network - in this case.

what ur saying is that if I used AT&T DSL and I got a bad connection, although my friend who has the same service and modem has better service, is somehow my fault. completely stupid, like you.

 

[ks-man]

what ur saying is that if I used AT&T DSL and I got a bad connection, although my friend who has the same service and modem has better service, is somehow my fault. completely stupid, like you.

I love how these types of posts end with that type of a comment. It truly leaves very little room for debate.

 

[milani]

what ur saying is that if I used AT&T DSL and I got a bad connection, although my friend who has the same service and modem has better service, is somehow my fault. completely stupid, like you.

Sue AT&T. Really? If you thought about it for about a half a second you would realize that it has NOTHING to do with AT&T, which is what I was trying to point out to you.

The issue isn't spotty network coverage, it's the iPhone's UNIQUE inability to detect, connect to, and hold onto 3G coverage. The former would indeed be AT&T's fault, but the latter - the actual problem (as acknowledged by Apple) - has nothing to do with AT&T because OTHER 3G PHONES ARE ABLE TO PICK UP THE SERVICE.

Your poorly thought out modem example is the same, except instead of it being YOUR fault, it's YOUR MODEMS fault, which in turn means it's the fault of the manufacturer of the modem. A better example, if I may: If my iPhone can't get 3G service, but my friend's no-name 3G phone gets perfect service, then it isn't the wireless provider it's the phone.

The lawsuit, although I think it is a bad idea because it's just going to redirect Apple's effort from fixing the problem to defending themselves in court/the press, is nonetheless a legitimate claim. The iPhone was sold as a 3G device, and the 3G tech is defective, which means that people were mislead when buying the phone. If you bought a car under the premise it had a stereo, and then found out it didn't work, and then found out that it didn't work for anyone else who bought the car, you might pursue a similar suit. Will it be thrown out? That depends on Apple's ability to fix the problem.

By the way, there's no need to call me an idiot, which is almost funny considering you just asked me if I wanted to subscribe to your Youtube videos. Maybe try being nice, and don't be threatened when someone disagrees with you. I wasn't call you out, I was just giving my opinion.

 

[lovetheduns]

What do people expect from a phone?

My mother left her dark purple LG flip phone (just purchased from AT&T about 1.5 weeks ago). The phone is sitting right beside my iPhone. iPhone has 2 bars of 3G (fluctuates between 1-3 bars) here at my house. New LG phone has 4 bars of Edge-- well now 1 bar of 3G--- now no bars of 3G. iPhone still has 2 bars of 3G still. So I would not say that it is because the iPhone is crap-- in fact sitting here for the past hour I could say the LG is completely crap. For what it is worth at work, my iPhone has a constant full set of bars for 3G.

Sure, I have dropped calls on the iPhone-- however, I cant say that this has happened more than any other phone I have ever had on Sprint or AT&T. I take it to be pretty standard that with a cell phone I am going to have dropped calls. Kind of the nature of cell phone in my opinion.

I cant say that my iPhone has been awful. Sure I have apps crashing-- but I dont think I can fully blame Apple for that afterall their apps do not crash on me. Sure I have dropped calls--- but like I said this is not abnormal for any cell phone, and sometimes I dont have 3g which seems pretty normal too for where my home is located.

I cant imagine if your phone is OBVIOUSLY showing that it cant stay connected 75% of the time-- then why are you still holding onto that phone or is this person trying to tell me that she has to bring across this lawsuit because every 3G phone she has had has the same problems?

The day that Apple does not switch out phones if necessary or stops sending out fixes-- is the day I think there may be a reason for a lawsuit but not now. Still all in all I am completely happy with the company and have been more than happy with their products in comparison to any other supplier.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

Sue AT&T. Really? If you thought about it for about a half a second you would realize that it has NOTHING to do with AT&T, which is what I was trying to point out to you.

The issue isn't spotty network coverage, it's the iPhone's UNIQUE inability to detect, connect to, and hold onto 3G coverage. The former would indeed be AT&T's fault, but the latter - the actual problem (as acknowledged by Apple) - has nothing to do with AT&T because OTHER 3G PHONES ARE ABLE TO PICK UP THE SERVICE.

Your poorly thought out modem example is the same, except instead of it being YOUR fault, it's YOUR MODEMS fault, which in turn means it's the fault of the manufacturer of the modem. A better example, if I may: If my iPhone can't get 3G service, but my friend's no-name 3G phone gets perfect service, then it isn't the wireless provider it's the phone.

The lawsuit, although I think it is a bad idea because it's just going to redirect Apple's effort from fixing the problem to defending themselves in court/the press, is nonetheless a legitimate claim. The iPhone was sold as a 3G device, and the 3G tech is defective, which means that people were mislead when buying the phone. If you bought a car under the premise it had a stereo, and then found out it didn't work, and then found out that it didn't work for anyone else who bought the car, you might pursue a similar suit. Will it be thrown out? That depends on Apple's ability to fix the problem.

By the way, there's no need to call me an idiot, which is almost funny considering you just asked me if I wanted to subscribe to your Youtube videos. Maybe try being nice, and don't be threatened when someone disagrees with you. I wasn't call you out, I was just giving my opinion.

your entitled to your opinions and i'm entitled to mine, there was no need to call you stupid or an idiot, so I take that back. although, whatever points you proved, one point is that 3G is relatively new technology and AT&T built it hastily before the launch date. also, the coverage is "spotty", according to at&t's own coverage map. Only a few places in the said state of alabama has it... it's not as widespread as EDGE. I deeply apologize for the vulgar language.

 

[vandozza]

It is astonishing to me to see the number of responses in this thread and others essentially blindly defending a corporation for false advertising and lack of disclosure in the face of what is obviously a defect. Or if not defending outright, attacking those paying customers who quite clearly are not receiving the service for which they have paid, significantly I might add.

I certainly don't consider myself a 'victim' in any sense, even though my 3g service has been as poor as many have reported here and in many other locations. But, anything that forces the offending party (Apple in this case, as I am in Canada and cannot attribute my issues to AT&T) to step up and rapidly address the issue is welcome news to me. And Apple, unfortunately, has a history of being forced into these sorts of things, as I am learning. Regardless of the outcome of this process, I will weigh that consideration very heavily in advance of my next investment in Apple product.

I think people are suffering from iPhone Stockholm syndrome.

 

[thetoothfairy]

I can agree with some people in this thread and some not... I do not think a law suit is the right choice here but both Apple and Att needs to get things straighten out.

Yes there were two upgrades since it was released.. apparently they know of the problems... 2.01 was a nightmare for me... my phone felt so unstable and it ended up a brick and I just went the other day and Apple gave me a new one... I was VERY pleased with their service at the Apple store....

As far as Apple rushing to get out another update... if they rush they will not get the things wrong with the phone straighten out...

From what I experienced the the hole iphone experience with the 3G I feel Apple should have had the apps in the app store all set and I feel Apple should have gave out 3G iphones to be beta tested with the apps and network as well in all areas of the country.... and outside of the country....

If they would have did this we would not have this mess right now going on.... within a short time that people have owned the 3G iphone it didn't take long to find out there was something wrong with it... beta testers would have found out alot and Apple could have held out on releasing it until things got kinked out...

Matter of fact I told that to Apple when I was on the phone with them for four hours the other day trying to trouble shoot this 3G phone....

I was not happy driving over two hours to the Apple store but at least I can say is they replaced it and was very kind about it all....

Now I have the new one here and all my apps are on it and it is all setup but I often wonder for how long...

At times I feel the apps have something to do with it as well.. one day all the apps would not load but the software that Apple had on it would... I almost feel there are two separate directory structures within the phone for it to behave this way... why did all the apps crash but not the software that Apple has on it?

All I know is no one pushed me to buying either the first generation iphone or the 3G... tomorrow is my 30 day time period and I will be keeping my 3G...

WHY? Because I know in time that Apple will get this right and when my 3G acts right it is the coolest phone on the market... I have never in my life seen what the iphone can do out of any other phone I have tryed... and when the apps run right.... some of them just blows my mind....

I am just going to be patient... and let Apple and Att do what they have to...

As for Att and their prices for a person like me that can't get 3G... I am not happy about that what so ever... but I couldn't stand the sound coming out of the first generation iphone and many of times I missed calls.... plus I wanted more space.....

 

[jt2ga65]

People buy the IDEA of the iPhone. They buy the advertising.

I buy the idea of a Big Mac, and am disappointed when the one I get doesn't look like the one on the board. That doesn't mean that I have a valid legal claim to sue McDonalds over their inability to provide me with the perfect hamburger.

Um, I live in Manhattan. I'm pretty sure we're covered. And people worldwide are experiencing these issues, it's not just AT&T. You clearly have not done your research on this.

Some of the worse receptions I have had in the last 20 eyars with cell phones have been in large cities. The problem is that although there is goos signal strength, the capacity isn't always large enough in all area to meet the demand of the users wanting to make calls.

"We are working on some bugs which affect around 2% of the iPhones shipped, and hope to have a software update soon."

the theiphoneblog.com stated:

"If this is authentic, and 2% is a solid number, given that the iPhone 3G sold 1 million units its first weekend, and may be over 3 million units now, that’s a staggering 60,000+ users potentially affected, — never mind 20 more countries set to launch later this week."

I don't have a date for this comment, or a good feel for the percentage or phones affected today. Certainly if there was anything that could be fixed about the chipset, I doubt that currently shipping phones would have the fault. Of course, if there was a fix, I would think that Apple would be able to push out the fix in a firmware update. It could actually be a whole lot less phones than 60,000. It could be a lot more.

Will Apple compensate you for the hours you waited in line to buy the phone? The time it takes for you to return the product? Your inconvenience at having to go without a phone after said return? Your early termination fee (and subsequent reactivation fee) if you changed carriers to buy the iPhone? Get real -- there are many hidden costs here you aren't considering.

From the many years of watching The People's Court, I am let to believe that a person can not recover those losses in a lawsuit. I'd also guess that if you desired to cancel AT&T within the 30 days, and return to your previous provider, they would be happy to waive any activation fees.

Saying it's my choice just begs the question. But for Apple's alleged lies, I never would have made that choice.

The claims that Apple made probably won't be ruled as false, and therefor probably are not lies. There are disclaimers to their claims. I do agree about the expectation that the phone will make and receive calls, connect to the Internet in some form, and be able to use the other claimed features. Of course, it seems that the vast majority of the phones do exactly that. The issue is reliability in a very small percentage. Maybe the Chinese just need to improve their quality control. Maybe we should sue China.

I think it's been pretty much accepted that the iPhone is defective, and has an inability to connect to or stay connected to 3G networks. It really has nothing to do with AT&T - or any other 3G network - in this case.

I don't think that this has been accepted at all. Remember this, most happy users never say anything. The unhappy ones are the ones that are vocal.

-jt2

 

[lindsayanng]

jt2, i have to entirely agree with you and say VERY well put. I cant really add any more to that arguement, as you said it all very well.

 

[tlapple]

I buy the idea of a Big Mac, and am disappointed when the one I get doesn't look like the one on the board. That doesn't mean that I have a valid legal claim to sue McDonalds over their inability to provide me with the perfect hamburger.

Hardly an apples to apples comparison huh? McDonald's doesnt charge several hundred dollars and make you sign a binding 2 yr contract for a Big Mac does it. No warranties are made on it. You take it as it is -- they can make it taste and look any way they want. A phone has to function like a phone. And 2-3% of users having upwards of 50% of dropped calls are not having it function that way.

Some of the worse receptions I have had in the last 20 eyars with cell phones have been in large cities. The problem is that although there is goos signal strength, the capacity isn't always large enough in all area to meet the demand of the users wanting to make calls.

This is the exact argument Apple was making when it was pointing the finger at AT&T, before they actually owned up to their being an issue on their end. There is a big hole in this explanation. If the iPhone 3G connectivity issues were due to a network overload, ALL 3G phones on the same network would be experiencing these network problems simultaneously. This is simply not the case. The iPhone 3G has been unique in its problems in many parts of the world. Not just large metropolitan areas in the U.S. I use NYC as an example because it has one of the most vast AT&T 3G networks in the country.

I don't have a date for this comment, or a good feel for the percentage or phones affected today. Certainly if there was anything that could be fixed about the chipset, I doubt that currently shipping phones would have the fault. Of course, if there was a fix, I would think that Apple would be able to push out the fix in a firmware update. It could actually be a whole lot less phones than 60,000. It could be a lot more.

Why are you so certain that if the chipset is the problem, they would have started shipping phones with a different one already? It's entirely plausible, and common, for a company to take the cheaper route in solving a problem, even if it is not as good of an actual fix. Companies use band aid solutions all the time to save their bottom line. If Apple can tweak the software to compensate for a weak chipset in order to save themselves millions of dollars in revenue from a potential recall, or future revenue from bad press, they might avail themselves of this option even if they could do better by recalling and using a higher quality chipset. Apple is not immune from the same manufacturing cost-cutting and profit-motivated decisions as every other company in the world.

And if you really believe that Apple started swapping out and shipping new phones with a new chipset, then they REALLY have a problem. This screams GUILTY and RECALL. This would only legitimize this lawsuit further, and yet another reason why Apple would first try to find a software fix even if it turns out to be a hardware issue.

From the many years of watching The People's Court, I am let to believe that a person can not recover those losses in a lawsuit. I'd also guess that if you desired to cancel AT&T within the 30 days, and return to your previous provider, they would be happy to waive any activation fees.

You would certainly be correct here. There is no basis for recovering incidental damages due to someone's decision to buy the phone such as wasted time or early termination fees. I incurred these myself and certainly Apple can not be reasonably expected to be held liable for these costs. I think that is fair. Other things yes, but definitely not wasted time and ETF.

 

[marksman]

but it CAN make and it CAN receive calls, just not in the particular area that you are standing in. I know of a TON of people who have razr phones on ATT who get an insane amount of dropped calls and it has nothign to do with the phone. its the network. Or in this case, its a combination of the phone and the network most likely.. Either way, it is capable of making calls.

Yeah this is a weird metric people have pulled out here.

It is widely known that US cell phone companies vary in coverage and reliability. AT&T has been AWESOME for me where I live, while the other carriers suck eggs with their coverage. People in other areas swear by Verion, or T-Mobile.

When things change as they have, it is possible you enter an area of lesser service. This is not a warrant for class action suit, it is a warrant for a refund and recision of the contract without penalty.

Both parties separate and go their own way knowing that at this time they can not do business together.

If you went and signed up with T-Mobile and found that they always dropped calls at your house, you would cancel in the first 30 days and go use someone else.

That same exact remedy is available here. It may not be palatable, but it is a technological reality of the wireless business in 2008. No carrier is perfect everywhere.

When my Sprint service sucked I left Sprint. When my T-Mobile Service sucked I left T-Mobile. When my Verizon service sucked I left verizon.

Given some people have zero issues, the problem is much more complex than just saying there is some hardware flaw. It is much more likely a combination of the phone and the network. Which just like with any other contract you would sign with a cellular company you would review the service and if it does not work take appropriate action. 30 days is enough time to make a reasonable and informed decision.

If someone kept their service past the trial period, I blame nobody but them. I certainly do not support them in any class action lawsuit, because it is both untenable and unreasonable.

If your issue is dropped calls/ no signal then you should get/have gotten a refund, ended your contract and either found an alternative AT&T product that works for you or chosen a different provider.

To me the dropped calls issue is the only one close to having any merit, and as explained it fails as well. Things like speed are relative, and Apple nor AT&T ever make any specific claims to speed other than it is faster than Edge. Which I have not seen anyone disprove.