There are groups, especially in medical malpractice cases, that track what Companies (Insurance Companies, too) will settle for as a deminimus nuisance payment. The it's-cheaper-to-pay-than-defend. I don't think State Farm realises the non-dollar impacts to Apple giving "go away" money. Every news outlet would report "Apple pays State Farm over home fire..."
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.
State Farm Sues Apple For Over $75,000, Claims Defective iPhone Caused House Fire
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There are groups, especially in medical malpractice cases, that track what Companies (Insurance Companies, too) will settle for as a deminimus nuisance payment. The it's-cheaper-to-pay-than-defend. I don't think State Farm realises the non-dollar impacts to Apple giving "go away" money. Every news outlet would report "Apple pays State Farm over home fire..."
How can it be deemed suspicious? You can purchase an iPhone 6 (released in 2014) in 2017 from retailers like Best Buy, Walmart, and multiple MVNO's. That's basically the same time frame. Also release date is not representative of manufacturer date.
Thanks for the link!
Line 8 mentions that she purchased the iPhone, but it doesn't mention where, or if it was new or used. Is that sort of ambiguity normal for these articles? Line 9 mentions the battery was never changed. If the phone was bought refurbished or used, could it have been changed prior to her purchase?
[doublepost=1500656640][/doublepost]
Ah, I see. Good point! I didn't think to search and didn't know retailers still carried older iPhones (new) like that.
Thanks for the link!
Line 8 mentions that she purchased the iPhone, but it doesn't mention where, or if it was new or used. Is that sort of ambiguity normal for these articles? Line 9 mentions the battery was never changed. If the phone was bought refurbished or used, could it have been changed prior to her purchase?
[doublepost=1500656640][/doublepost]
Ah, I see. Good point! I didn't think to search and didn't know retailers still carried older iPhones (new) like that.
You could still buy a new iPhone 4S in that year, I did.
---
In The link posted by @Fzang it says
I have to laugh here, so they more or less say Apple didn't do their best to test it's iPhones and battery rigorously.
Mind you, I am not saying the iPhone wasn't faulty.
Last edited:
If it is shown that the phone was properly used, not modified in any way from manufacture, and still caught fire, then Apple is strictly liable for the phone starting the house fire. Apply will try to show misuse and that is the only way they could win this. State Farm thinks apple is liable and this is part of what they are good at determining. They won't waste their time otherwise and Apple will probably settle after further discussion. All products get manufacturing defects as nothing is perfect. Smaller companies carry liability insurance to cover the risk and the cost of that insurance gets bundled into the product cost. Apple self-insures this one but they likely have factored in the risk of this sort of payout in their cost structure.
Last edited:
They are saying that Apple's best obviously wasn't good enough as their product did catch fire so they were negligent in not having a good enough process. Most that is boilerplate for this type of legal action.
It's fairly easy for Apple to prove it isn't negligence, if Apple can show evidence that only few batteries have caught on
fire, say 1 in a million, than to me it means they did their job well.
If there is evidence that it was a faulty battery then Apple should pay.
Last edited:
Tough to buy a new house for $75,000 even in Wisconsin. The home owner and insurance company just want back the money used to repair a house fire, nothing more.
Yes. The article says the battery was not CHANGED (or replaced) not that is was not CHARGED.
No, sues "for over" $75,000 is coded language. It's a federal case, and the minimum amount you can sue for is $75,000. The actual amount is not known, but could be much higher. Journalists use this trick all the time when the actual amount is being kept confidential.
I don't know how your home insurance works, mine pays out (and has paid out) for the damage caused by a broken item in a household. (And they don't pay for the broken item itself, which I replaced for £10 when the damage was about £5,000). A faulty charger wouldn't be a reason not to pay. Unless they find a bill where someone sold you "One faulty charger - $0.99"
LiOn batteries explode/catch fire when the permeable barrier between the anode and cathode is compromised, leading to the rapid discharge of the battery. It happens either as a result of a battery defect or from the barrier being breached mechanically. Not sure if a defective charger could also be implicated, but I wouldn't think it could. So I suppose proper care involves not stabbing your phone with an ice pick. Otherwise, I have no ideas about what constitutes proper care in terms of preventing a battery from failing catastrophically. We all walk around with these little bombs in our pockets but don't much concern ourselves with the explosive potential because it happens so seldom.
Under the liability laws of many states, anyone in the chain from battery maker to Foxconn to Apple to store could be held responsible. But it's hard to sue the non-American ones, and some states allow suing the local companies in lieu of the foreign ones.
It would probably not be too difficult to prove that Apple's engineers knew that one in ten million batteries might catch fire.
So in the end, if it's proven to be caused by a bad battery, Apple could be made to pay for it. After all, they get the profit when things DO work right. In return, they have to accept responsibility when it does not.
Last edited:
I also would like Apple to send me some money. I only need to think up a good reason.
Maybe my iPhone is causing carpal tunnel. That should also be good for $75000.
Maybe my iPhone is causing carpal tunnel. That should also be good for $75000
.So little understanding of the US legal system in this thread...
There are chargers and cables. Faulty chargers can damage the battery, but faulty cables cannot. USB power adaptors are cheap and sold everywhere without Apple's approval, and Apple cables are not. But the iPhone 4 had the 30 pin cable instead of the stupid Lightning cable, which never broke anyway, so the cable wasn't an issue back then either.
State Farm Insurance Company is using their internal legal staff (not likely to be quack lawyers) to get reimbursement from Apple for a claim they paid out for damage caused by a defective product that Apple sold. The home owner wants their deductible back. Nobody is getting rich here. They want to break even.
Last edited: