Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Danish Court Rules Apple Must Replace Man's iPhone With New Rather Than Refurbished Model
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Even if he was awarded court costs, this guy still took countless days off work and spent many times more than what he was awarded to fight this, all over a phone more than 5 years old. Wow.
[doublepost=1481300640][/doublepost]
Numerous studies have shown the refurbished products are actually far more reliable than new. New products don't see much in the way of QA screening in the numbers they pour out of the factory in. Refurbs are tested far more for all kinds of flaws and issues that the new products aren't. Because of this they have a far lower repair rate and failure rate. Same is generally true with certified pre-owned cars.
[doublepost=1481300640][/doublepost]
Numerous studies have shown the refurbished products are actually far more reliable than new. New products don't see much in the way of QA screening in the numbers they pour out of the factory in. Refurbs are tested far more for all kinds of flaws and issues that the new products aren't. Because of this they have a far lower repair rate and failure rate. Same is generally true with certified pre-owned cars.
I always thought it was a bit lucrative of Apple to replace your brand new (faulty) iPhone with one that contains recycled parts, or was once itself faulty. But at the same time I'd rather faulty phones were fixed and reused rather than being trashed.
What would those things be?
No, read the Warranty coverage posted on Apple's site. Also look into their return policy for your area.
Bottom line is companies should be required to replace like for like if the device is still under warranty. So if I bought a refurbished device, then it should be replaced with a refurbished device and if I bought it brand new, it should be replace with a brand new device.
Now you may ask why this is and the simple answer is under the law if there is a defect, it should be corrected in a way to make you whole again. Replacing something that I bought as new with something that is refurbished is not actually making me whole again, because as this article states, a refurbished phone will indeed have a lower resale value and therefore doesn't have the ability to make you whole again.
Now you may ask why this is and the simple answer is under the law if there is a defect, it should be corrected in a way to make you whole again. Replacing something that I bought as new with something that is refurbished is not actually making me whole again, because as this article states, a refurbished phone will indeed have a lower resale value and therefore doesn't have the ability to make you whole again.
Consumer Protection Law for Denmark is very equal to Sweden, Finland, Norway, Partly Germany as well. So, if other countries follows it could change the whole supply chain and what needs to be done going forward.
Because this is a new invention called a blog or web site, and the newer headlines have not yet pushed this off to a second page.
Wouldn't work. Part of Danish consumer law is underpinned by EU directives - including a clause that redress must not be overly onerous on either the vendor or the customer. If Apple tried to make the plaintiff sweat it out, the latter would be entitled to ask for a refund.
So give the man a new iPhone 4! Uh, anybody got one? An iPhone collector who never took his out of the box?
we also have a 2 year warranty on almost everything... to be good enough for denmark it should last atleast two years
that is how stuff lasts longer in the U.S .. it has to hold up to danish standards.
You should actually thank us for slowing down planned obsoletion
that is how stuff lasts longer in the U.S .. it has to hold up to danish standards.
You should actually thank us for slowing down planned obsoletion
You are correct. The should follow the other part of their warranty coverage, take back the phone and repair it like I mentioned here. That said, it may not be part of their warranty coverage in Denmark by how their consumer laws sound.
That's not how it works. Fortunately, iPhones don't "continually fail," so consumers aren't all eventually going to get new iPhones when they need to be repaired. There's also the little problem with your warranty expiring.
The way it works now is for the benefit of consumers. Most times, if there is something wrong with the phone and its under warranty, instead of making you wait while your phone is sent off for repair, Apple will simply swap you out a new or refurbished phone and you are on your way. Even if your warranty is expired, Apple generally has a very generous program where they will sell you a refurbished model at a very good price and you can be on your way if you don't want to wait and pay for a repair.
The reason consumers would in Denmark would be hurt is once you make it so expensive for Apple by forcing them to give you a brand new phone, (ridiculous because you have a used phone with a used battery, scratches, etc. ) it will become cheaper more often for Apple to simply take your phone and send it out for repairs instead of giving you a new phone. This means that instead of getting a refurbished phone, which will have a new battery, new outer shell and have been thoroughly tested gone through, a consumer will now have to wait without a phone and then get back their used phone.
Of course everyone would want a brand new phone instead of their used phone, but how many people would prefer to wait and end up with a "used" phone instead of an Apple refurbished phone with a new battery and outer shell, with a minimum of ninety days warranty (1yr?)on the entire refurbished phone?
Last edited:
That is what I was thinking. Plus if the phone is obsolete (not made by Apple) then what?
Although I can't find the actual court ruling, based on most articles this does seem to be a somewhat-limited case: the guy bought a new phone, it didn't work right "out of the box", so the court says Apple has to give him a new phone that works, or give him his money back. It's not like Apple's being required to replace a 3-year-old phone with new one.
I think I'd want a new one too in this case.
I think I'd want a new one too in this case.
Refurbished Apple products are commonly considered better than new because they've gone through additional testing, and have already been in the wild. They come with the same warranty, as if new.
Other than the phone itself having been previously-owned, nobody has stated that repairs are made with second-hand parts. Likely, repairs are made with brand new parts. And then the phone undergoes rigorous testing.
This guy from Denmark represents a sad state of affairs for too many people around the world — harbouring the thinking that something not being "new" is somehow "dirty". It couldn't be farther from the truth for official Apple refurbs.
I should have taking my Macbook Pro with a logic board failure to the Danish Genius Bar! Worst case scenario, they fix it Best case, I get a new one!
we also have a 2 year warranty on almost everything... to be good enough for denmark it should last atleast two years
that is how stuff lasts longer in the U.S .. it has to hold up to danish standards.
You should actually thank us for slowing down planned obsoletion
I wish we had more "good enough for Denmark" policies in the US : /
If your new device failed on Day 2 of use. Provided you did not abuse it, you would receive a New Phone. Please read Apple's Warranty Policy with some retention.
Yes, how dare Apple give you refurbished phone with a new battery, new outer shell and completely reconditioned, and let you walk out the store, instead of making you go without a cell phone while you wait for your used phone to come back to you repaired with its used battery, scratched outer shell and whatever other problems it may have had. It's time to end this evil practice.