Thanks for everything Apple!

[zin]

Just to clarify on some points being made here

UK standard warranty is 1 year not two.
There’s no 6 year warranty
There’s consumer law which allows you to make a claim for inherent (at purchase) faults.
Fault must be noted and reported in the first 6 months post purchase.
You then have 6 years to exercise your claim.

The issue wasn’t there at the point of purchase, as you describe, which means the unit did not have an inherent fault which means you don’t have any consumer protection on this fault occurrence.

Buy AppleCare people!

That's not entirely true. The fault does not have to be reported within the first six months after purchase. What changes after six months is that the burden to prove the fault existed at sale transfers to you. Within those first six months, the law assumes the fault existed at sale unless the retailer can prove otherwise.

It is possible his issue was a fault that existed at sale and manifested later, but he would have to prove it. It's reasonable to assume the vast majority of displays don't fail after a year, so he could at least try and make a claim under the law. He doesn't lose anything from trying. Many other people have been successful.

 

[haydn!]

The 6 year law which has been thrown around means that the product has to be fit for service for a period of 6 years, it is not an automatic replacement/repair within that period.

That’s not quite true. A product is not required to last six years, only a fair and reasonable amount of time up to a maximum of six years. So for example it’s reasonable to expect a £2000 laptop to last longer than a £500 machine but neither are required by any law to actually last six years.

I would certainly argue a MacBook could last six years, but should it, is an entirely different question. A fridge freezer on the other hand, I would totally not expect to have to replace that within a six year window.

It’s all highly subjective though hence why an independent assessment is essential.

 

[jeremy h]

I've managed this in the past. I had an expensive 5 year old computer gadget (that was potted so components couldn't be replaced) had the screen fail (a component failure as opposed to wear and tear) after 5 years. In this case it should have lasted at least 10. Initially the company concerned told me that they weren't going to do anything for me so I did research the law and threw my research at them. They were a German company where I think the limit is 5 years (as opposed to our 6) so it took a bit of work but once they realised what the situation was here they were reasonable.

My understanding of the law from this experience is that if the item fails due to an inherently faulty component before what one would expect its normal life to be and within the 6 year period then you're entitled to a repair at a reasonable cost. In my case the component couldn't be replaced and as it failed at half its life expectancy (10 years in my case) but within the 6 year period I negotiated a half price replacement.

In your case I would expect the laptop to last well in excess of even the 6 years - leave alone a few days over the year it actually did.!!! They've quote a repair cost but the amount is unreasonable in this situation in my opinion. They need to make you a much better offer on that repair. I'd go back in and make a real stink about this (really politely though). If that doesn't work then threaten them with the small claims court etc until they escalate it up to customer services in Ireland.

I've found Apple have been quite reasonable about this sort of thing once you can talk to someone who can make decisions.

 

[sublunar]

I'm sure I have read stories about Apple store managers exercising some flexibility in offering big discounts off new models if old (replacement) ones are not readily available. Or even handing over new for old in some cases. Again, it's down to the person you speak to - which is why people are more likely to get results when speaking to the manager who is in a position to authorise exceptional good will like that.

I would still recommend having a word with Apple's customer support help and see if you can in effect get a code to take into the store to effect a cheap or free repair. The big point being lack of satisfactory use of an expensive laptop which should be expected to last 5-6 years an instead barely lasted one year contrary to the sale of goods act.

 

[Brian Y]

The inherent fault part of UK law mentioned above is only one point. An item doesn’t necessarily need to have a provable inherent fault to qualify (there’s also lasting a reasonable amount of time, and being of satisfactory quality).

The law also states that a product “must last a reasonable amount of time”. Given the price of a MBP, one would reasonably expect it to last more than 13 months.

Book another appointment, state that you wish to make a claim under consumer law, as the machine has not lasted a reasonable amount of time. May need to speak to a manager, but I have no doubt they’ll do it (they have a specific warranty status for consumer law repairs). If not, follow up with a letter to head office, then a LBA if they don’t respond to that.

I highly doubt it’ll get that far though. Normally mentioning that you know your rights is enough. If it did end up in small claims court, you’d be pretty much guaranteed a win - you wont have a hard time proving that a £2k laptop should have lasted more than 13 months.

 

[A Hobo]

Once again like every thread related to consumer law this ones littered with misinformation and hearsay.

There’s a lot of “my friend got x,so I can’t believe I didn’t get X” and “not the case with me, I got covered by a repair program”

That’s great for you, you guys are the few exceptions, but the law stands.

Apple and the buyer will have wildly differing opinions on what’s “reasonable” when it comes to lifespan, so saying “I expect X Product to last x time because it cost x is COMPLETLY SUBJECTIVE”

Case in point, apple warranty is 1 year. Expect it to last a year and no more. AppleCare is apple making a bet against the machine, that it doesn’t fail within 3 years, and far many more don’t fail, then those that do.

And finally forgot to mention, consumer law is only against the reseller, not the manufacturer. So if you bought an iPod touch from Tesco and it failed within a short time you’d have to chase Tesco, not apple (warranty excepting)

 

[sublunar]

Once again like every thread related to consumer law this ones littered with misinformation and hearsay.

There’s a lot of “my friend got x,so I can’t believe I didn’t get X” and “not the case with me, I got covered by a repair program”

That’s great for you, you guys are the few exceptions, but the law stands.

Apple and the buyer will have wildly differing opinions on what’s “reasonable” when it comes to lifespan, so saying “I expect X Product to last x time because it cost x is COMPLETLY SUBJECTIVE”

Case in point, apple warranty is 1 year. Expect it to last a year and no more. AppleCare is apple making a bet against the machine, that it doesn’t fail within 3 years, and far many more don’t fail, then those that do.

And finally forgot to mention, consumer law is only against the reseller, not the manufacturer. So if you bought an iPod touch from Tesco and it failed within a short time you’d have to chase Tesco, not apple (warranty excepting)

Let's get the heresay out of the way - COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE can be affected by the expectation generated by marketing. Apple are an aspirational brand, we're in the realms of Porsche, Mercedes, Omega, etc. It's reasonable to expect brands such as these to last longer than other brands based on the impression left by their marketing.

Here's Apple's interpretation of EU law on the matter as it stands in the UK. I'm not sure if the OP bought direct from Apple (either an Apple Store or the Apple Store online) but that might become a factor.

Applecare, for the average Brit, is going to be more valuable because it removes that element of resistance from Apple Stores - you'll get a no-questions-asked repair or replacement if it's unrepairable within the parameters of Apple Care. If you don't then you have to be prepared to fight your corner. And yes sometimes people get a break with Apple (deserved or not). But there's no call to be petty about the warranty or the OPs attempt to get a satisfactory resolution.

 

[A Hobo]

expectation generated by marketing.
It's reasonable to expect brands such as these to last longer than other brands based on the impression left by their marketing

Got any marketing that Apple put out saying “it’ll last longer than a dell!

You; the consumer, puts that “it’s expensive, it should last longer” idea into existence.

I am simply trying to advise the OP correctly, in this case (unless an exception is made) his device isn’t covered. Saying go back and try again might not achiev anything and it’s not realistic to expect a different answer.

You’re just gonna put pressure on the poor guys in the store who can’t cover it even if they wanted to, and then once that exception is made, everyone will want it too, that’s just how it is, and the circle repeats.

I’m not trying to poo poo the OP, I’m doing something called setting an expectation.

 

[sublunar]

Got any marketing that Apple put out saying “it’ll last longer than a dell!

You; the consumer, puts that “it’s expensive, it should last longer” idea into existence.

I am simply trying to advise the OP correctly, in this case (unless an exception is made) his device isn’t covered. Saying go back and try again might not achiev anything and it’s not realistic to expect a different answer.

You’re just gonna put pressure on the poor guys in the store who can’t cover it even if they wanted to, and then once that exception is made, everyone will want it too, that’s just how it is, and the circle repeats.

I’m not trying to poo poo the OP, I’m doing something called setting an expectation.

Just a selection of first page hits off Google re: Apple and reliability. They have played the reliability card before - many times - at the expense of Microsoft and other rivals. Remember Mr PC vs Mac?

http://www.zdnet.com/article/consumer-reports-apple-still-tops-in-reliability/
http://www.zdnet.com/article/apples-macbooks-still-the-most-reliable/
https://www.fiercewireless.com/wire...to-focus-quality-and-reliability-not-products

You're right in a way to try and manage expectations. It would be wrong for the OP to be led to believe he's completely dead in the water on this matter.

There is EU law, the OP can try and use it, or try and get Apple to (at their discretion) make a goodwill gesture to part fund the repair or even replace the unit. Remember he might have been spoken to by a member of staff who was applying the policy incorrectly. If the OP had just immediately asked to speak to the manager and pleaded a reasonable case he might have had a different outcome.

If the repair was quoted at £700 Apple could've offered to cover some or all of it due to the age of the machine. It's not in any way unprecedented as car manufacturers will often do the same if a car suffers a serious issue not covered by warranty after 7 months for example.

Most Apple store staff on the ground don't have the authority to do this sort of thing which is why I have suggested a word with the manager but speaking to someone in Apple Care might be better, especially if there is a supervisor available.

 

[macdudesir]

Let's get the heresay out of the way - COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE can be affected by the expectation generated by marketing. Apple are an aspirational brand, we're in the realms of Porsche, Mercedes, Omega, etc. It's reasonable to expect brands such as these to last longer than other brands based on the impression left by their marketing.

Here's Apple's interpretation of EU law on the matter as it stands in the UK. I'm not sure if the OP bought direct from Apple (either an Apple Store or the Apple Store online) but that might become a factor.

Applecare, for the average Brit, is going to be more valuable because it removes that element of resistance from Apple Stores - you'll get a no-questions-asked repair or replacement if it's unrepairable within the parameters of Apple Care. If you don't then you have to be prepared to fight your corner. And yes sometimes people get a break with Apple (deserved or not). But there's no call to be petty about the warranty or the OPs attempt to get a satisfactory resolution.

I don't know anything about UK consumer law, but I was just thinking to bring up luxury car brands when I read your comment...I can go and buy an Audi S5 for $55000 (im American bare with me on the dollars...) or I can go get a Toyota Camry for $23,000. So by the logic that an expensive laptop will last longer than a cheaper one...I should expect the Audi to last longer...But I don't. Theres no necessary correlation between price and longevity. In fact, I would never buy an Audi...I would lease them because I would never want one outside of warranty...it will most likely break and then cost a ton to repair...

Going even further, if I went and spent 250k on a Ferrari, it should last a lot longer than a Camry, right? Not at all. I'd be impressed if the Ferrari made it a full year without anything going wrong.

So while it is unfortunate for the OP, from what I can tell about the UK consumer law so far, trying to prove that the device should last longer than 13 months (which IMHO it should) is going to be more than difficult. And price is not a telling factor...

But I do think that another visit to the store is warranted...OP, you may be able to get Apple to subsidize the cost of repair due to the machine's age if you can't get them to cover it outright.

 

[Apple Fritter]

True; an expensive Cuban cigar won't burn any longer than a 50¢ one by design. An expensive bottle of champagne won't fill any more glasses than some cheap bubbly brew from Wal-Mart.

On the other hand, they never tire of stating just how splendid and well made their stuff is, so they are, at least morally, guilty of inciting that expectation within their customer's minds. Remember, we live in a world where people have to be told not to dry cats in microwave ovens or the manufacturer is responsible. In that regard Apple should be required to slap a sticker on every device telling people not to expect function beyond 12 months if they really don't stand behind their products.

Also, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a person who considers a laptop to last more than 12 months unreasonable. Unless you're Apple in this case. Whatever the law may say (I'm not an attorney), I'd expect them to at least strike a deal with the customer paying either just part or labor.

 

[A Hobo]

http://www.zdnet.com/article/consumer-reports-apple-still-tops-in-reliability/
http://www.zdnet.com/article/apples-macbooks-still-the-most-reliable/
https://www.fiercewireless.com/wire...to-focus-quality-and-reliability-not-products


There is EU law, the OP can try and use it

1. Not apple marketing. If companies find Apple products more reliable, great. But Apple has never marketed their products as such, so well done for the swing and a miss.

2. I remember the Mac vs ads, I remember them being almost always about the “experience” of macs over pcs, I don’t remember any saying that macs outlast pcs.

3. EU law doesn’t cover him. Another point of confusion in the current UK/EU Law nonsense. The EU coverage is only a directive in the UK in its current state and not adopted.

That’s why there’s two separate laws.
Which is also why it’s not mentioned anywhere on the Apple UK site. UK consumer law supersedes it as being applicable.

Or not in OPs case. Sorry to say.
[doublepost=1518051597][/doublepost]

Apple should be required to slap a sticker on every device telling people not to expect function beyond 12 months

It’s not a sticker but it does say 1 year limited warranty during the set up process. I mean you guys read the T’s and C’s before just agreeing with them right?

I mean, you have to know what your agreeing to right?

You don’t just click accept do you?

 

[New_Mac_Smell]

That’s not quite true. A product is not required to last six years, only a fair and reasonable amount of time up to a maximum of six years. So for example it’s reasonable to expect a £2000 laptop to last longer than a £500 machine but neither are required by any law to actually last six years.

I would certainly argue a MacBook could last six years, but should it, is an entirely different question. A fridge freezer on the other hand, I would totally not expect to have to replace that within a six year window.

It’s all highly subjective though hence why an independent assessment is essential.

You misunderstood or I didn't write correctly, was a long post...

I wasn't suggesting it should last 6 years, just there is the expectation that it'll be fit for service for this period. This is a highly subjective legal comment that in reality gets debated all the time. What it means is the product should be fit for purpose, not in 100% brand new condition for this period. If I brought it and used it on a fishing trawler for 6 years, it would be unrealistic to expect it to last this long. However if I brought it and never opened the box, I would expect it to work after 5 years. A lot comes down to the use of the machine, which is where good-will comes into play. If you've enjoyed and made full use of the product for 5 years and then a speaker fails, this is entirely fair use. If however the CPU dies, then this comes under the fit for purpose. However, again, this does not mean you are entitled to an automatic repair/replacement, it means that Apple should offer you a repair - whether they discount it or anything is up to you. Or you can go down the legal route of proving defects, legal advice etc.

Basically, don't read anything into UK consumer law beyond the 1 year warranty. It's a mess designed to protect the consumer from buying a box of rotten apples, and the retailer from endless expensive repairs every time a button stops working. It's also designed to protect against genuine defects however, should a manufacturer create a product with a known problem (I.e. VW diesel) then the consumer is protected for this period.

Trying to make claims after 1 year is often not worth the hassle on a fairly cheap device, I know a lot of people like to mention £££ = expense and it should last forever stuff, but £2500 is not a lot of money in reality. Setting up a court battle will cost you at least £500, plus the time you spend researching and attending (Whatever you value your time at). Then there's the extra legal advice and independent testing, that could easily run several thousand. You could spend £4000 battling a case when there's no guarantee you'll win, it'll just cause a lot of stress to yourself when you could've just spent the £500 on a repair.

In the OP's case I do recommend trying with Apple, but fully understanding your rights is crucial. You are not entitled to anything and expecting a free repair will not get you anywhere. At the very least, I would expect Apple to offer you a discounted repair due to the expectation of reasonable use - which they may just discount to free. Either way you need to speak to a senior advisor regarding this, the front-line staff have no authority or ability to offer people anything outside of company policy for obvious reasons. It's the senior staff that are paid to investigate and make decisions on these things.

 

[groove-agent]

I can't believe how much Apple has turned into a bunch of hard-asses with respect to repairs, esp ones that are clearly design flaws (the keyboards in particular). The only way Apple will take it seriously is if you hit them with a public law suit.

 

[Samuelsan2001]

Just double checked my invoice, the MacBook is actually only 12months and 23days old. 23 days out of warranty, £700 out of pocket. I will most certainly never pay the full amount up front again, feel robbed so disappointed in Apple

Bring up consumer law, make a scene 23 days and escalate it to a manager straight away, apple are usually pretty good about these things to be honest.
[doublepost=1518090994][/doublepost]

That’s not quite true. A product is not required to last six years, only a fair and reasonable amount of time up to a maximum of six years. So for example it’s reasonable to expect a £2000 laptop to last longer than a £500 machine but neither are required by any law to actually last six years.

I would certainly argue a MacBook could last six years, but should it, is an entirely different question. A fridge freezer on the other hand, I would totally not expect to have to replace that within a six year window.

It’s all highly subjective though hence why an independent assessment is essential.

But when they offer a 3 year warranty that is the minimum that you would expect it to last.

 

[haydn!]

You misunderstood or I didn't write correctly, was a long post...

I wasn't suggesting it should last 6 years, just there is the expectation that it'll be fit for service for this period. This is a highly subjective legal comment that in reality gets debated all the time. What it means is the product should be fit for purpose, not in 100% brand new condition for this period. If I brought it and used it on a fishing trawler for 6 years, it would be unrealistic to expect it to last this long. However if I brought it and never opened the box, I would expect it to work after 5 years. A lot comes down to the use of the machine, which is where good-will comes into play. If you've enjoyed and made full use of the product for 5 years and then a speaker fails, this is entirely fair use. If however the CPU dies, then this comes under the fit for purpose. However, again, this does not mean you are entitled to an automatic repair/replacement, it means that Apple should offer you a repair - whether they discount it or anything is up to you. Or you can go down the legal route of proving defects, legal advice etc

Again this is wrong.

Nowhere in UK consumer law does it state the product should last, or be fit for purpose for six years. Only that it must be fit for purpose at point of purchase and last a reasonable amount of time. I don’t disagree a laptop should last this amount of time, but these laws apply to all products and the same could not be said or expected of a cheap hair dryer for example.

Yes, if you buy something and don’t open it for five years you’d quite reasonably expect it to work. But if it doesn’t, the responsibility still sits with you to prove the fault existed at purchase. It’s your fault you didn’t open and use immediately, not the retailers.

A retailer is only legally obliged to acknowledge faults reported within six months of purchase or faults proven to exist at purchase. (Most retailers by their own choice extend this to at least 12 months but are under no obligation to do so).

If you use a product and the CPU fails after 5 years, again, you have no immediate rights. Apple is not obliged to offer you anything unless you can prove that fault existed at point of sale.

The only reference to six years is that this is the period your rights expire. However this is your right to make a claim that a fault existed at purchase and there is no automatic assumption the product should last this long.

But when they offer a 3 year warranty that is the minimum that you would expect it to last.

Arguably, yes. But there is no legal requirement for it to do so. With Apple Care you’re essentially paying to extend your rights, not guaranteeing the hardware will physically last this long. It can still fail, but with your extended rights you’re covered.

It’s an insurance and like most insurances they’re a convenience for the consumer (in that they make things easy if something does go wrong) and a gamble by the retailer, that their product will last the period of cover.

I’d recommend checking out my earlier post and the links direct to full explanations of UK consumer law. It’s easily, and often misunderstood.

 

[jeremy h]

The real actual act is linked here. I'd read it through previously (yeah, I know, I need to get out more) when I was dealing with my issue. It's all to do with the contract made. I'm no lawyer but I quoted in terms of durability (see 3e below) and expectations from advertising (5 & 6) etc Worked for me... But YMMV...

9Goods to be of satisfactory quality
(1)Every contract to supply goods is to be treated as including a term that the quality of the goods is satisfactory.

(2)The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of—

(a)any description of the goods,

(b)the price or other consideration for the goods (if relevant), and

(c)all the other relevant circumstances (see subsection (5)).

(3)The quality of goods includes their state and condition; and the following aspects (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—

(a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are usually supplied;

(b)appearance and finish;

(c)freedom from minor defects;

(d)safety;

(e)durability.

(4)The term mentioned in subsection (1) does not cover anything which makes the quality of the goods unsatisfactory—

(a)which is specifically drawn to the consumer's attention before the contract is made,

(b)where the consumer examines the goods before the contract is made, which that examination ought to reveal, or

(c)in the case of a contract to supply goods by sample, which would have been apparent on a reasonable examination of the sample.

(5)The relevant circumstances mentioned in subsection (2)(c) include any public statement about the specific characteristics of the goods made by the trader, the producer or any representative of the trader or the producer.

(6)That includes, in particular, any public statement made in advertising or labelling.

If you're buying an Apple product thats 'off the shelf' (not BTO etc) then buy from John Lewis. Automatic 2 year guarantee at the same price. (I know a couple of firms who buy all their Apple stuff from them because of this.)

 

[haydn!]

If you're buying an Apple product thats 'off the shelf' (not BTO etc) then buy from John Lewis. Automatic 2 year guarantee at the same price. (I know a couple of firms who buy all their Apple stuff from them because of this.)

+1 for John Lewis. They have great extended warranties for free on quite a lot of their tech. 5 years default on tvs I believe.

Shame they don’t offer student discounting though haha

 

[New_Mac_Smell]

Again this is wrong.

Nowhere in UK consumer law does it state the product should last, or be fit for purpose for six years. Only that it must be fit for purpose at point of purchase and last a reasonable amount of time. I don’t disagree a laptop should last this amount of time, but these laws apply to all products and the same could not be said or expected of a cheap hair dryer for example.

Yes, if you buy something and don’t open it for five years you’d quite reasonably expect it to work. But if it doesn’t, the responsibility still sits with you to prove the fault existed at purchase. It’s your fault you didn’t open and use immediately, not the retailers.

A retailer is only legally obliged to acknowledge faults reported within six months of purchase or faults proven to exist at purchase. (Most retailers by their own choice extend this to at least 12 months but are under no obligation to do so).

If you use a product and the CPU fails after 5 years, again, you have no immediate rights. Apple is not obliged to offer you anything unless you can prove that fault existed at point of sale.

The only reference to six years is that this is the period your rights expire. However this is your right to make a claim that a fault existed at purchase and there is no automatic assumption the product should last this long.



Arguably, yes. But there is no legal requirement for it to do so. With Apple Care you’re essentially paying to extend your rights, not guaranteeing the hardware will physically last this long. It can still fail, but with your extended rights you’re covered.

It’s an insurance and like most insurances they’re a convenience for the consumer (in that they make things easy if something does go wrong) and a gamble by the retailer, that their product will last the period of cover.

I’d recommend checking out my earlier post and the links direct to full explanations of UK consumer law. It’s easily, and often misunderstood.

You're still misunderstanding me here, I'm not trying to argue with you just clarify a basic point that often gets misconstrued into rights.

Mainly, there is no 6 year warranty at all - this is the thing people often believe and what we both agree on here. You have 6 years in which to make a claim based on a manufacturing defect, this is the confusion. If it breaks after 1 year and you wait 5 years, then it is reasonable to expect that continued use further damaged and would cost the manufacturer more, and so no claim. If you never use it all all and open it after 5 years to discover it is not working, then you can make a claim that there was a manufacturing defect. This is what I am trying to clarify (badly), it's not a 6 year warranty, just you have rights for a period of 6 years. The 'Fit for purpose' is the main problem as it's highly subjective, a product should last a reasonable amount of time however no definition is provided due to the impossible task of guessing. Each user will use it differently, someone who uses it to check emails on a Saturday morning can expect it to last longer than a main 4K editing machine for 2 years.

Either way none of this is an automatic right and what I have tried to say. The fact is you have to prove issue, which is incredibly difficult and often not worth the hassle, unless there is a high amount of publicity about a known issue. Even if you open it after 5 years to discover it is not working, you have to prove it's the manufactures fault still - and they can in the case of a laptop argue the battery is only warranted for 6 months and so not covered.

As has been mentioned Apple expect them to last 3 years. If you use it daily for 8 hours under heavy load then it is reasonable to suggest this timeframe, however there's way too many variables to be concerned with. After 6 years the product is more or less worthless, and you'd need to spend far more than the value in instigating legal battles. So rule of thumb is to just ditch it and get a new one. Or wait/hope for high profile problems such as delimitation or GPU failures or any number of other issues on previous 'perfect no problem at all' MBP's produced prior to 2016.
[doublepost=1518163754][/doublepost]

+1 for John Lewis. They have great extended warranties for free on quite a lot of their tech. 5 years default on tvs I believe.

Shame they don’t offer student discounting though haha

Anyone got any experience making a claim through John Lewis?

Just curious as I've always avoided it myself, feel like it's a case of "Yes we'll repair it, but it'll take a while" sort of thing. If it was like a proper 2 year warranty (Speedy 100% OEM repairs then great). Otherwise I just buy from Apple for the convenience of being able to quickly and easily get things sorted wherever I am in the world (Usually). Let's be honest though, a product is rarely going to fail in the first 2 years.

 

[leman]

Just double checked my invoice, the MacBook is actually only 12months and 23days old. 23 days out of warranty, £700 out of pocket. I will most certainly never pay the full amount up front again, feel robbed so disappointed in Apple

You got rather unlucky. I don't really see how this is Apple's fault though. Its your risk after all. Things can break occasionally. If you want to protect yourself financially agains such situations, you get an insurance (in this case, a warranty extension). And sure, Apple could be nice enough to do it for free, but I don't really understand where this feeling of entitlement comes that they HAVE to fix it for free.

 

[jeremy h]

And sure, Apple could be nice enough to do it for free, but I don't really understand where this feeling of entitlement comes that they HAVE to fix it for free.

It's not about getting something fixed for free or a sense of entitlement. A supplier here in the UK is covered by the Consumer Rights Act (2015). It grants the consumer certain rights when a contract is established. Whatever is said in the contract, AFAIK it's deemed to automatically include a term that the quality of the goods supplied, is of satisfactory quality and this includes durability. Sure, its vague but in this sort of case I think it would be hard to argue that the good supplied was of a satisfactory quality. It's not about being unlucky, its about Apple being reasonable. I would suggest that Apple's offer of a full retail price repair isn't reasonable in this particular situation and they need to make a much better offer. No one is asking for 'free'.

Also there are consequences of Apple's recent insistence on making anything they can non user-serviceable, then covering everything else with glue and these consequences shouldn't just rest entirely with the consumer.

I haven't had any repairs etc done by John Lewis. My experience of Apple (since 1989) has been very mixed. I've had excellent and generous support through to extremely bad support (even including Apple Care covered products in that). It really seems to depend on who gets involved on the Apple side and how much they take a liking to you! In my experience staff do seem to have quite a bit of latitude though.

 

[leman]

It's not about getting something fixed for free or a sense of entitlement. A supplier here in the UK is covered by the Consumer Rights Act (2015). It grants the consumer certain rights when a contract is established.

I thought this was already cleared up above? The Act you quote demands the proof from the customer that the failure was due to an inherent defect of the product and not because of "normal" circumstances. So its far from simple. Based on statistics, 10-20% of laptops fail within the first two years. It is not totally abnormal for a consumer device to fail after 13 months. Unfortunate, but not abnormal. After all, a failure can happen randomly (and often does). To benefit from this law, the user would need to show for example that the experienced failure is part of some larger systematic pattern that has causal connection to the product design and construction (e.g. failed 2011 GPUs).

In the end, if the discussion is shifted to this kind of discourse, the only logical way is to settle the matters legally — involving lawyers and attempting to prove that the Consumer Act applies here. Discussing this on the forums is not really constructive.

P.S. That said, the OP should totally try to use the Act to get a free replacement. Something like "it is not normal for an LCD to fail so soon, so it must have been an internal defect, and in according to Act blablabla...". If Apple gives in, good. If not, well...

 

[jeremy h]

I've linked to the actual act above - it is actually worth reading through.

Discussing this on the forums is not really constructive.

Errr... this is a discussion forum, isn't this what we're meant to do?

---

Edit - just seen your edit (the PS.) - I agree with that, I'd actually settle for substantial discount on the retail repair.

 

[leman]

Errr... this is a discussion forum, isn't this what we're meant to do?

My experience is, unfortunately, that when legal issues are concerned, common sense often becomes irrelevant

 

[Spudlicious]

Big sympathy with the OP, but I would not know how to advise him. There are professionals who specialise in giving legal advice, they're called lawyers and I don't happen to be one. What the story does remind me is that buying at the expensive end always means setting yourself up for a big hit if you're the unlucky guy. Amazon UK list many laptops over the £1000 mark, quite a few over £2000. Twelve months warranty, every one of them, and if your £1500 Dell (to pick a name at random) suffers a display failure after 15 months, then who you gonna call? It might as well be Ghostbusters.