Slashdot Mirror
Govt. Watchdog Group Finds Apple Misled Aussies On Consumer Rights
beaverdownunder writes "Apple has agreed to an agreement to ensure staff inform customers of rights under Australian consumer law. Despite the 2011 law requiring retailers to provide a refund option for faulty goods, and free repairs to items reasonably expected to still function properly (this part of the law is intentionally ambiguous), Apple steadfastly stuck to its AppleCare program, denying warranty repairs to units more than one year old (without the purchase of an extension) and only offering replacement or credit for DOA items. Apple has promised to compensate all Australian customers who were charged for repairs during the last two years, and make the terms of the law clear on the Australian Apple website. How this will affect company warranty policy is unclear — under the law, consumers could be entitled to repairs for the life of the product (barring damage, of course)."
I have several Apple products and in general I like them. Still it is sad for such premium products that the maker has to be strongarmed into agreeing to local law. The same happened in Europe where (and I think it is reasonable) products such as laptops should have a 2 year guarantee. Perhaps not on Applecare level (which is really good, I had to use it once and was happy with the service quality - a technician came to my home to replace my 27" imac screen panel), but at least a normal guarantee should be expected.
Of course Applecare becomes less attractive if it is just a one year extension and a higher service level. But frankly the products while well made are expensive enough to have the above mandatory local guarantee applied without hassle.
It's more profitable for the lawmakers to change that law than to force Apple to provide repairs.
Yes. It is also easier for lawmakers/political elite to seem to be forced to change the law against their will in order to avoid political fallout. "We are just normalizing with internationaly recognized laws", Enter the TPP.
If the price of the long warranty is equal to the cost of the warranty to Apple, they'll just bake it into the price. If the warranty is a high margin item whose standard retail price far exceeds the actual cost to Apple, Apple can't just raise the price by the standard retail price of the warranty--raising the price shifts the demand curve and reduces the total number of Apple products sold (something that does not happen if the warranty is sold at the same retail price but as an optional item). Apple would instead be forced to raise the price by a smaller amount that is closer to the actual cost of the warranty, so as not to reduce sales too much.
Imagine that they were selling iPads but had a deal where you paid an extra million dollars to get them gift-wrapped. If the government forced them to gift-wrap every iPad, they could not raise the price by a million dollars.
If Australians want to know why they are constantly charged more for things, this is an example of such regulation.
Australians are charged more for things because charging Australians more for things produces a greater benefit than not charging them more.
Everything else is Stockholm syndrome. It's time to kill the beliefs about the fairness of the world.
There's no way a business can afford a longer warranty period without collecting for it somehow.
Well, they could build their products to last at least 2 years, that should drastically reduce the number of repairs/replacements needed... but I know, that's just a fantasy.
Since this is just the latest in a sequence of run-ins for Apple with the Australian consumer watchdog, I doubt it.
One of the things I like about living in Australia is the consumer protection law. Any phone you buy on a 2-year contract with a provider is required to have a 2 year warranty, thanks to the government consumer watchdog. Recently, another company was fined for lying to people about their rights. Displaying 'No exchanges or Refunds' sign is against the law, since you are legally obliged to provide exchanges or refunds if a product is defective, or does not do what it claims to do.
The claim that 'the current law is, ironically, bad for consumers' is bullshit. It might be bad for the subset of consumers who buy products that work and who have no problems, if we assume that companies charge what they need to rather than the maximum the market will bear in the conditions. It is good for the subset of consumers who companies try to fuck when they sell unreliable crap.
To quote the Consumer Affairs Victoria (Australia) site example:
"Danny buys a plasma TV for $6000. It stops working after two years.
The store says they will not provide a repair or replacement as the TV only had a 12-month manufacturer’s warranty. They tell Danny he should have bought an extended warranty, which would have given five years’ cover.
However, it is reasonable for Danny to expect more than two years’ use from a $6000 TV. He is entitled to a repair, replacement or refund from the store."
I agree with Consumer Affairs Victoria. A $6000 TV should work for more than two years.
There's no way a business can afford a longer warranty period...
Certainly not when they deliberatly build in obsolescence so your forced to throw away/consume more - increase profits vs deplete more natural resources.
That's BS. My iPhone battery has lasted 6 years so far. The battery charge lasts 3 days to a week, depending on my call volume.
Are you maybe loading crApps on it that consume a lot of battery for no reason? Even with a lot of cycles, the iFixit article is pretty crappy in its estimates of charge cycles, in my experience (760+ charges so far). Apples not going to guarantee this level of performance, but my experience is that others get similar numbers.
The end effect I can see of countries forcing long warranties on products [......]
They're not forcing long warranties on products. The law merely requires that a good should be of merchantable quality and fit for purpose - anything else is essentially fraud anyway.
Another possibility is that Apple would become more stingy with repair/replacement, which would be a shame as it's really nice to go in and have them say "well, this just isn;t working, have a new one".
They're not being generous, it's what Australian law requires them to do.
The EU directive (that has been ratified into local law by most countries) varies according to the type of item, but it does indeed state two years for electronic devices such as phones (white goods get more), after which the onus is on the consumer to prove a manufacturing fault and usually the most you can expect is a repair or replacement. If the item in question is no longer made then you might get an equivalent value *at time of sale adjusted for inflation / RPI* item.
The reason Apple is getting told off all the time is because they try to dodge the law all the time. Dell won't publicise your statutory rights but they don't go out of their way to mislead you into thinking you don't have any.
It *is* a warranty, a manufacturer's warranty, codified under statutory rights law as distinct from an after purchase warranty that is provided by the seller. Thus Apple (the manufacturer) have a manufacturer's warranty for an iPhone and Apple (the seller) can also offer you a (extended) warranty. *Those* are two separate things.
When claiming under manufacturer's warranty your first recourse is the place you bought it from and *they* have to go through the hassle of fighting with the manufacturer (though PC World tried to dodge that when I had a faulty Transformer). However, the seller has to fulfill the conditions to the buyer then and there, making it like a charge back on a card.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
This has nothing to do with warranties.
This is about requiring manufacturers to take responsibility for selling faulty products.
If someone sells me thousands of dollars worth of electronics and it fails after 12 months (or even a few years) of normal use, they've sold me a faulty product and should either repair or replace it. Even you free market extremists should be able to get your heads around that.
I've pulled the "Consumer Protection Laws" card a couple of times already in the last few years, each time to have home appliances either repaired or replaced after they failed outside the warranty period. Two years and four years, respectively, are not acceptable lifetimes for a microwave and a washing machine.
They already build their products to last at least 2 years, otherwise they wouldn't have been offering extended warranties that cover out to 2 years.
Oh a warranty period is why we're charged more for non-electronic goods, clothing items, food, and software sold as services through websites?
Please expand on that won't you.
Consumers need to give up on Apple. Why continue to believe that supply and demand works against a company which refuses to listen to demand?
When claiming under manufacturer's warranty your first recourse is the place you bought it from and *they* have to go through the hassle of fighting with the manufacturer (though PC World tried to dodge that when I had a faulty Transformer). However, the seller has to fulfill the conditions to the buyer then and there, making it like a charge back on a card.
If you buy an Apple product in the UK, you have about the same rights both under manufacturer's warranty and statutory rights for six months. The next six months the manufacturer's warranty is better for you, and from then on you only have statutory rights.
As long as you are protected by both, you have the choice to claim either against the seller or the manufacturer, whatever suits you better. Neither of them has the right to pass you on to the other.
And no, there is no manufacturer's warranty codified anywhere. For most products that you buy, you have no idea who the manufacturer is, and if you did know, you would have no way of forcing them to do anything. That's why the sole legal responsibility is with the seller, because you know the seller, you went there once to buy the goods so they are usually near enough to go there again with complaints. The seller may have a contract with the manufacturer so they are not stuck with the cost, but that's of no interest to the customer.
When you mention Dell, the Italians were quite upset that Apple doesn't make your statutory rights clear enough when selling extended warranties. And they _do_ tell you about them, but apparently it's not clear enough. Dell does no such thing. They sell you two years extended warranty without mentioning statutory rights at all, which is exactly what the Italians complained about with Apple.
Actually, that's already what they do.
If you count the cost of AppleCare into the price of the device, then add taxes, you find that the EU and Australian prices aren't too far out of line anymore with the US prices. And make sure you count all taxes - including various duties (which can easily approach 50%) of import.
Of course, the AU and EU governments will still complain and whine that they're "gouged" but it appears that Apple is one of the least gouging companies around - at least when you compare like to like (add sales taxes to price, add extended warranty to price, etc).
And yes, it's things like this that people forget all about, and yes, Apple is at fault for selling AppleCare when you don't need it.
But it's not gouging when the law says an extended warranty is mandatory and companies build it into the baseline cost.
I work for ATT and you either got an iphone made by the hand of god himself, or you are lying. Or you make 2 1 minute calls a day. One of our biggest complaints when I get customers escalated to me is that the phone is only a year old and the batter does not keep a charge. I seriously doubt a six year old iphone is that marvelous. Of course a six year old iphone did not have all the newer technology that sucks battery, so you might have a shred of truth, but Apple is the king of planned obsolescence. So either you are rocking a regular 2g or a 3g. As for the other poster he is correct. I get a call escalated today. Iphone 5 user has a broken power button. Customer goes to Apple and they tell her it is $135 us to replace it, and they cannot guarantee it will work, that it could also be the screen that is effected, that she is better off getting a new phone. She calls one of our reps furious. I found a local repair shop for her via the internet, and they fixed it for 20 bucks, with a 3 month warranty. If you have a broken screen, you can get it repaired at Radio Shack for 70 bucks. They build in obsolescence and then instruct their geniuses to overcharge for repairs so they can make the case to just buy a new phone.
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
So just because my company here pays me more than my company pays the same position in the USA adjusted for exchange rate means that companies should screw people?
I wonder if they took into account that despite earning more my take home pay is lower than my USA counterparts given they are taxed at 25% while I'm taxed at 50%.
Also sub question: What came first, the unaffordable high prices and cost of living from screwing consumers, or the kindness of the corporations trying to make all their little peons rich?
What the USA considers poverty is irrelevant because the cost of living is different.