Obviously, this wasn't acceptable, so she managed to convince the clerk to give her a replacement for the $49 fee.
What "$49 fee?" There is no such fee for replacements. In-warranty, a replacement is free, and out of warranty, the service fee for an iPhone 4 is $149 (which shouldn't be charged for a warranty issue).
On the other hand, AT&T is selling refurbed 8GB iPhone 4 models for $49...
I hate to say it, but I have a feeling your mother may have gotten swindled. Instead of processing a "warranty claim," it's possible the rep may have determined your mother was in fact eligible for an upgrade (or did something to make the eligibility happen), and rather than do a warranty exchange (which, if I remember right, AT&T doesn't do for iPhones anyway... only Apple warranty-services iPhones) she might've sold your mother a refurb without telling her. The benefit to the salesperson is, they pocket themselves a commission,
and an iPhone that she could drop off at an Apple Store and get a like-new replacement, that she might either keep for herself, or sell to some other unsuspecting schmuck.
That would definitely explain why your mother paid $49 more than she should have, and came out of the store with an 8GB iPhone when she originally walked in with a 16.
Did you mother sign anything as part of this "warranty exchange?"
Your mother, and possibly you with her, need to contact AT&T and find out exactly what happened on that store visit, and possibly get it undone.She should not have been charged $49. She should not have been given an 8GB iPhone in exchange for a 16. And the rep
should've told her that Apple, not AT&T, handles warranty service for iPhones.
----------
I'm sure it was a simple miscommunication. Besides the twelve trouble free years I've used AT&T, I've got friends & family with them too. That's a lot of phones, we've all enjoyed customer service as good as Apple.
I and many of my iPhone-toting friends have enjoyed great customer service from AT&T too... and I've also seen first-hand what lengths a bad apple (pardon the pun) at an AT&T store will go to earn an easy extra few bucks off someone who they perceive as an easy mark. Bad employees happen at every company. Even at AT&T, and yes, even at Apple.
Additionally, I've even seen the in-between: well-meaning employees who didn't do what they were supposed to either through lack of training or other incompetence. Or, employees who intentionally flubbed or fudged something not to be outright malicious, but because rectifying the matter the right way would be tedious and result in having a customer sit there fuming for a while, and flubbing/fudging was simply the easiest way to appease a customer right then and there and get them out the door... and hopefully not come back demanding a real fix until their shift ends.
Such is retail.
The haters are quick to forget their idol Steve Jobs chose AT&T.
This has nothing to do with idolitry or hating. It has everything to do with the OP's mother not getting what was due her, and very possibly being taken advantage of by an
individual employee, not a company as a whole, or on Steve Jobs' business decisions. So, kindly refrain from ad hominem attacks. Even
your idol, AT&T, isn't perfect, and they do not hire perfect, ethical employees 100% of the time.
At the very least, that individual employee slipped up and gave her poor customer service; that part can't be denied. And at the very worst, that employee may have outright cheated her; that part can be proven or disproven by checking the account history to see what transactions were made, and whether a simple device swap took place or there was a full-on "upgrade" and device sale posted.
In any case, shrugging shoulders and saying "oh well!" isn't the answer. *I* wouldn't accept getting a smaller-capacity phone and having to pay extra for it, and I'm betting you wouldn't, either. Neither should the OP or his/her mom.
It may well be possible that there was a miscommunication, but the details are a bit fishy. Who charges $49 for a warranty repair? Why is this mystery fee suspiciously similar to the contract price of a purchased (
not replacement) refurb? And why did the OP's mother not get a like-kind replacement, but rather a replacement that suspiciously matches the specs of those on-sale, non-replacement refurbs?
