Pretty sure the OP knew this was at best immoral, but figured I'd they could just get a few people here to agree with them then that would ease their conscious.
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.
MacBook Pro try and then return to Apple?
- Thread starter AVBeatMan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Pretty sure the OP knew this was at best immoral, but figured I'd they could just get a few people here to agree with them then that would ease their conscious.
There is nothing immoral about buying a product to try and if not liking it, then returning it.
Edit:
Let me just add, when I had my MBP in for repair and that repair was going to take longer an Apple manager recommended that I buy a new MBP and then return it once the repair was done and he'd waive the 14 day return period. So while a different situation, its clear he was not worked up about buying without any intention of keeping it.
That's not what the OP is proposing. The OP is proposing to buy a product with no intent of keeping it.
I'd say that that was Apple trying to right a wrong. They can make those decisions.
The OP is asking if it's ok to "wardrobe" a device - that is to buy it with every intention of returning it before the time is up and zero intention of keeping it.
That can actually be seen as fraud as you're not entering into the purchase in good faith.
Is the OP going to get caught? Almost certainly not. However that doesn't mean to say it's the right thing to do.
People complain Apple devices cost too much money, yet then advocate actions like this on the basis "Apple can afford it".
The OP is taking advantage of an existing policy, and trying to spin it any other way doesn't make sense. He's free to buy whatever he wants, and he's free to return it regardless of his motives.
Rightfully so as Apple is known to gouge consumers, just look at them charging 400 dollars for wheels to 1,000 for a monitor stand.
To it its not a question of them affording it, but rather leveraging a policy that exists, pure and simple.
So, that doesn't change anything, its not like he's signing a contract stating his intent is buy it, cherish it and keep it forever. Heck, just look at what I posted, a store manager recommend that I buy (with no intention of keeping it) a MBP and then return it.
I go to Macy's. I buy an evening gown with the intention of doing a return the following week, and then wear it to an event. I then return it to the store the following week, tags intact claiming "it wasn't me, I'd like my money back."
Fraud or no fraud?
If fraud, then how is what the OP asking about any different?
The difference is because Macey's return policy has this:
Apple and oranges, the OP is working within the policy, in your example, you're skirting the policy and lying, he's not lying, he's buying using, returning all within what apple defined as acceptable conditions
You cannot wear a dress and have it remain in original saleable condition, whereas the MBP does not have any such stipulation and the little I know is you cannot conceivably wear a dress with tags remaining.
Apple and oranges, the OP is working within the policy, in your example, you're skirting the policy and lying, he's not lying, he's buying using, returning all within what apple defined as acceptable conditions
And, as I said at the start, if not illegal then it is immoral. And you're using your experience to justify the OPs position. A store can do whatever they want, customers do not have that luxury.
If a store offers you a new Apple Pencil to right a wrong, does this also mean you can go in and take one for yourself? No. Apple stores have the right to make any deal they feel for to help a customer out. Doesn't mean that all customers now get the exact same deal.
By the way, it is possible to wear a dress with the tags still in because I accidently did it once... Felt mortified when I found out towards the end of the evening.
Get caught? Illegal? What state laws have been broken here? Please enlighten us?
Yes, that's pretty clear legally and per Apple's policy. However it doesn't mean it's not an abuse of the spirit and intention of the policy.
The issue is that "abusing" a generous policy such as this does two things -
Apple accounts for a certain amount of returns and exchanges and figures that into their pricing... the more people who take advantage of the policy, the more it figures into the pricing, and every customer pays for it.
And if enough people "abuse" the policy, they will restrict the policy further or eliminate it, and then all customers lose out.
This is the language Apple uses:
It's pretty clear what the intention is. The intention clearly is not to purchase the product with no intention of buying it. If you have a clear conscience abusing the policy, ultimately it's your choice.
I don't see it immoral, so there you go.
I disagree in fact I see this: "however, that sometimes a product may not be what you expected it to be. " stating that you use it and if you find out it doesn't meet your needs you can return it. The OP is basically seeing if the product meets his expectation, which oddly enough is stated in the return policy
I live in Ohio, so Title 29 could apply:
2913.01
As used in this chapter, unless the context requires that a term be given a different meaning:
(A) "Deception" means knowingly deceiving another or causing another to be deceived by any false or misleading representation, by withholding information, by preventing another from acquiring information, or by any other conduct, act, or omission that creates, confirms, or perpetuates a false impression in another, including a false impression as to law, value, state of mind, or other objective or subjective fact.
(B) "Defraud" means to knowingly obtain, by deception, some benefit for oneself or another, or to knowingly cause, by deception, some detriment to another.
Now again, I reiterate, the OP may not be charged when any crime, however it is abusing the policy to the detriment of others. The policy costs money. We pay that price even we buy anything from Apple.
[automerge]1584912371[/automerge]
I don't see it immoral, so there you go.
I disagree in fact I see this: "however, that sometimes a product may not be what you expected it to be. " stating that you use it and if you find out it doesn't meet your needs you can return it. The OP is basically seeing if the product meets his expectation, which oddly enough is stated in the return policy
Except they're not. They are wanting it rent free for the period of the window and have no intention whatsoever of keeping it. They're making the deal knowing full well they will absolutely be returning it abs have no desire to complete the purchase.
It's at best a bad faith purchase.
You yourself have complained many times about the high cost of Apple devices. Now here you are condoning an action that is one of the oh so many reasons we pay the infamous "Apple Tax".
Now, if the OP gies go in the store and declare their intentions at the time of purchase and the store still gives them the go ahead, then they can have at it. That's for the store to make that call.
Last edited:
There's two ways this goes - the OP chose not to clarify their post, so we don't know...I disagree in fact I see this: "however, that sometimes a product may not be what you expected it to be. " stating that you use it and if you find out it doesn't meet your needs you can return it. The OP is basically seeing if the product meets his expectation, which oddly enough is stated in the return policy
1. The OP meant to imply that they were purchasing it with the intent to evaluate and decide whether to keep the purchase or return it. This is clearly allowed and in the spirit of the return policy. If this is the case, this thread has been a ridiculous discussion based on a misunderstanding.
2. The OP meant to imply that they were purchasing it with NO intention of keeping the product and are going to return it regardless if the product meets their expectations or not. If you think that's perfectly ethical, fine, you've stated your opinion. But it's clearly not the intention or in the spirit of the return policy, and most people would think it's the wrong thing to do.
I would say in this case OP has left open the possibility that he might like it enough to keep it? He does say he's actually debating whether to get a MBP, not just that he has a paper to write so he's going to borrow it for 2 weeks to do that and then definitely take it back when done. That seems reasonably consistent with Apple's no questions asked return policy to me? Maybe OP will like it enough he'll decide to keep hold of it after all?
[automerge]1584913890[/automerge]
[automerge]1584913890[/automerge]
I interpret it as he's not sure whether to get it, so he wants to buy it and use it for 2 weeks before making the decision whether to keep or return it. I think maybe the way he's phrased 'return it before making the final decision' is the crucial point here, if OP means he's trying it for 2 weeks, then definitely returning it before buying another one later if he wants it, then that would probably fall into your latter category, but the thing is it makes no sense to do that. If you get it, try it and decide you want it why return it and buy another one?
Last edited:
I'd like to give the OP the benefit of the doubt as well... the only thing is several posters interpreted it as "no plans to keep it" and the OP did not refute that but rather doubled down on rationalizing that Apple has lots of money and can afford the abuse of policy and that it's not unethical to use the policy to return a product they have no intention of keeping. I don't know, maybe just a language misunderstanding.
Don't know, but to me there's zero logic to buying something, using it for two weeks, definitely returning it, even if you want it, and buying it again later?
Actually it is. There does not need to be a written contract or an explicit statement. All that is necessary to make it illegal is to convince a judge that he's taking unfair advantage of the return policy by not having an intent to keep the item.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_faith_(law)
People complain that Apple products are expensive - this is one of the reasons why. It costs them money to manufacture, ship, store, despatch a product & then re-ship, check, re-pack, re-stock it. Not to mention the environmental cost of two unnecessary journeys.
It's not illegal, and Apple will have very carefully calculated whether it makes / loses them money, but it's not right. By all means return something that doesn't work for you - I sent back a clear silicone case that was worse than an £8 Spigen - but don't buy it just to try it.
YMMV, I think that's taking the rise.
It's not illegal, and Apple will have very carefully calculated whether it makes / loses them money, but it's not right. By all means return something that doesn't work for you - I sent back a clear silicone case that was worse than an £8 Spigen - but don't buy it just to try it.
YMMV, I think that's taking the rise.
With all the stores closed there really is no other way to test drive one. So long as they remain closed the OP has some justification.
BTW, fraud by definition is an illegal act in most jurisdictions. Whether Apple will consider someone buying a Mac under false pretenses (i.e., buying, trying and returning) a fraud is another matter, but very likely as it violates their policy.
I literally have a 32gb 2TB 16” 2019 MacBook Pro sitting in its delivery box and not opened. I just can’t convince myself to open it yet thinking something new will get introduced this month. Also worried that they can’t take my return in store like they said they would when stores open back up. OP, just buy it and try it. The only thing I would hate to see buying to test it done by a lot of people is that they will eventually start charging a restocking fee if they haven’t already.
Could you call Apple directly and request a refund (if that's what you want to do)
I wouldn't feel guilty if you have a good faith intention to buy it if you like it and it meets your needs.
That's why Apple has a two week, no questions asked return period
I don't feel that's deceitful.