Slashdot Mirror
Apple Fined By Italy For Misleading Customers About Warranty Terms
beaverdownunder writes "An Italian watchdog has fined Apple 900,000 euros ($1.2m, £750,000) for failing to inform Italian shoppers of their legal right to two years of technical support, recognizing instead only a one-year standard warranty. This had led people to pay extra for Apple's own support service, AppleCare, which overlapped with the government-mandated guarantee."
Apple and the Italian government deserve each other.
Italy looking for ways to balance the budget :)
Service plans are probably the most profitable thing anybody sells. Just like rebates, odds are very very high that the person buying said plan won't ever use it, so it's pretty much free money a lot of the time...
Where was this concerned Italian government when MTV sent over the Jersey Shore cast?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
That is corporate ethics at it's absolute worst. You can be sure that it's likely Apple in Italy knew of the situation and was milking it if they got a fine like that... :(
I wonder if the fine even approaches the profits they made abusing the laws like that.
GrpA
Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
F*uck Apple.
Sent from my Macbook Pro
Apple's profits from selling the additional warranties in the entire country of Italy is almost certainly more than the fine, so it was a good business decision for them to flout local law if this is all they're going to face.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
They always try and get me to spend money on a 1 year warranty for tools, laptop, etc... I read the package to them and ask "The manufacturer has me covered for 2 years, what does your warranty get me that I don't have." Answer: "We handle all the problems with calling them..". Neat.
When a company does this to a product, force them to provide a lifetime warranty on that product. They will be much more careful.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
"Technical Support" from Apple is like going to church. You get told things like "because that's the way it is" and when you press, you never get the "why" part of it. I learned long ago about the compatibility between Apple and business -- there is none by the standards I have come to expect in the PC world. There is no "next business day, on site, accidental damage" support from Apple. When I learned that, I could never again take them seriously where business was concerned.
An AppleCare plan offers much more protection than just one more year warranty.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
The abstract is at least as misleading as Apple's warranty terms, it seems. The mandated two year warranty has nothing to do with a manufacturer's warranty. The two year mandated warranty
a) covers only faults that where present at the time of the sale.
b) has to be given by the seller of the product, independent from any manufacturer (how the seller gets back to the manufacturer for cover is up to them).
Only if Apple is the seller of the items (e.g. through the Apple Stores), it has to adhere to the rules. And then the terms of business or the advertising for the extended warranty must not be misleading about the coverage the buyer is entitled to anyway.
A "Troll" is when you say something you don't believe. I believe this. Go suck eggs. I believe that too.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Apple is being fined because Italy feels that Apple doesn't make it explicitly clear to Italians that Apple abides with Italian consumer codes that in Italy, Apple warranties last 2 years instead of their standard 1 year. Italy feels that some consumers may have purchased AppleCare when they didn't need to purchase it. AppleCare increases the coverage terms and time period. On the English version it seems clear but since I don't read Italianvery well, I don't know if it is clear on the Italian version. Also I don't know if Apple has recently changed their pages.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
DIRECTIVE 1999/44/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
of 25 May 1999
on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 95 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission(1),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee(2),
Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty in the light of the joint text approved by the Conciliation Committee on 18 May 1999(3),
(1) Whereas Article 153(1) and (3) of the Treaty provides that the Community should contribute to the achievement of a high level of consumer protection by the measures it adopts pursuant to Article 95 thereof;
(2) Whereas the internal market comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is guaranteed; whereas free movement of goods concerns not only transactions by persons acting in the course of a business but also transactions by private individuals; whereas it implies that consumers resident in one Member State should be free to purchase goods in the territory of another Member State on the basis of a uniform minimum set of fair rules governing the sale of consumer goods;
(3) Whereas the laws of the Member States concerning the sale of consumer goods are somewhat disparate, with the result that national consumer goods markets differ from one another and that competition between sellers may be distorted;
(4) Whereas consumers who are keen to benefit from the large market by purchasing goods in Member States other than their State of residence play a fundamental role in the completion of the internal market; whereas the artificial reconstruction of frontiers and the compartmentalisation of markets should be prevented; whereas the opportunities available to consumers have been greatly broadened by new communication technologies which allow ready access to distribution systems in other Member States or in third countries; whereas, in the absence of minimum harmonisation of the rules governing the sale of consumer goods, the development of the sale of goods through the medium of new distance communication technologies risks being impeded;
(5) Whereas the creation of a common set of minimum rules of consumer law, valid no matter where goods are purchased within the Community, will strengthen consumer confidence and enable consumers to make the most of the internal market;
(6) Whereas the main difficulties encountered by consumers and the main source of disputes with sellers concern the non-conformity of goods with the contract; whereas it is therefore appropriate to approximate national legislation governing the sale of consumer goods in this respect, without however impinging on provisions and principles of national law relating to contractual and non-contractual liability;
(7) Whereas the goods must, above all, conform with the contractual specifications; whereas the principle of conformity with the contract may be considered as common to the different national legal traditions; whereas in certain national legal traditions it may not be possible to rely solely on this principle to ensure a minimum level of protection for the consumer; whereas under such legal traditions, in particular, additional national provisions may be useful to ensure that the consumer is protected in cases where the parties have agreed no specific contractual terms or where the parties have concluded contractual terms or agreements which directly or indirectly waive or restrict the rights of the consumer and which, to the extent that these rights result from this Directive, are not binding on the consumer;
(8) Whereas, in order to facilitate the application of the principle of conformity with the contract, it is useful to introduce a rebuttable presumption of conformity with the contract c
This situation has been going on (of course deliberately) for years.
I bought a MacBookPro (first Intel ones) some 5 years ago in Spain, and the 2-years-EU-warranty-law was already valid.
Didn't buy an AppleCare, so after the first year, when things started to go wrong (and keep in mind that, during the first year, I already had to replace battery, AC adaptor, logic board, inverter board and cd drive, all inside Apple's 1-year warranty) I went to the Apple Service closer to my house because of a broken fan and overheat and talked about the 2 years European warranty law. They pretty much laughed at my face, saying something along the lines: "We know the law, but Apple only offers one year warranty. Good luck trying, you will need a legally-valid exame by some specialist that states that the defect was in fact not caused by the user..." or some disproportioned thing like that, implying that others had complained about the warranty before and never got Apple to accept (both individuals and companies). So in my case (and keep in mind this was like 4 years ago) it is not like they simply misinformed about AppleCare, they just wouldn't accept replacements or repairs after first year without AppleCare, even when I mentioned the 2 years warranty we in the EU have by law.
Every european customer is supposed to know that.
*snip*
Every product in the EU since ages has a law gurranteed 2 years "guarranty".
That's funny because the consumer agency of at least one EU country begs to differ
I can't be bothered to go through all EU countries but I feel confident saying that Finland doesn't have nearly the worst consumer protection laws of EU. So everything you wrote (with lots of bold text and stuff) is factually untrue.
What really happened:
1. EU mandates 6 month + 18 months of warranty for manufacturing defects. Six months the burden of proof is on the seller, 18 on the consumer. There are some exceptions and the rules are defined quite well, but this is the general way it works. This warranty doesn't cover wear and tear (unless wear and tear is caused by manufacturing defect).
2. Apple complied with the warranty, but tried to market apprecare plan by obfuscating the fact that customer had the right to warranty during two years anyway.
3. Apple got fined for illegal form of marketing.
The warranty text refers to itself as the Apple limited ONE Year warranty then explicitly mentions that it lasts one year. Yes Apple includes the catch all statement that local laws may invalidate some statements but that is all. One of these texts had the same blob repeated in several languages and that included the one year limitation in the italian version (can't read italian but having the same words repeated for every language including the one makes it kind of obvious).
I don't know which of the texts you refered to but none of the 3 I looked at mentioned anything other than one year. So please include a link to the text you meant instead of sending others on a wild goose chase.
like those cafone, olive-picking dago peasants can afford apple products.
... buying extended warranties of any form really.
If anything goes wrong during the warranty period you bring it in to the store. They'll do whatever it takes to make it work, including replace it.
Now outside of the warranty period you are kinda screwed.
They don't do well for business but then nobody but Apple fans thinks they are serious at the business market anyhow. Apple wants to make consumer electronics toys (because that's where they've made massive money) not business systems.
Antitrust Authority: We will fine them... ONE MILLION DOLLARS!
Apple Customer: Don't you think we should ask for *more* than a million dollars? A million dollars isn't exactly a lot of money these days. Apple alone made over 25 billion dollars last year!
Antitrust Authority: Really? That's a lot of money.
[pause]
Antitrust Authority: Okay then, we will fine them... One... Point Two... MILLION DOLLARS!
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Often what is being sold is an extended warranty, meaning that the underwriter starts their warranty when the factory warranty runs out. That is how Squaretrade warranties work, which are pretty commonly sold (you can buy them yourself too). AmTrust (their parent insurance company) agrees that should your item fail after the manufacturer's warranty period runs out for a term of whatever you pay them for, they'll do what it takes to get you a working one. So buy a TV with a 2 year warranty and get a 3 year Squaretrade warranty, it is covered for 5 years total, but by different people.
Not saying it is worth it, just saying that is how it often works. The reason you'd purchase something is to extend it, not double coverage.
1. Your Prime Minister was sleeping around with a 17 year old stripper so you should not be throwing rocks when you live in a glass house.
2. Your economy is the the crapper so maybe you should be looking to fix your own house first.
3. Two years warranty is TOO LONG for a device that is obsolete within a year. The standard in other countries is a year.
3. Apple care provides more protection for the device than just an extended warranty. It provides free battery replacement.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
The way the mandatory two year warranty as mandated by the EU is implemented is very different from AppleCare and AppleCare goes beyond it. If a fault becomes apparent after more than six months after you buy the device you as the customer have to prove that the fault is due to some technical problem that was caused during the manufacturing of the device. This is pretty much impossible to do without the help of a lawyer. So technically a company can refuse to pay for any repair after six months and there is not much you can do. Within the first six months the burden of proof (that you caused the fault) lies with the company.
Apple's standard warranty is one year, already making it easy to get repairs for six months longer than the minimum required by law. After that year they play the burden of proof trick I mentioned.
The main problem is that it is often very confusing when a company offers a warranty deal beyond what is required by law, confusing the different concepts or as in this case giving the impression that there is no coverage at all.
My boss bought a unibody Mac Mini a year ago. About 6 months later its USB port started frying keyboards. It took out a few (some expensive) keyboards before he could figure out what was going on. So, he took it to the apple store and they told him to come back in 2 weeks when they would have the parts. About 2-3 weeks later the parts had arrived so he went to the store and they suddenly decided that his warranty was void. The reason? When they opened it, it had too much dust (no cats, no smoking house) so the warranty was void and it was in the system so no Apple store would fix it. But fear not! Here is a $100 off coupon for a brand new Mac Mini!
I could not get my boss to fight it ("it is Apple, so it must be as they say") - if it was me I would probably have shoved an ipod down the "genius" throat that would dare to tell me he was voiding my warranty for a reason that is not even listed on the warranty terms! And how could it be listed? Apart from the fact that you need SERIOUS dust and moisture to damage electronics, it is the manufacturer the one who controls whether there will be dust in the machine in the first place, when designing the air intake! The desktops I build are dust-free because I add a filter in front of the air intake fan. I guess the Mac Mini does not have a filter because a little dust can get a gullible apple user to part with his warranty!
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
Dust is in the air and it gets worst if the house is near a heavy traffic or near construction area, the dust in the air is worst.
You don't need a cat to cause the problem. Not cleaning around the area of the device will cause the same dust problem.
So, yes .... the problem may had being caused by the user, not the manufacturer.
Yet another example of this evil company's underhanded business tactics. In typical fashion, Apple's fanatical supporters will no doubt deny this latest scheme and probably try to blame the Italian government. That's to be expected from a mafia of technically ignorant blowhards and sissy art directors inside his exclusive community of iJonestown who are drinking iKool Aid from Reverend Steve Jobs. The iHype behind this outfit and it's grossly overprice products is disgusting.