Unbelievable Poor Apple after care!

[ratsg]

In all my years of shopping at the Apple store, I have had one disappointing experience. I went in to purchase a $10.00 cable. Found my cable and paid for it with cash. The guy running the cash register wanted all kinds of personal information that he didn't need and I wasn't going to provide.

He then decided that he wasn't going to sell me the cable, so he refunded my money. No heated words by either party, just a weird experience.

Back to the OP's post, assuming that all information that has been shared is on the up-and-up, it seems obvious that the 3rd party screen came from the first visit when a repaired system was forced upon him.

Either way, I am curious to see how this all plays out. I am also curious if the OP is in the UK, US or somewhere else. I haven't paid close enough attention to who is doing it, but there seems to be a lot of quoting of UK law.

 

[PNutts]

OP has not responded back. We'll see.

Too bad, I still have some popcorn left. At this point my only question is how long is his daughter grounded.

 

[Mindbender14]

In all my years of shopping at the Apple store, I have had one disappointing experience. I went in to purchase a $10.00 cable. Found my cable and paid for it with cash. The guy running the cash register wanted all kinds of personal information that he didn't need and I wasn't going to provide.

He then decided that he wasn't going to sell me the cable, so he refunded my money. No heated words by either party, just a weird experience.

That is bizarre. I would have made a bigger deal about it but that's just me.

 

[ratsg]

That is bizarre. I would have made a bigger deal about it but that's just me.

It was bizarre. I did stick to my guns and I didn't give out my personal information.

If I pay for something with cash, that should be good enough, be it a $10.00 cable for $$$.$$ for a fancy set of speakers.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

In all my years of shopping at the Apple store, I have had one disappointing experience. I went in to purchase a $10.00 cable. Found my cable and paid for it with cash. The guy running the cash register wanted all kinds of personal information that he didn't need and I wasn't going to provide.



He then decided that he wasn't going to sell me the cable, so he refunded my money. No heated words by either party, just a weird experience.



Back to the OP's post, assuming that all information that has been shared is on the up-and-up, it seems obvious that the 3rd party screen came from the first visit when a repaired system was forced upon him.



Either way, I am curious to see how this all plays out. I am also curious if the OP is in the UK, US or somewhere else. I haven't paid close enough attention to who is doing it, but there seems to be a lot of quoting of UK law.

I would have done the same thing concerning a cable, you sort of understand giving information for major purchases but not for a $10 cable!

Yeah the OP is in the UK. He stated the store is in Cardiff and his user name is 'Cymru' so that's about as Welsh as we get lol

 

[Azzin]

I still think Apple have created this issue by not showing the OP exactly why they were refusing his warranty claim (non genuine screen fitted).

Whatever people say, Apple had an obligation to offer firm proof of their claim.

Simply saying "It's got a non genuine screen on it, but you'll have to take our word for it" is not sufficient or acceptable and has led to this issue.

 

[taelan28]

It was purchased on Apples 12 month finance deal which still has 4 months to go

Maybe this is off topic and trolling, but for the love of god, either you have the money or you dont. The only thing you should ever get a loan for is your house and maybe your first car.

 

[I7guy]

I still think Apple have created this issue by not showing the OP exactly why they were refusing his warranty claim (non genuine screen fitted).

Whatever people say, Apple had an obligation to offer firm proof of their claim.

Simply saying "It's got a non genuine screen on it, but you'll have to take our word for it" is not sufficient or acceptable and has led to this issue.

That's the thing. Whatever people say apple had an obligation to abide by company policy. If it was not showing "proof" so be it. Clearly apple has the upper hand, but there is remediation for the op in the form of small claims court.

 

[Azzin]

That's the thing. Whatever people say apple had an obligation to abide by company policy. If it was not showing "proof" so be it. Clearly apple has the upper hand, but there is remediation for the op in the form of small claims court.

You're (still) missing the point.

Regardless of Apple's policy (and I don't think for one moment they have a policy of Don't show the customer anything, just expect him/her to take our word for things", the store employee should have shown the CUSTOMER exactly why they couldn't honour a warranty repair.

Had they shown the customer that, this issue would not be rattling on.

Currently, the OP has a bad taste in his mouth because he's caught in between Apple and his daughter.

At least if they had shown him, he would know for sure that it had a 3rd party screen on it.

As it stands, the OP simply has to take the store employee's word for it and when someone doesn't offer proof of something, it normally means there isn't any.

 

[kupkakez]

Suspect there is more to this. I have always been treated like a King at Apple stores.

I agree. I am always always always treated well in any Apple store I've ever been in. A couple of years ago when I was having an issue with my MBA not charging they replaced the MBA and also let me pick out any accessory within a price range to compensate me for having to drive 1 hour+ away to fix a laptop during finals.

When I see these stories about mistreatment at Apple stores crop up on here I can't help but wonder if there is more to the story, sometimes.

 

[TWO2SEVEN]

You're (still) missing the point.

Regardless of Apple's policy (and I don't think for one moment they have a policy of Don't show the customer anything, just expect him/her to take our word for things", the store employee should have shown the CUSTOMER exactly why they couldn't honour a warranty repair.

So the employee should ignore their employer's policy and risk losing their job to make one CUSTOMER (not sure why you put this in all caps, but I figured I would join in) happy?

 

[I7guy]

You're (still) missing the point.

Regardless of Apple's policy (and I don't think for one moment they have a policy of Don't show the customer anything, just expect him/her to take our word for things", the store employee should have shown the CUSTOMER exactly why they couldn't honour a warranty repair.

Had they shown the customer that, this issue would not be rattling on.

Currently, the OP has a bad taste in his mouth because he's caught in between Apple and his daughter.

At least if they had shown him, he would know for sure that it had a 3rd party screen on it.

As it stands, the OP simply has to take the store employee's word for it and when someone doesn't offer proof of something, it normally means there isn't any.

As the poster above said, there is no point to be missed; and you are still barking up the wrong tree. # it's a done deal, apple did what it had to. Whether from employee ignorance or company policy apple made it's decision. We will never know.

So what op has a bad taste on his mouth, with hundreds of millions of devices sold do you expect 100% satisfaction?

Op should have taken this to a third party, and maybe posted back about what happened. But until op posts back we so t know.

 

[Azzin]

So the employee should ignore their employer's policy and risk losing their job to make one CUSTOMER (not sure why you put this in all caps, but I figured I would join in) happy?

Nope.

Let's try this another way...

What is Apple's policy on (not) showing CUSTOMERS why they won't show them the reason for a warranty repair refusal?

If it is that they don't show customers, what on earth sense does that make? Do they really expect customers to believe them?

So if the MOT tester at your garage turns round and says "Sorry Sir, I can't pass your car for an MOT because the <insert component here> is not a genuine one, but you can't see the component in question because it's company policy, so you'll just have to take our word for it", you'd be ok with that?

Of course you wouldn't, if you were convinced it was the original, you'd ask him to show the the non genuine part & compare it to a genuine one, so that you are clear in your mind.

Apple just refusing the warranty repair and also to show the OP the reason is just poor and if that is the policy, it should be changed immediately IMO.

----------

As the poster above said, there is no point to be missed; and you are still barking up the wrong tree. &#55357;&#56876; it's a done deal, apple did what it had to. Whether from employee ignorance or company policy apple made it's decision.

That's not a decision, a decision is made, not just arrived at by ending up with 2 possible outcomes.

We will never know.

Because we have no idea if it's policy or lack of training.

 

[I7guy]

Nope.

Let's try this another way...

What is Apple's policy on (not) showing CUSTOMERS why they won't show them the reason for a warranty repair refusal?

If it is that they don't show customers, what on earth sense does that make? Do they really expect customers to believe them?

So if the MOT tester at your garage turns round and says "Sorry Sir, I can't pass your car for an MOT because the <insert component here> is not a genuine one, but you can't see the component in question because it's company policy, so you'll just have to take our word for it", you'd be ok with that?

Of course you wouldn't, if you were convinced it was the original, you'd ask him to show the the non genuine part & compare it to a genuine one, so that you are clear in your mind.

Apple just refusing the warranty repair and also to show the OP the reason is just poor and if that is the policy, it should be changed immediately IMO.

----------



That's not a decision, a decision is made, not just arrived at by ending up with 2 possible outcomes.

Sigh! A phone not a car, and apple stores are not dealers or garages. Maybe you can websearch apples policy on this matter and get back to the forum. it would certainly save some speculation.

But in my own opinion apple does not have to prove anyting, they didn't install the non-oem screen. it may be remediation in the court of law is where the OP will find satisfaction.

However many times you try "this", apple imo, is under no obigation to prove their assertion. Some of my reasoning, whether on target or not is posted earlier.

 

[TWO2SEVEN]

Nope.

Let's try this another way...

What is Apple's policy on (not) showing CUSTOMERS why they won't show them the reason for a warranty repair refusal?

If it is that they don't show customers, what on earth sense does that make? Do they really expect customers to believe them?

So if the MOT tester at your garage turns round and says "Sorry Sir, I can't pass your car for an MOT because the <insert component here> is not a genuine one, but you can't see the component in question because it's company policy, so you'll just have to take our word for it", you'd be ok with that?

Of course you wouldn't, if you were convinced it was the original, you'd ask him to show the the non genuine part & compare it to a genuine one, so that you are clear in your mind.

Apple just refusing the warranty repair and also to show the OP the reason is just poor and if that is the policy, it should be changed immediately IMO.

----------



That's not a decision, a decision is made, not just arrived at by ending up with 2 possible outcomes.

I am still wondering why CUSTOMER and CUSTOMERS needs to be caplitalized...

The point is, you (or I) do not know Apple's policy this issue. As I7guy has mentioned, the OP could probably escalate this issue in a legal arena, but at this point Apple has closed the metaphorical door. At this point all they (may) have lost is a loyal CUSTOMER.

I am not saying that Apple is right and the OP is wrong or that Apple is wrong and the OP is right. What I am saying is that the case is closed (for now) from Apple's perspective. Hopefully the OP will get it sorted out one way or another.

----------

Regardless of Apple's policy (and I don't think for one moment they have a policy of Don't show the customer anything, just expect him/her to take our word for things", the store employee should have shown the CUSTOMER exactly why they couldn't honour a warranty repair.

Had they shown the customer that, this issue would not be rattling on.

Currently, the OP has a bad taste in his mouth because he's caught in between Apple and his daughter.

At least if they had shown him, he would know for sure that it had a 3rd party screen on it.

As it stands, the OP simply has to take the store employee's word for it and when someone doesn't offer proof of something, it normally means there isn't any.

So the employee should ignore their employer's policy and risk losing their job to make one CUSTOMER (not sure why you put this in all caps, but I figured I would join in) happy?

Nope.

Let's try this another way...

So are you now going against where you said the employee should go against policy?

 

[braddick]

Parents of sneaky 12 year olds don't always now their child is sneaky. That is what makes them so, otherwise they are not allowed to be referred to as, "sneaky".

 

[TWO2SEVEN]

Parents of sneaky 12 year olds don't always now their child is sneaky. That is what makes them so, otherwise they are not allowed to be referred to as, "sneaky".

Are they called sneaky because they are sneaky or are they sneaky because they are called sneaky first?

 

[Azzin]

I am still wondering why CUSTOMER and CUSTOMERS needs to be caplitalized...

It's a reminder that CUSTOMERS are what drive Apple's business and should not be treated badly.

The point is, you (or I) do not know Apple's policy this issue. As I7guy has mentioned, the OP could probably escalate this issue in a legal arena, but at this point Apple has closed the metaphorical door. At this point all they (may) have lost is a loyal CUSTOMER.

But that's the point, we don't know, but either way, Apple or the Apple rep handled this badly:

1. If the policy is "Don't show customers the reasons for rejecting warranty claims", then this should be changed.
2. If the policy is "Show all customers the reason for rejecting warranty claims", then the rep either mislead the customer or he lied.

I am not saying that Apple is right and the OP is wrong or that Apple is wrong and the OP is right. What I am saying is that the case is closed (for now) from Apple's perspective. Hopefully the OP will get it sorted out one way or another.

It's only closed because the rep wouldn't show the OP his alleged non Apple screen. This then became a dilemma for the OP as if he gets someone else to identify that it is a indeed a genuine screen, his warranty becomes invalid due to opening.

All the rep had to do was show the OP the non genuine screen and the problem ends right there and then.

So are you now going against where you said the employee should go against policy?

I'm saying the customer has a right to see proof of the reason for a warranty rejection, it shouldn't be down to a rep to simply expect a customer to take his/her word for it.

 

[TWO2SEVEN]

It's a reminder that CUSTOMERS are what drive Apple's business and should not be treated badly.



But that's the point, we don't know, but either way, Apple or the Apple rep handled this badly:

1. If the policy is "Don't show customers the reasons for rejecting warranty claims", then this should be changed.
2. If the policy is "Show all customers the reason for rejecting warranty claims", then the rep either mislead the customer or he lied.

It's only closed because the rep wouldn't show the OP his alleged non Apple screen. This then became a dilemma for the OP as if he gets someone else to identify that it is a indeed a genuine screen, his warranty becomes invalid due to opening.

All the rep had to do was show the OP the non genuine screen and the problem ends right there and then.



I'm saying the customer has a right to see proof of the reason for a warranty rejection, it shouldn't be down to a rep to simply expect a customer to take his/her word for it.

I guess you can keep repeating what should have happened over and over again, it still doesn't change what did happen.

Have fun!

 

[I7guy]

It's a reminder that CUSTOMERS are what drive Apple's business and should not be treated badly.



But that's the point, we don't know, but either way, Apple or the Apple rep handled this badly:

1. If the policy is "Don't show customers the reasons for rejecting warranty claims", then this should be changed.
2. If the policy is "Show all customers the reason for rejecting warranty claims", then the rep either mislead the customer or he lied.

It's only closed because the rep wouldn't show the OP his alleged non Apple screen. This then became a dilemma for the OP as if he gets someone else to identify that it is a indeed a genuine screen, his warranty becomes invalid due to opening.

All the rep had to do was show the OP the non genuine screen and the problem ends right there and then.



I'm saying the customer has a right to see proof of the reason for a warranty rejection, it shouldn't be down to a rep to simply expect a customer to take his/her word for it.

So you think that Apple may have these policies and procedures for a reason? Do you think in apple's eyes the customer was treated fairly? Do you think based on an anonymous internet post, which actually supports apples policies they are going to change it because you said so?

To end this, all the op as to do is get a secondary diagnosis and the problem ends right there and then. You can't say apple handled or mis-handled anything because you don't know their policies and procedures.

And as for the rights of the customer are based on their legal agreement with apple, which you so-far have not been able to articulate. If the customer feels they have been mis-treated the remediation is in the court of law.

Apple is not going to change it's policies based on your "suggestions" and in the oft chance they violated their protocol (as opposed to feeling like they wasted their time because op tried to scam them), it's up to the op to remediate it.

You cannot say apple handled it badly, because you having been able to demonstrate what apples protocol is. Maybe they were nicer than they should have been.

 

[Azzin]

So you think that Apple may have these policies and procedures for a reason? Do you think in apple's eyes the customer was treated fairly? Do you think based on an anonymous internet post, which actually supports apples policies they are going to change it because you said so?

To end this, all the op as to do is get a secondary diagnosis and the problem ends right there and then. You can't say apple handled or mis-handled anything because you don't know their policies and procedures.

And as for the rights of the customer are based on their legal agreement with apple, which you so-far have not been able to articulate. If the customer feels they have been mis-treated the remediation is in the court of law.

Apple is not going to change it's policies based on your "suggestions" and in the oft chance they violated their protocol (as opposed to feeling like they wasted their time because op tried to scam them), it's up to the op to remediate it.

You cannot say apple handled it badly, because you having been able to demonstrate what apples protocol is. Maybe they were nicer than they should have been.

Again, you're completely missing the point.

I ask again...

• Do you think it's right/fair that an Apple rep can just refuse a warranty repair, without offering any kind of proof for that refusal?

In fact, you can apply the same question to my car MOT analogy from earlier:

• Do you think it would be acceptable for a garage to refuse an MOT pass or a warranty repair on your car, simply because they say you have a non genuine part (that they won't show you) fitted?

That really is the crux here for me.

If the rep had showed him the alleged non genuine screen, the OP would know 100% that there is a non genuine screen fitted to this phone.

As Apple wouldn't show him, they have effed him over as if he gets someone to open it and prove the screen is a genuine Apple one, Apple will then refuse the claim when he goes back with the proof, as it's been opened.

All Apple had to do was show the customer the non genuine screen...

 

[I7guy]

Again, you're completely missing the point.

I ask again...

• Do you think it's right/fair that an Apple rep can just refuse a warranty repair, without offering any kind of proof for that refusal?

In fact, you can apply the same question to my car MOT analogy from earlier:

• Do you think it would be acceptable for a garage to refuse an MOT pass or a warranty repair on your car, simply because they say you have a non genuine part (that they won't show you) fitted?

That really is the crux here for me.

If the rep had showed him the alleged non genuine screen, the OP would know 100% that there is a non genuine screen fitted to this phone.

As Apple wouldn't show him, they have effed him over as if he gets someone to open it and prove the screen is a genuine Apple one, Apple will then refuse the claim when he goes back with the proof, as it's been opened.

All Apple had to do was show the customer the non genuine screen...

Not missing the point at all, I do think it's fair that apple refused service without offering any proof.

You keeping missing the point apple is not a garage or car dealer. In fact car dealers can refuse warranty service based on the warranty act without offering up proof. The burden is on the owner to prove the part hasn't been modified.

This is the crux, I don't know what apples policies and procedures are and neither do you. You can certainly have an opinion in the matter, but apple seems to be well within its rights as does the op to sue.

 

[Azzin]

Not missing the point at all, I do think it's fair that apple refused service without offering any proof.

At last.

So you think it's ok for Apple to have created this situation for the OP, thanks for clarifying. √

You keeping missing the point apple is not a garage or car dealer. In fact car dealers can refuse warranty service based on the warranty act without offering up proof. The burden is on the owner to prove the part hasn't been modified.

He can't "prove" it if he can't see it can he?

Again, all Apple had to do was show him the non Apple screen-job done.

This is the crux, I don't know what apples policies and procedures are and neither do you. You can certainly have an opinion in the matter, but apple seems to be well within its rights as does the op to sue.

No, this is the crux-Apple or the rep treated this customer badly by not showing him the screen, end of.

I say again, if Apple had shown the OP the alleged non apple screen, this issue simply wouldn't exist.

 

[I7guy]

At last.

So you think it's ok for Apple to have created this situation for the OP, thanks for clarifying.

Yes, I do. It's apples policies and procedures.

He can't "prove" it if he can't see it can he?

Again, all Apple had to do was show him the non Apple screen-job done.

Again, whatever you're opinion apple had a different viewpoint.

No, this is the crux-Apple or the rep treated this customer badly by not showing him the screen, end of.

I say again, if Apple had shown the OP the alleged non apple screen, this issue simply wouldn't exist.

it seems apple is quite okay in having this issue exist, why should it bother you so personally? OP does have some remediation, and can make this issue go away if there is some thought about unfairness. Maybe apple was right.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I agree that Apple should show the customer the reasons why they can't honour a warranty and this should be changed. They can't just take the attitude they've inspected the device in their secret room and you have to believe them because they are Apple. The customer has the right to have something like that explained and demonstrated. We don't accept this sort of approach in many other services we purchase so I don't see why a brand is able to take such a cloak and dagger approach here. Apple need to review this as they could end up answering more questions in court than is really necessary.