New Zealand Commerce Commission Warns Apple About Misleading Consumers

[actcyclist]

NZ and Australian consumer law were brought into a reasonable sync a few years ago. I think it's pretty dodgy that Apple have clear messages in Australia that recognise that local law overrides Apple's policies for guarantees but they've seemingly not copy and pasted those into NZ.

In Australia a company can't limit your guarantee by 1 or 2 years like Apple does and guess what? Apple and other companies are still thriving. The USA and UK could bring these laws in, but unfortunately your governments suck.

 

[Candlelight]

New Zealand and Apple have a funny relationship. The original iPhone 4 release was handled so unbelievably badly they removed us from the list of 'first' countries to receive new iPhones for a few years. Managers refused to tell staff when and where the phones would be available, even up to 9am on launch day.

Also, I vividly remember seeing non-unibody MacBook Pros for sale at least two years after they were supposedly no longer available for purchase, at major retailers. Some just refused to send stock back, and tried to sell the products on regardless.

https://www.vodafone.co.nz/iphone6/...gclsrc=aw.ds&dclid=CILVr-G6rNsCFdFwvAod3M0DnA

Vodafone still sells the technically discontinued iPhone 6.

 

[xplora]

As a consumer, this makes no logical sense to me.

The manufacturer is the one who guarantees the workmanship, not the retailer. So why should I go to the retailer, which wouldn’t be trained in any proper way on the manufacturer’s goods, to make a claim on the warranty?

It almost like I’m asking for a hammer to hit on my head dealing with a middle man when I could just go directly to the manufacturer.

Actually it make perfect sense, the seller is responsible for what they sold.

The customer did not buy the product from the manufacturer, they bought it from the seller, and therefore are well within their rights to expect the seller to deal with problems when they arise, it then becomes between the seller and the manufacturer to sort out separately. The seller can direct people to the manufacturer, but if the customer wants the seller to handle it, the seller must handle it.

 

[lec0rsaire]

Apple should only be liable for products carrying the Apple logo. The macs, phones, tablets, watches, ATVs and their corresponding 1st party accessories. Nothing else.

Apple offers 3rd party products for our convenience. Unless you buy a warranty from a retailer such as Best Buy, after a reasonable amount of time they simply are no longer responsible if something is defective. Nearly every retailer will tell you go contact the manufacturer. Now in the case of expensive products (think 4 digits and more), it is likely that the retailer will accommodate you since you are a valuable customer but this is largely on a case by case basis.

 

[actcyclist]

Apple should only be liable for products carrying the Apple logo. The macs, phones, tablets, watches, ATVs and their corresponding 1st party accessories. Nothing else.

That's true in the USA and China, but fortunately consumers are much better off in Europe, Australian the NZ. Apple seems reluctant to accept that in NZ so will probably end up with a compliance program coming their way.

 

[Praesto]

Consider situations like the infamous 2011 MacBook Pros with the faulty video chips. It's a well-known problem and if it was to occur on my machine today then it'd be treated as a manufacturing defect and would not be related to my handling of the machine. It's reasonable to expect that it'd be covered under the CGA.

As for warranty on third-party products, I don't see why that's ridiculous. If you sell a product then you're responsible for its quality. Don't sell flaky junk if you don't want to support it.

Just to make sure I’m hearing you right, you think that if I sell a product manufactured by someone else, I also have to have an engineering team capable of fixing that product if it breaks?

In other words, if I buy a cell phone from a gas station, they have to fix it or they get sued? You can’t have company specific law as that is predatory, so this is how I read your comment. Please clarify.

I see this ending with higher prices for customers in New Zealand.

 

[lec0rsaire]

That's true in the USA and China, but fortunately consumers are much better off in Europe, Australian the NZ. Apple seems reluctant to accept that in NZ so will probably end up with a compliance program coming their way.

I understand but these terms should be reasonable as well. Apple’s customer service is already the best in the business. I’m all for out of warranty repairs for recalls and defects that show up years later but forcing retailers to replace or service every single product they sell is just insane.

Europe has its own problems. There isn’t even such a thing as a toll free number over there. While most of the time you speak to local humans on the phone instead of someone in India, you’re charged by the minute.

 

[Nermal]

Just to make sure I’m hearing you right, you think that if I sell a product manufactured by someone else, I also have to have an engineering team capable of fixing that product if it breaks?

No. You have to replace the product or send it back to the supplier on the customer's behalf (which of these you do is up to you). You definitely don't need to repair it yourself!

Apple should just withdraw from NZ if it becomes too much of an issue.

I see this ending with higher prices for customers in New Zealand.

I should point out that this is not a new law; it's been around for ~25 years (well before Apple even started selling directly in NZ in the first place). I don't see Apple pulling out of the country due to a "make sure you follow the law" notice (and it is that, a warning/reminder notice, not an actual fine or enforcement order).

 

[ElRojito]

They are responsible for arranging for it to be fixed - they don't actually have to open it up and fix it themselves. Very often this simply takes the form of the shop liaising with the supplier of the camera. The shop might not even incur any expenses in doing this themselves if the supplier covers it.

If Apple sells a laptop to you with a third party drive, and the drive fails, you take the laptop back to Apple and they in turn take the drive back to the third-party supplier. After all, why should you know or care that there's a third-party drive in the laptop? You gave your money to Apple - they should fix it.

The consumer always deals with the vendor, and can't be fobbed off or given the run-around. The CGA (consumer guarantees act) is one of the best pieces of legislation in a long time.

And getting a Genius Bar appointment sucks now?

NZ: Hold my beer!

 

[sir1963nz]

So they have no specific time period for how long the warranty has to last, just vauge language, and they are responsible for warranty on third party products sold in their stores? That just seems ridiculous.

Its quicker, its cheaper for everyone concerned. No need for lawyers, and the little guy can win against a corporation with tons of money to waste without bankrupting himself.

And it gets even better, if their faulty product caused you other legitimate expenses (ie shipping for revue

How in God’s name can Apple warranty another company’s stuff??????? That part makes less than zero sense. That is functionally retarded
[doublepost=1527647891][/doublepost]So any retail store in New Zealand is responsible for fixing the products they sell???

Correct. That responsibility to repair is most often contracted out to 3rd parties, but they are responsible for getting it to the repair centre , having it tied and getting it back.

And as it turns out, these retailers then go back to the manufacturer and gets reimbursed by them, if they dont play ball then their products are not long on the shelf and a competitors product takes its place.

The reason the retailer takes initial responsibility is that when it comes to imported products the customer has no ability to seek redress. For example if you were to buy a Ferrari and it had a significant fault, who do YOU believe is responsible, the people you bought it from (who may not be the authorised agent), or Ferrari in Italy ? Thats right the people who sold it to you (at a profit).

It is a perfectly acceptable was of handling things, we don't spent a fortune on lawyers who then take 90% of the winnings, we get things fixed.

Also ALL goods for retail in New Zealand MUST be prices with all taxes etc included. There is none of this ******** where you see something on the shelf for $20 and you pay $25 because of taxes. Hidden costs are illegal here. You see a hotel for $200 a night, thats what you pay, there is no +taxes, + resort fee, + city taxes, etc, its all up front and honest.
[doublepost=1527654352][/doublepost]

And getting a Genius Bar appointment sucks now?

NZ: Hold my beer!

Its not hard, and it all works without the need for lawyers.
Our government KNOWS that every customer is also a voter, and no our politicians are far more accountable and are far more accessible to the voters than those in the USA. If you know the right bar to go to you can go and have a beer with a lot of them, there is no in your face security guards with guns. We are ranked as being far more democratic than the USA, more "free", have better education, healthcare, welfare and are a much happier country. We the people vote, and the government generally look after we the people and not the large corporation.

 

[itsmilo]

I understand but these terms should be reasonable as well. Apple’s customer service is already the best in the business. I’m all for out of warranty repairs for recalls and defects that show up years later but forcing retailers to replace or service every single product they sell is just insane.

Europe has its own problems. There isn’t even such a thing as a toll free number over there. While most of the time you speak to local humans on the phone instead of someone in India, you’re charged by the minute.

Huh? Charged by the minute? What year is it? 1998? I don’t recall ever being charged by the minute unless you call something shady. Germany here

 

[cmwade77]

I am of course in favor of companies standing by their products but they’re just looking for Apple to say the hell with it and stop selling 3rd party stuff in their stores. I find Apple’s warranty in the U.S. more than reasonable for electronics. 1 year included with a total of 3 years with AppleCare. This is on top of a 14 day return window without any restocking fees.

There are a truckload of other companies whose warranties are effectively good for nothing like the typically 90 day warranties on most consumer electronics. Why aren’t they going after those companies?

No, given the price of the electronics, it should be a minimum of 5 years of included warranty and then Applecsre extending it an additional 3 years. The same should go for all simillarly priced "quality" devices, no matter the brand.

 

[clg1]

I love the outrage here! I was born in the USA but moved to NZ 13 years ago. I understand both places very well. The NZ system works just fine thanks!

 

[CarlJ]

The products should last for a reasonable period of time. ...

Popcorn please while I watch all the US citizens handwringing.

Not handwringing, just... who decides what the definition of "reasonable" is. And is it the same this month as last month? And what if different parties have differing interpretations of "reasonable period of time", for a given device? If one party disagrees with the court's interpretation of "reasonable", who is in charge of determining whether the court is using a reasonable definition of "reasonable"? It seems a little like having a law that says, "be nice" - you could be charged at any time with not being nice when you thought you were being really rather quite nice. Lots of laws get written with sloppy definitions for things (because politicians don't think like software developers), but this seems like going out of their way to write a very fuzzy definition.

Not handwringing, not complaining, just... slightly astonished. If it works for you, fine.

 

[rom3o]

Europe has its own problems. There isn’t even such a thing as a toll free number over there.

That is not true. It is up to each individual company if they want to offer a toll-free number as a service for their customers, that is no different in Europe than it is in the USA.

 

[FourDegrees]

How in God’s name can Apple warranty another company’s stuff??????? That part makes less than zero sense. That is functionally retarded
[doublepost=1527647891][/doublepost]So any retail store in New Zealand is responsible for fixing the products they sell???

It says that Apple is responsible for the warranty, which means they have to sort out any issues; they do not necessarily have to fix them. Whether they go back to the manufacturer or replace defective items is up to them. This means that you only have to deal with Apple.

Makes a lot of sense.

 

[firewood]

Hasn’t Apple already taken care of these laws by higher prices and lower inventory in NZ? (compared to USD). So these laws just make all NZ consumers pay more for these laws in the form of a hidden pre-paid Apple repair insurance fee. Wouldn’t be surprised if this actually ends up increasing AAPL profitability in NZ.

 

[0007776]

Also ALL goods for retail in New Zealand MUST be prices with all taxes etc included. There is none of this ******** where you see something on the shelf for $20 and you pay $25 because of taxes. Hidden costs are illegal here. You see a hotel for $200 a night, thats what you pay, there is no +taxes, + resort fee, + city taxes, etc, its all up front and honest.

That is one that I do wish we had in the US since I hate not knowing how much I’ll have to spend up front.

 

[C DM]

Its quicker, its cheaper for everyone concerned. No need for lawyers, and the little guy can win against a corporation with tons of money to waste without bankrupting himself.

And it gets even better, if their faulty product caused you other legitimate expenses (ie shipping for revue


Correct. That responsibility to repair is most often contracted out to 3rd parties, but they are responsible for getting it to the repair centre , having it tied and getting it back.

And as it turns out, these retailers then go back to the manufacturer and gets reimbursed by them, if they dont play ball then their products are not long on the shelf and a competitors product takes its place.

The reason the retailer takes initial responsibility is that when it comes to imported products the customer has no ability to seek redress. For example if you were to buy a Ferrari and it had a significant fault, who do YOU believe is responsible, the people you bought it from (who may not be the authorised agent), or Ferrari in Italy ? Thats right the people who sold it to you (at a profit).

It is a perfectly acceptable was of handling things, we don't spent a fortune on lawyers who then take 90% of the winnings, we get things fixed.

Also ALL goods for retail in New Zealand MUST be prices with all taxes etc included. There is none of this ******** where you see something on the shelf for $20 and you pay $25 because of taxes. Hidden costs are illegal here. You see a hotel for $200 a night, thats what you pay, there is no +taxes, + resort fee, + city taxes, etc, its all up front and honest.
[doublepost=1527654352][/doublepost]

Its not hard, and it all works without the need for lawyers.
Our government KNOWS that every customer is also a voter, and no our politicians are far more accountable and are far more accessible to the voters than those in the USA. If you know the right bar to go to you can go and have a beer with a lot of them, there is no in your face security guards with guns. We are ranked as being far more democratic than the USA, more "free", have better education, healthcare, welfare and are a much happier country. We the people vote, and the government generally look after we the people and not the large corporation.

Are we comparing countries with differences in area and population, along with states and many many other things, that are on the order of something like 50x? Seems like even apples to oranges wouldn't be a decent description of that as much as peas and watermelons might be.

 

[sir1963nz]

So, Apple is supposed to keep parts on hand for hundreds of third-party products, and get trained on how to repair them. The length of warranty for their own stuff is one thing, I can’t get over how dumb that second part is
[doublepost=1527648214][/doublepost]

So, a mom and pop shop in New Zealand sells me a Nikon camera. It fails after a year. They have to fix it?

No, Apple send it to the manufacturer for repair they do not have to carry spares etc etc etc. However Apple has the options of repair, replace, or refund.The repair can be done by a 3rd party who is authorised to do the repair.

And yes a mom and pop store has the same responsibility.
[doublepost=1527664327][/doublepost]

As a consumer, this makes no logical sense to me.

The manufacturer is the one who guarantees the workmanship, not the retailer. So why should I go to the retailer, which wouldn’t be trained in any proper way on the manufacturer’s goods, to make a claim on the warranty?

It almost like I’m asking for a hammer to hit on my head dealing with a middle man when I could just go directly to the manufacturer.

Edit: I just want to add that there’s a difference between a hard drive being a component of a greater whole, and a stand alone hard drive sold as is.

Even if the hard drive in my Mac is a Samsung, the unit sold to me is Apple and they guarantee the workmanship (ie: they guarantee that all components work). If I buy a lacie hard drive as is in an Apple store, lacie guarantees workmanship. Apple’s relationship with the customer is merely transactional.

We view it that the transaction creates a contract between the retailer and the customer. The customer has no such contractual arrangement with the manufacturer , the retailer does, so it is up to them to sort the problem with the manufacturer not the customer.

 

[TechGod]

Apple should just withdraw from NZ if it becomes too much of an issue. Their Gov can explain


That’s not good. That means a giant company like Nikon gets away with poor quality while mom and pop needs to become engineers to figure out if every single product in their family shop is good or not and how to repair them. That’s insane

Only thing that’s insane is that you’re not getting this in the slightest!!!
[doublepost=1527665368][/doublepost]

Hasn’t Apple already taken care of these laws by higher prices and lower inventory in NZ? (compared to USD). So these laws just make all NZ consumers pay more for these laws in the form of a hidden pre-paid Apple repair insurance fee. Wouldn’t be surprised if this actually ends up increasing AAPL profitability in NZ.

No, the stuff is higher price because of taxes.

 

[sir1963nz]

Not handwringing, just... who decides what the definition of "reasonable" is. And is it the same this month as last month? And what if different parties have differing interpretations of "reasonable period of time", for a given device? If one party disagrees with the court's interpretation of "reasonable", who is in charge of determining whether the court is using a reasonable definition of "reasonable"? It seems a little like having a law that says, "be nice" - you could be charged at any time with not being nice when you thought you were being really rather quite nice. Lots of laws get written with sloppy definitions for things (because politicians don't think like software developers), but this seems like going out of their way to write a very fuzzy definition.

Not handwringing, not complaining, just... slightly astonished. If it works for you, fine.

There are guidelines based on a range of things, what the item is (ie a computer has less reasonable life expectancy than a refrigerator), the quality of the item (Cheap Android vs iPad). There is also consideration of previous decisions, these are shared by all courts in NZ and all adjudicators have access to these decisions. There are no lawyers involved and because of this its possible the cheaper was of doing things even if you loose occasionally.

It works.

 

[Falhófnir]

This is a bit confusing to me so let me see if I get this right:

If I buy a MacBook Pro and, say, a third-party hard drive (let's say LaCie) from the Apple Store. Then the hard drive stops working at no fault of my own. Does that mean Apple isn't allowed to refer the customer to LaCie's customer support? Becuase based off of how I understood the article, this is where my conclusion leads to. I'd be happy if someone were to clarify this for me.

As I understand it, because they are the seller, they wouldn’t be able to do the ‘not our problem, talk to LaCie’ thing. They would have to make a reasonable effort to amend the situation - possibly including up to sending the HDD off to LaCie for data recovery and a replacement themselves...

 

[sir1963nz]

Hasn’t Apple already taken care of these laws by higher prices and lower inventory in NZ? (compared to USD). So these laws just make all NZ consumers pay more for these laws in the form of a hidden pre-paid Apple repair insurance fee. Wouldn’t be surprised if this actually ends up increasing AAPL profitability in NZ.

No lawyers, no class action suits, etc etc etc probably offsets the differences.
And at times because of exchange rate fluctuations it has been cheaper to buy here in NZ than in the USA.

 

[tennisproha]

No because you don't need a lawyer. If the claim is under something like NZ$15,000 you take it the small claims court where lawyers are not allowed.

The Consumer Guarantees Act allows for variable time frames because no one expects a 5 year life from a cheap piece of Chinese junk bought for $150, but they can expect that from Apple "premium" marketed products.

And this applies to spares too, so it is NOT reasonable for a spare mother board to cost more than the computer in 3 years time. I have used the CGA to get a MacBook repaired when the mother board died at 3 1/2 years, a GPS unit that lost all its data at 18 months old, a camera that was 2 days outside of its 12 month warranty, and have helped others make successful claims. The CGA applies to workmanship too, one claim I helped with was with a Harley Davidson where they rebuilt the motor but failed to replace the oil filter and wash the sump out properly, the end user had it seize on them after about 200km, they got the price of having it rebuilt professionally.

Legislation like the CGA show the the government is working for the PEOPLE, the ones who elected them, and not for the corporations..
[doublepost=1527642159][/doublepost]

Correct, the FIRST port of call is always the place you bought it from. The end consumer has no obligation to go any further back down the supply chain.
IF the shop you bought it from no longer exists, then you can go back along the supply chain with the same right.

You don't even need to be the original owner. So long as there is no unreasonable damage (ie it has been opened beyond what is reasonable , or dropped, etc) then the act still applies. You can reasonably expect for example a refrigerator to last 10+ years.

I for one would love a law like this in the US. What's crazypants to me is that Apple has a measly bs 1 year warranty on a $1000 device and then CHARGES the consumer AppleCare for an actual warranty. A 1 year warranty implies that they do not expect the product to last more than 1 year. And then AppleCare is the greatest oxymoron; more like AppleDontGiveAShit.

And while I'm on this train, it's also crazy that Apple CHARGES for more storage. I have always bought the base model. It's absurd that they charge $100+ for a SSD that costs them pennies on the dollar.