Slashdot Mirror
Apple Is Forced By EU To Give 2 Years Warranty On All Its Products
dsmalle writes "Apple has adapted its warranty to cover 2 years, under pressure of the European Union and after European consumer organizations sued Apple. From the article: 'The warranty conditions have been changed and these changes can be found on the website of Apple. Products that are purchased on the website of the manufacturer or in stores are now under warranty for two years, as it is required by the EU warranty guidelines. However, the warranty for Apple products that have been purchased elsewhere will not change and they will only be given a limited one-year warranty.'"
For once, the headline is understated.
It really doesn't matter what Apple's warranty duration is, because there seems to be a statutory warranty of 2 years in at least part of the EU.
What this story is really about is Apple selling 2-year AppleCare plans in places with statutory warranties of 2 years, which is pretty darned slimy IMHO.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
This is really amusing to me, that the EU has laws that mandate minimum warranty policies for devices sold.
Actually, it's much more than that.
Not only was Apple not selling devices with the warranty required by law, but Apple was trying to upsell additional Applecare warranty to cover the mandatory warranty time period.
Of course, if it's out of warranty, you're probably SOL since Apple designs most of its products to be non-repairable.
.... Just silly... Apple wasn't "forced by EU", was forced by the EU directives that were transposed to law in all EU countries. The headline should be: "Apple forced to abide the law in EU countries".... since it wasn't until now. It's not something that just happened to "fall" on our laps here in EU countries just now... it's decade and an half old law.
It is a retailer warranty. It only applies as Apple sells something directly to consumers.
In other cases, other retailers have to get Apple to fix the stuff, but Apple isn't directly liable.
What's the point of a warranty that lasts two years which covers defects that were present on delivery?
"Defects present on delivery" IS what the law requires. However, the intended interpretation of this is that a product is defect if it cannot sustain two years of regular wear and tear without breaking. As such, bad soldering causing your screen to stop functioning after 19 months is considered a defect present at moment of purchase.
Well clearly they just didn't know. Since all the electronics they buy have 2 years warranty (by law) it isn't like they are going to go check that. They wouldn't find out until the thing broke and they needed warranty service. The fact that this even became a big enough deal to make it to the EU legal system means that many Apple products DID fail in less than 2 years (whether it was just battery not holding a charge or something worse) and enough people complained to bring it to the EUs attention.
The EU has consumer protection laws, the USA has class action lawsuits and guns. It probably balances out in all but bodycount.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
In the EU, you can't change the laws by writing terms on your website, or providing some arbitrary "agreement" with the product. All it takes is for someone to challenge it, and Apple will get a slap on the wrist and get told that the law applies.
And now that someone did challenge this 1 year warranty "agreement", Apple has got their slap on the wrist and changed their heinous ways.
That's all there is to it really...
It is a retailer warranty. It only applies as Apple sells something directly to consumers.
In other cases, other retailers have to get Apple to fix the stuff, but Apple isn't directly liable.
No, it's a manufacturer warranty, but generally handled by the retailer, who acts as a go-between for the customer and manufacturer.
I.e. if your iGizmo breaks down, you take it to the retailer, who sends it to Apple, who fixes it under warranty. This is in the interest of the consumer, who has a single point of contact. The manufacturer (or, rather, brand name holder) is still the liable part.
This in contrast to US conditions, where the customer usually has to contact the manufacturer directly.
In addition to the mandatory warranty, the purchaser also has reclamation rights not limited to a fixed term, but the reasonably expected lifetime of a product. For consumer electronics, this is generally interpreted to be in the ballpark of the warranty or shorter, but if you buy, say, house siding that cracks after ten years, or a water heater that that breaks down after four years, you probably have a good case for getting it fixed by the manufacturer.
A big difference between that and regular warranty is that for regular warranty, the manufacturer is liable by default and has to show that the customer misused the product to get out of it, while for the reclamation rights, the customer has the burden of evidence.
Still, it is useful, and while I lived in Europe, I exercised this right a couple of times (broken washer/dryer, guitar neck that warped).
And if this was the USA, there would be a class-action lawsuit
If this was the USA, the ToS likely prohibits the customer from bringing a class-action lawsuit in the first place.
I don't know for sure, though, as I don't have the time to read 56 pages worth of legalese.
No, it's a manufacturer warranty, but generally handled by the retailer, who acts as a go-between for the customer and manufacturer.
Not really. I as the consumer enter a contract with the retailer. I pay them money and they provide me with a product, they are responsible for delivering a decent product and therefore have to give a warranty. Where they got the product from and how they provide the warranty is none of my concern, I didn't enter a contract with the manufacturer, as far as I know they don't exist.