Well well well so many interesting opinions however unfortunately a lot of people have been brainwashed and believe exactly what they have been told or heard however my own experience is completely different. Fact is if a device is purchased new it must be replaced as new with equivalent if not better (if model is no longer made or defunct). If I want a refurb I would have purchased a refurb - common sense. Remember Apple staff are not experts in Consumer Law (I'm in Australia) and will try various resolutions to minimise new replacements.
... [lots of purchases replaced by Apple after making yourself a polite pain in their arse] ...
If I were Apple, I would politely ask you to never buy another one of my products again. They've undoubtedly lost money on most everything you've bought.
I think it's important to note that refurbished products are not remanufactured. Refurbished products have often times been used then returned. This is not the case of remanufactured products which have not been used by anyone else prior.Yes of course, but they’re not the same price. If they were just as good people would be happy to pay for that surely?
Then you misunderstood (or they did or they did not word it correctly).Now, people who have knowledge of the Dutch system have spoken up and said that if a product fails within six month of purchase the consumer is entitled to a brand new item. It's been suggested that this is what the ruling is based upon.
Actually it isn't about getting a new device but about getting a product as agreed upon. That means that it should work as expected and if it doesn't it should be repaired or, if that is impossible, you should get something that is equal.Why should anyone be entitled to a brand new device to replace an older, used device (fit for use laws notwithstanding as they have a finite time period and are generally very good because a new device should last some amount of time)
To be more exact: we implemented the EU directive because we have to but we didn't implement the warranty part. Instead we kept our own because it gives more protection to the consumer and since that is the objective of this directive we are allowed to do so.For a long time, I thought so too but it's a little more complicated. The point is, that the 2 year EU consumer warranty is a 'directive', not a law. The Netherlands have chosen not to implement it. (Member states can do this, as long as the consumer is at least as well protected.)
That used to happen but the EU court ruling in the Quelle case states that this is not allowed.On the other hand, this does not necessarily mean you get a new product within (or after) those 2 years. Usually this means you get a discount on repairs or on another sale.
I’m sure you know what the deal is but let me clarify. I'll rephrase. Really I don't care what you, the genius, Tim Cook or the president of the world thinks.I think it's important to note that refurbished products are not remanufactured. Refurbished products have often times been used then returned. This is not the case of remanufactured products which have not been used by anyone else prior.
But as for the reason refurbished products are sold at a discount, it's because people unjustifiably view them as less than a new product. Refurbished products look new, they perform as new, the warranty is the same as new, and if someone told you it was new there would be no way to know otherwise.
But again, Apple is not providing refurbished products as service replacements. They're providing remanufactured products that are functionally identical to a new product. If you don't like that don't buy an Apple product, because they're perfectly within their right to do this per the terms and conditions customers agree to.
Actually, I'd prefer a remanufactured device. It's gone through additional inspections and conceivably could have fewer problems than a new device.
Be careful... the new device may have been touched accidentally by human workers when it was packed, loosing the level of virginity acceptable for high demanding "the world revolves around me" customers![]()
It would drive up the cost to the consumer
And in general they pay higher prices to cover the extra warranty costs. TINSTAAFL
This might be true, but every time there is an article about the price increases in non-US markets, many people make comments complaining that the currency exchange adjusted price is higher than the US price.
One of the reasons for the inconsistent prices is the cost of these more aggressive consumer protection laws being passed down to the consumers.
TINSTAAFL applies always.
Great minds think alike.I agree. Actually, I posted a similar statement about 3 posts before yours. Even said TINSTAAFL....
See:
I think where we might differ in opinion is about if Apple should give new devices as replacements.Great minds think alike.
What always strikes me reading this site is the number of people who have experience of faulty Apple products and how wonderful Apple service is and how they ALWAYS get instant replacements and great service.I think she's got a point. If Apple are reusing logic boards from devices, then you've got devices which are already into their limited read/right cycle replacing potentially new devices. I have no issues wiht refurb devices being used as out of warranty replacements or even after the 1st year of warranty, but within the first year, how is it fair for example to take in a near new device and have it replaced with one you have no idea about the storage lifespan.
[doublepost=1493191337][/doublepost]
They do a hopeless job at it then. I've had 4 doa refurb iPads, 1 doa refurb iPod and 2 doa refurb iPhones in the family.
One of the reasons for the inconsistent prices is the cost of these more aggressive consumer protection laws being passed down to the consumers.
A company that makes reliable products has nothing to fear from 2 year warranties.I think where we might differ in opinion is about if Apple should give new devices as replacements.
I think they should while acknowledging that this may drive up the prices.
I posted earlier saying that if there is a problem with a device under warranty, that Apple should either attempt to fix it, or offer the customer a refurbished device replacement. If the customer chooses to have their device fixed, and Apple determines that they are unable to do so, either by limitations or not being cost effective, then Apple should replace the device with a new one.
I disagree with many posts here that the full warranty should start over from that point though. Apple gives 90 days or the remaining of the initial warranty. I think that is fair.
All that said, this could drive up the price, because I doubt Apple will want their profit margin to drop.
A lot of complaints are made about the price difference of Apple products outside of the US. One of the reasons of the price difference is the consumer protection laws, such as a required 2 year warranty.
There are many other factors when it comes to pricing, not just warranties.Apple products cost more in the EU before two year warranties and the latest rulings about replacing with new.
There are many other factors when it comes to pricing, not just warranties.
I am sure the increased difference since then was, at least in part, influenced by the potential extra warranty claims.No one said otherwise.
What I pointed out, was that higher warranty costs wasn't a reason back when Apple was already charging more overseas.
In come the "I've had replacements better than brand new" comments (not saying they aren't better, but we've all seen the comment a thousand times)
Wonder how Apple will respond to this, this obviously requires more money to replace a device, will they change prices or? And I wonder if Apple has to ship the iPad unit brand new or a full retail one with box and all
Actually, I'd prefer a remanufactured device. It's gone through additional inspections and conceivably could have fewer problems than a new device.
If getting what I pay for means I think the world revolves around me then call me the Sun. Dropping close to a thousand bucks on a phone in my opinion deserves high quality customer service. They have high enough margins to handle it. Also I don't believe I inferred or said in any way that I was more important than another customer when it comes to getting my phone. You know the whole world revolving around me comment. Out of place and nothing to do with what we were talking about. So yeah, there's that. Also I don't recall suggesting nobody touch it before me, although it's unlikely anyone but me would have touched it by the time I get it.
What always strikes me reading this site is the number of people who have experience of faulty Apple products and how wonderful Apple service is and how they ALWAYS get instant replacements and great service.
Over years and years neither myself or my sons have had any issues with any Samsung, HTC or Motorola products. Except damage caused by abuse. IE Device taking a heavy fall onto concrete. Apple products must be very unreliable!
i'm more wondering what will happen when she gets her brand new iPad and something fails in six months. does this 'new' iPad really mean retail new so she has a new one year warranty, can she demand that Apple give her yet another new one etc.
and what about when an iPad is out of the one year warranty and doesn't qualify for EU consumer protections that say after so many months the customer has to prove the issue existed when delivered..
Please remind your fellow countrymen about this when they complain here about how Apple products are soooo much more expensive in your country vs the US.
[doublepost=1493212773][/doublepost]
You probably weren't too thrilled to read this:
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/19/apple-recycled-materials-end-mining/
Let me try to summarise your point for anyone who zoned out at the wall of text:
At least in countries with strong consumer protection laws, it pays to escalate any issues you have with even minor defects to Apple executive support. You might even score a newer/faster/better device. And if you don't do all these things, you're brainwashed.
It's kind of amazing to me that you insinuate ill will to a company that has repeatedly treated you better than any other consumer goods company out there. If I were Apple, I would politely ask you to never buy another one of my products again. They've undoubtedly lost money on most everything you've bought.
Some can only feel good about a transaction if they get the upper hand. Other people feel good about themselves when both sides get a fair deal and one-sided transactions don't feel right, regardless of the size of the other party. Maybe the latter type are just brainwashed like me.
The return from recycling is part of the equation for determining selling price. That revenue offsets production costs and thus a company can charge less up front for the device; assuming the value of the recycled material exceeds the cost of recycling.As for recycling, I don't support any recycling at all especially when companies are making money from second hand parts and components without financially reimbursing the purchaser.
I have been trained in Consumer Law unlike most.
Are you an attorney? If so, I'm curious - what are the applicable laws that require a company to replace a product with a new product if the warranty explicitly states it may be replaced with a refurbished unit for a warranty repair?
I was referring to people who post here stating how everytime they take their faulty devices to Apple they get "great service". This is a common enough claim. Individuals getting multiple faulty products seems to be more than just bad luck.If you are producing in excess of 250 million devices per year it's inevitable that you're going to get some failures. Let's not forget that Samsung make several parts for the iPhone so some of those failures will be due to faulty Samsung parts.
It's how you respond to those failures that really counts.
If we want to talk anecdotally I've only ever bought 1 Samsung product (a HD TV) and it's been terrible. I've had to call Samsung out 3 times to it to have parts replaced. The last time they replaced the main board. Since then it's been very slow. 10 seconds to switch off or display the menu. Samsung say that is normal and there's nothing wrong with it. I've relegated it to the kitchen and replaced it with a Panasonic that's been faultless.
I can't speak about HTC or Motorola because I've never owned a product from either company.