Danish Court Rules Apple Must Replace Man's iPhone With New Rather Than Refurbished Model

[medazinol]

Of course Apple will appeal this ruling, if they don't it sets an expectation and precedent that others can use to get free iPhone upgrades to the latest model just by making claims it doesn't live up to expectations. Companies have to fight these kinds of rulings because it has potential to drastically hurt sales.

 

[BarcelonaPaul]

Silly. Does the refurbished part pass electrons through it differently than the new part? As somebody who had been in Apple support for years and has replaced hundreds if not thousands of parts and devices, the worst thing that can happen isnt that something is broken within warranty, that is forgivable. Its if its broken more than once. Refurb parts are great. Apple is actually telling the truth here.

I disagree. This guy bought a brand new VERY EXPENSIVE product. Why should he be given a second hand thing when his premium product went wrong? Hardly premium service.
I always think that dealing with Apple is like dealing with the devil. They seem to be so full of lies and deceit and then they appear on stage looking fat and bloated and come out with some marketing speil and a grin. There's something not quite right at that place.

 

[Whoakapi]

A "refurb" is essentially the same as a "repair" that required the replacement of all the phone's components at once (i.e. as if they were all broken), but can happen on the spot, rather than waiting for an engineer to do the "repair".

As I like to call it... Pre-repaired

 

[djgamble]

Why wouldn't it be? This could majorly change how Apple handles repairs in one country, and other countries may be emboldened to try the exact same thing.

Read my post...
1.

Well, it doesn't have to originate from the u.s to be news!

Some beat me to it - above.

The Danish ruling is a good decision, IMO. +1

Read my entire post:
1. I'm not even from the USA
2. Civil law countries don't have 'precedents' so the factual basis of the article is incorrect

 

[bsolar]

To argue that a replacement has less value is just wrong.

That's not what is being argued: what is being argued is that the replacement being refurbished means it has less value. Since Apple itself doesn't sell refurbished products at full price, it's pretty much a fact.

 

[Zaft]

Apples refurbs are basically new, new cases and screens. You cant even tell the difference..

 

[Gudi]

Sounds like it's very specific to Denmark's consumer law too (so is unlikely to have any meaning in a global context).

For context, MARGRETHE VESTAGER the European Commissioner for Competition is a Danish politician. I hope $14.5b in illegal tax benefits is enough for you to care about Denmark.

 

[jmgregory1]

To everyone defending Apple on this, the customer bought a new iPhone, not a refurbished one. When the phone turned out to be defective within the warranty period, he expected the same product he originally had bought. It is not about whether reforms are as good as new or whatnot. It's about getting what you buy. If I buy a refurb, I don't expect a new device if I get it replaced. If I buy a new one, I do though. The man they talk about here said on Danish television that it's a matter of principal, and he does indeed believe the phone to be as good as a new one, but the package was opened, and it had minor scratching on the back - not something he would normally care about as he uses a case, but he had bought a new phone, so it was his legal right to get a replacement that was new as well

It's ridiculous to completely discount the fact that a customer gets use out of the iPhone (or any product), so it's not new when it gets turned in for warranty replacement. If Apple tried to provide an already opened iPhone, that's a different issue, because it's certainly not how they normally operate here.

Every replacement I've gotten has always come out of a new white or black box, fully cellophane wrapped, in new condition. I've always considered replacements as a great way to upgrade from the scratches and dings the phone I'm turning in had, so it's a benefit, not a negative.

This being said, one of my kids got a replacement iPhone 5s through AT&T's insurance plan and it was neither new nor an Apple certified replacement. It had issues with the home button set below the screen, making it impossible to use touch ID accurately, so I had to get a replacement for the replacement. Clearly AT&T is doing their own refurb work or outsourcing to some company doing very cheap fixes. I didn't complain, because he really just needed a replacement, but it was certainly shoddy compared to what we've gotten from Apple in the past.

 

[Shajee]

Apples refurbs are basically new, new cases and screens. You cant even tell the difference..

If it says and labelled as REFURBs then you would know the difference from the 'NEW'

 

[Pupi]

Stupid and irresponsible.

btw, what's the reason he's getting his phone replaced for?

 

[honglong1976]

One lucky fellow in Denmark will soon be the proud owner of a brand new iPhone 4. I bet Apple has one lying around somewhere

 

[nviz22]

The plaintiff has way too much time on their hands. Great use of the Danish judicial system.....

 

[samcraig]

Here's part of the logic fail in some. I'm not advocating for or against the case or the policies. However, if a consumer buys a product and it fails - then suggesting that they get a product that is not entirely new because they already used the other device is not valid. The failure is on the business to provide what was promised. It's their responsibility to deliver on that promise. The customer paid for a new working device.

Personally, I'm not sure I would care about refurbished or not when it comes to Apple. But I do understand the inherent desire to know you're getting something genuinely new vs something that was refurbished.

As for resale value - personally (I know maybe not the consensus) - but I don't buy tech because of the resale value. I buy it because it's a tool to do the job I need it to do. If/when I am done and think it's worth selling, I look at any money made off the device as pure "gravy."

 

[prowlmedia]

If it says and labelled as REFURBs then you would know the difference from the 'NEW'

It's not in anyway. I've had 'refurbs'. Most of the entire phone is brand new - battery / MB case / screen.

It will just mean Denmark will get stricter T&Cs.

 

[Kramerjn]

A "refurb" is essentially the same as a "repair" that required the replacement of all the phone's components at once (i.e. as if they were all broken), but can happen on the spot, rather than waiting for an engineer to do the "repair".

So that sounds good for the consumer...(fast repair service).

...except...if it were a car that had broken, would you really want your car replaced under warranty using a car built from second hand parts...?

That's a bad analogy since physical wear on the parts in the car would be MUCH more than the wear on the electronics in the phone.

 

[Krevnik]

I disagree. This guy bought a brand new VERY EXPENSIVE product. Why should he be given a second hand thing when his premium product went wrong? Hardly premium service.
I always think that dealing with Apple is like dealing with the devil. They seem to be so full of lies and deceit and then they appear on stage looking fat and bloated and come out with some marketing speil and a grin. There's something not quite right at that place.

Except, is the item in question "brand new" at the time of failure? If it is months into the warranty period, it certainly isn't.

If this was a DOA item, I could buy the argument that they should replace it from new stock. But if they've used it for months, a refurbished item is going to have similar value. The whole point of using refurbished for swaps is to not waste the customer's time waiting for repairs. And if we want to cut down on e-waste, repairs and refurbished swaps are really the way forward here.

Would you accept a repair of your device, over a refurbished swap for your nearly 1 year old item that failed under warranty? Why is the refurbished swap worse than a repair? Keep in mind, the parts used for repairs come from the same place as parts used for refurbishment.

That's not what is being argued: what is being argued is that the replacement being refurbished means it has less value. Since Apple itself doesn't sell refurbished products at full price, it's pretty much a fact.

And the item prior to breaking wasn't valued at full retail price, if you consider what someone will pay for a used device.

 

[RumorConsumer]

I disagree. This guy bought a brand new VERY EXPENSIVE product. Why should he be given a second hand thing when his premium product went wrong? Hardly premium service.
I always think that dealing with Apple is like dealing with the devil. They seem to be so full of lies and deceit and then they appear on stage looking fat and bloated and come out with some marketing speil and a grin. There's something not quite right at that place.

Welcome to warranties. I understand you believe you're entitled to new and its not the law. Your entitled to function. Everything you get from pretty much any company anywhere to replace a defective part is going to be a refurb. And nobody really cares that much if it just works. New parts dont perform better than refurb parts in any test including longevity. After a certain amount of time in operation, most parts tend to just work.

 

[MNJohn]

And this is front page news because...?

Denmark's a civil law country so this is no precedent (even if Denmark was a common law country it's an appealable decision, so wouldn't be binding precedent for anything).

Sounds like it's very specific to Denmark's consumer law too (so is unlikely to have any meaning in a global context).

---

Edit for the benefit of those who are unfamiliar with 'civil law' and 'common law' differences (to say that a civil court would give precedential treatment to a judgment... let alone a lower court judgment is such a major error of understanding that I had to point it out):

Civil law, civilian law, or Roman law is a legal system originating in Europe, intellectualized within the framework of late Roman law, and whose most prevalent feature is that its core principles are codified into a referable system which serves as the primary source of law. This can be contrasted with common law systems whose intellectual framework comes from judge-made decisional law which gives precedential authority to prior court decisions on the principle that it is unfair to treat similar facts differently on different occasions (doctrine of judicial precedent, or stare decisis).

https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_law_(legal_system)

Thanks for the legalese, Your Honor.

 

[Blackstick]

Apple will just pass the price of that along to all new iPhone purchases in Denmark. They're anything but a charity.

 

[Shajee]

It's not in anyway. I've had 'refurbs'. Most of the entire phone is brand new - battery / MB case / screen.

It will just mean Denmark will get stricter T&Cs.

Yeah no wonder why it will get strict'r

 

[MNJohn]

Silly. Does the refurbished part pass electrons through it differently than the new part? As somebody who had been in Apple support for years and has replaced hundreds if not thousands of parts and devices, the worst thing that can happen isnt that something is broken within warranty, that is forgivable. Its if its broken more than once. Refurb parts are great. Apple is actually telling the truth here.

Yah, and a used car is worth less a new car. Your point?

 

[Kramerjn]

GOOD! If I buy a phone and its under warranty, and the phone stops working because of a defect not of my doing, I would EXPECT to get a brand new phone, not a refurbished phone. This will also let Apple have a better selection of refurb phones on their website. Everyone wins.

Except in almost all consumer products, a warranty allows for repair of said device rather than replacement with new.

The other option is to give the user a loaner, take his / her phone in for repairs, then give it back. In that case, they would have a used phone (Their original phone in this case) with some new components. It all depends on local laws, but it would be legal in most countries to do this, likely costing the customer more time.

I have had carrier extended warranties in the past, dealing with shipping a phone out, using a loaner, then reverse the process, is a pain in the neck. The Refurbished replacement is actually a nice service (IMO).

If he indeed received a refurbished device with blemishes, then he should be made whole by receiving a proper replacement.

Yes Apple will indeed replace the refurbished device if it's found defective. I've personally had 2 different refurbished phones replaced straight away. I always inspect them before I sign anything.

I can see replacing with a NEW phone if it breaks within their return period, or maybe a month, but otherwise they clearly state you will get "like new" condition.

 

[jadot]

Not great for the environment, surely? I thought Denmark might be forward thinking in this department.
The iPhone, refurbished and working is still an iPhone, no? Re-Sale value? Wouldn't worry about it - invest in property if you want resale value.

 

[azentropy]

And consumers wonder why Apple products are more expense in certain countries. It is nice to have great consumer protection laws but do they actually think the companies just absorb the cost themselves?

 

[RumorConsumer]

Do you have evidence that they are so different? If a car company could demonstrate that a replacement refurbished part was indistinguishable from a new part, then in theory, what difference would it make?

I did not know that car companies use refurb parts for warranty repairs...indeed, I wonder how many people do know this.

My biggest issue is, how do you know the refurb phone was not previously used extensively to game, or placed it in hot (or cold, or humid) environments during use? Your refurb may function "as good as new" on day one...but perhaps it has been stressed, and has a shorter life as a result compared to a newly manufactured product. To me the biggest concern in this aspect is the GPU and the battery...

Great questions. In terms of solid state parts I would actually be totally fine with parts that have been stressed. Why? Because I stress my parts. I dont buy iPhones or other products and keep them on a little velvet cushion on my bedside table with the little smudge removing towelette next to them. My phone gets used. My computer gets used. I treat my stuff really well. And parts that have been in operation that pass basic tests that Apple gives back to me are in my mind as good or better as anything new which is effectively unknown.

The other thing to understand is that Apple has studied what makes people angry. Its not really new parts failing. Thats easily remedied daily at Apple stores and other service channels. The thing that makes customers mad is *repeat repairs*. Parts that fail once and then continue to fail is what erodes the relationship with the customer, the product and so on. So if Apple had any real doubt in those replacement parts they wouldn't use them. They are there to be the shining star stand in for anything new that fails. They are A game parts in most cases. Bar none.