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

[Gudi]

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

And Danish consumers will think twice if they buy overpriced luxury products, because they're anything but a charity for shareholders.

 

[Kramerjn]

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

In most cases I have more longevity with refurbished phones than with their brand new ones. My 5S was the only phone I've had from them that didn't have something go wrong within the year warranty period.

 

[az431]

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)

Wikipedia is not a good place to get a law degree, and your simplistic analysis misses a key distinction between what is law and how a law should be applied to a set of facts.

Common law is not codified, and created as a result of judicial decisions. Under civil law, something is not law unless it is codified. But that does not mean that courts are not allowed to rely on prior decisions to interpret the meaning or application of a codified law to specific set of facts, which is precisely what juries do in both civil and common law systems. Indeed, even in countries were common law still applies, such as the US and the UK, most laws are codified.

 

[RumorConsumer]

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

Point is that new is a proper expectation when purchasing a new product not having a product repaired under warranty.

 

[truthertech]

Consumer protection law(s) in Denmark wouldn't apply to other countries, though, correct?

Correct, the Danes can't pass laws that the rest of the world has to follow.

 

[tomdelom]

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

Sorry, this is not true. My iphone 4s was replaced by Apple (Apple Care) with a refurbished one. The screen of the refurbished phone was much more susceptible to fingerprints and lagged clearness of the old one.
My Cinema Display was replaced by a refurbished one which hat the same default like that one it replaced - but the malfunction was more pronounced. The second replacement was quite right and seemed new to me.

 

[Thunderhawks]

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.

He used his brand new product and since he used it it was no longer new.
Didn't see how long he used it.

The options were then to have this product repaired, i.e. keeping the same phone or
to speed things up get a "new/other" iPhone that works.

So far so good.

The resale value is uninteresting, because if he sold it nobody would know if that was a refurb.

Anybody having dealt with Apple for a while should actually prefer a refurb, because my guess is they test refurbs way more, as they don't want it back or get the reputation that refurb is bad news.

I have bought a lot of refurbs over 32 years from them and they were all excellent and looked like new.
You could not tell it wasn't.

Regardless of what you think, if you ever get an Apple product within warranty or have Apple Care they will do everything necessary to make sure you have a well functioning and okay device.

When millions upon millions devices are being produced it is totally unrealistic to expect every one to be perfect.

Apple is a big company and humans work there. So, expect what humans do : They make mistakes.

Their last one was the 2016 MBP.

 

[furi0usbee]

Not if the increased cost of servicing devices drives down margins, Apple could (rightfully) increase prices to compensate.

Increase prices more than they already do?

 

[blacktape242]

From personal experience refurbished Apple products are as good as new—aside from packaging—but still boxed well.

pretty much, i frequently buy refurb or open box.

 

[newyorksole]

Having purchased many, I can confidently say that Apple refurbished devices are as good as new. I actually agree with Apple's fighting this, as they have a great program. Theirs isn't the same as being compared to a 3rd party vendor refurbishing a device by polishing, painting, or replacing screens with cheap knockoff parts.

Exactly. Some people on here don't understand that Apple's Certified Refurbished products look and function like BRAND NEW.

Apple's website even says that their Cert. Refurb.'s have brand new shells, brand new batteries and go through a rigorous process.

 

[truthertech]

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.

But if Apple just repaired the defect, you'd be worse off with your used, non-refurbished phone. Be careful of what you wish for

 

[sinsin07]

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)

You should of looked up the definition of "news" while you were at it.

 

[furi0usbee]

Why would you expect that? You bought a new device but the moment you start using it, it becomes used. The only expectation Apple has by law is to provide you with parts that meet or exceed the functionality of the ones that failed. Its unreasonable to place the additional burden of "never used" at this volume.

If the reason the phone needs to be replaced is because of a defect not caused by the consumer, they certainly should be forced to replace with BRAND NEW. Otherwise, risk getting the same defect that prompted the return in the first place.

 

[MNJohn]

Welcome to warranties. I understand you believe you're entitled to new and its not the law.

Wrong again. The point of this article is that replacement with new is the law, at least in Denmark.

 

[2457282]

From Apple's Website --

If during the Warranty Period you submit a claim to Apple or an AASP in accordance with this warranty, Apple will, at its option:

(i) repair the Apple Product using new or previously used parts that are equivalent to new in performance and reliability,

(ii) replace the Apple Product with the same model (or with your consent a product that has similar functionality) formed from new and/or previously used parts that are equivalent to new in performance and reliability, or

(iii) exchange the Apple Product for a refund of your purchase price.

Emphasis Added by me.

Now I am in the US so the wording could be different in other countries, but assuming that the language isn't significantly different, why would there be any expectations of a new phone replacement?

 

[foxconn]

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.

- the phone you've given them is not new
- this is exactly why Apple is now repairing phones rather than giving out returbs
- no other company does this. So why should apple?

 

[DudeDad]

The iPhone 4 has resale value?

 

[truthertech]

This ruling, if followed broadly in Denmark, would hurt consumers in the long run because it would just force Apple to repair phones instead of giving you a refurbished one. Consumers are better off getting an immediate replacement instead of having to wait for a repair and also Better off getting a refurbished phone instead of their used but non-refurbished repaired phone back.

Fortunately,United States consumer protection laws allow refurbished items in lieu of warranty repairs and it's a standard part of almost every warranty language

 

[nwcs]

And this is one reason why prices are different in different countries. The legal system incurs different costs. People want to look at the US prices and think it should be equivalent but there's more to a price than the parts. There's the warranty mandate differences, return period differences, currency hedging, and legal rulings like this that vary in regions.

 

[Euge]

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.

This.

Many people here don't realize this is not just an Apple thing. This has been standard practice for product warranties as long as I can remember. I had a Sony Discman that was replaced twice under warranty. I read the fine print and it was the same -- may be replaced by refurbished goods. This was back in 1990.

Read the warranty of just about any product you've bought and it will probably say the same thing.

 

[Strutten]

Read my post...
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

To believe that there is one definitive version of civil law is more than just ignorant. The civil law of the Nordic countries (Scandinavia plus Finland and Iceland) is in many ways a legal hybrid. The supreme courts in the Nordic countries are very influeantal, and have plenty precedence.

/JD from a Nordic country

 

[CmdrLaForge]

Why was that phone in need of a replacement? Did it stop working within 1 year without the users fault?

 

[canny]

Steve Jobs wanted to surprise and delight his customers. Tim Cook actually sues them - he hates his customers.

 

[konqerror]

Now I am in the US so the wording could be different in other countries, but assuming that the language isn't significantly different, why would there be any expectations of a new phone replacement?

That's not the whole story. There's a 30 day DOA policy at least if you buy from Apple:
https://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/salesrefund.html

An Apple-branded hardware product is considered DOA if it shows symptoms of a hardware failure, preventing basic operability, upon its first use out of the box. If you believe that your product is DOA, please call... within 30 calendar days of the invoice date...

• Replacement: The same product that you ordered will be shipped to you at Apple's expense...
• Service: You may have the product repaired; however, once serviced, the product is no longer eligible for replacement.

 

[Strutten]

I am surprised that there are new iPhones being sold anywhere, since the refurbished ones apparently are far superior. I assume that no-one of the commentators in this forum have ever bought a new one?

By the way- is the superiority of the refurbished iPhones the reason they are more expensive than the new ones? Or...