iPhone died 5 hours after purchase

Forums › Spark New Zealand (including Skinny and BigPipe) › iPhone died 5 hours after purchase

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

534 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#571946 22-Jan-2012 15:50

peroski: The problem is substantial as
she wouldn't have bought the goods if she'd known about the fault.
The goods are substantially unfit for purpose i.e it doesn't work.
If the problem is substantial, you can:
Reject the product and choose a replacement of the same type or similar value or a full refund of your purchase price

You are overstating the scale of the problem. No one would buy a good if they knew it was faulty, that is a completely ridiculous point to make.

Doozy has summed it up nicely and Telecom would be returning the device to the manufacturers approved repair company. It is their right under the CGA to do so.

It comes across that you are just trolling Telecom who are only trying to help with a single faulty device.

Connecting to UFB? Go with Bigpipe and use this link for free credit!

gregmcc

2147 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#571951 22-Jan-2012 16:02

Shock:
peroski: The problem is substantial as
she wouldn't have bought the goods if she'd known about the fault.
The goods are substantially unfit for purpose i.e it doesn't work.
If the problem is substantial, you can:
Reject the product and choose a replacement of the same type or similar value or a full refund of your purchase price

You are overstating the scale of the problem. No one would buy a good if they knew it was faulty, that is a completely ridiculous point to make.

Doozy has summed it up nicely and Telecom would be returning the device to the manufacturers approved repair company. It is their right under the CGA to do so.

It comes across that you are just trolling Telecom who are only trying to help with a single faulty device.

It's quite fair for telecom to send the phone away for repair, but..... now that this phone has been repaired it no longer the same as a new working order phone, it has had a substantial fault, and the CGA says that this is just cause to reject the phone and insist on a replacement or refund.

Let everyone here know how you get on, there are lots of people interested on how things go.

If it works out good let us know which telecom store, they may just get some more business as a result, they may get less business if they handle it very badly.

peroski

37 posts

Geek

#571953 22-Jan-2012 16:05

Shock:
peroski: The problem is substantial as
she wouldn't have bought the goods if she'd known about the fault.
The goods are substantially unfit for purpose i.e it doesn't work.
If the problem is substantial, you can:
Reject the product and choose a replacement of the same type or similar value or a full refund of your purchase price

You are overstating the scale of the problem. No one would buy a good if they knew it was faulty, that is a completely ridiculous point to make.

Doozy has summed it up nicely and Telecom would be returning the device to the manufacturers approved repair company. It is their right under the CGA to do so.

It comes across that you are just trolling Telecom who are only trying to help with a single faulty device.

Read prior posts and you might understand the point I was making.
I was qualifying her problem as 'substantial'
"A reasonable consumer wouldn't have bought the goods if they'd known about the fault."
http://www.consumer.org.nz/reports/consumer-guarantees-act/putting-it-right

As the problem is 'substantial' under the CGA she does not have to wait for Telecom to return the device to the manufacturer, she can reject the item and get a full refund
http://www.consumeraffairs.govt.nz/for-consumers/law/consumer-guarantees-act/got-a-problem-with-goods

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#571954 22-Jan-2012 16:05

peroski: If you want something done right, don't bother asking Telecom.

My friend contacted Apple direct and they are replacing her phone with a new one.

Apple obviously have a better understanding of the CGA than Telecom or perhaps they just care more about keeping their customers happy, either way case solved!

Thanks to everyone for their advice.

That is good to hear. I believe if they had purchased it overseas, such as an apple store, they would have just switched it too. It is good to know it is better to deal with the manufacturer in this sort of problem. Just wondering though why the retailer couldn't do this, if they didn't contact apple themselves.

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#571958 22-Jan-2012 16:10

Shock:
peroski: The problem is substantial as
she wouldn't have bought the goods if she'd known about the fault.??
The goods are substantially unfit for purpose i.e it doesn't work.
If the problem is substantial, you can:
Reject the product and choose a replacement of the same type or similar value or a full refund of your purchase price

You are overstating the scale of the problem. No one would buy a good if they knew it was faulty, that is a completely ridiculous point to make. ?

Doozy has summed it up nicely and Telecom would be returning the device to the manufacturers approved repair company. It is their right under the CGA to do so.

It comes across that you are just trolling Telecom who are only trying to help with a single faulty device.

Although a brand new phone straight off the shelf shouldn't need repairing. Imagine you get the product of the shelf in the store, you pay for it, and then you decide test it instore that it works. Obviously difficult because you have to wait 2-4 hours for it to charge. You then find it doesn't work. Would you then expect them to switch for a new one, or send it to be repaired. The only difference in this case is that they took it home first.

peroski

37 posts

Geek

#571963 22-Jan-2012 16:20

That is good to hear. I believe if they had purchased it overseas, such as an apple store, they would have just switched it too. It is good to know it is better to deal with the manufacturer in this sort of problem. Just wondering though why telecom couldn't do this, if they didn't contact apple themselves.

I guess the store is only set up to sell and not to support.
Telecom need to work on their policies so that there is a clear process for their sales staff to follow e.g. goods faulty when sold > instant replacement/refund. Goods faulty after X days > return to manufacturer & provide loaner

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#571968 22-Jan-2012 16:32

peroski:

That is good to hear. I believe if they had purchased it overseas, such as an apple store, they would have just switched it too. It is good to know it is better to deal with the manufacturer in this sort of problem. Just wondering though why telecom couldn't do this, if they didn't contact apple themselves.

I guess the store is only set up to sell and not to support.?
Telecom need to work on their policies so that there is a clear process for their sales staff to follow e.g. goods faulty when sold > instant replacement/refund.?? Goods faulty after X days > return to manufacturer & provide loaner

Definitely, but telecom are no different from other phone retailers with that sort of policy. I had an expensive phone that was less than a week old and had a defect, and they also had it sent it back to be repaired. That wasn't telecom. It seems to mainly apply to mobile phones for some reason.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#571988 22-Jan-2012 17:13

mattwnz: It seems to mainly apply to mobile phones for some reason.

Exactly. For some esoteric reason other consumer goods seem to fall under the "let's put it right" (with some retailers obviously), while mobile phones are in a special category as in "these are so special and shiny we deserve some special rules"... These companies seem to believe everyone buys a handset to replace parts and claim DOA, or swap old batteries or whatever they fear, leaving them with the bad apple ;)

rscole86

4973 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#572039 22-Jan-2012 18:29

The main problem here is

"has no damage."

Having worked for a number of years in retail, we saw a few products come back like this. Unfortunately for the masses, a few have actually damaged their product through neglect, which means retailers have a strict inspection process, before replacing items such as yours.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#572057 22-Jan-2012 18:52

gregmcc:
sbiddle:
gregmcc: Return to the store you got it from, advise them that you paid for a new un-repaired phone, you will not accept a repaired phone unless there is a significiant reduction in price.

Apple's warranty clearly says they may repair or replace desices with refurbished product. This is in very clear in English in their warranty terms and conditions.

Doesn't matter what apple T&C's are the law is the law end of story

What if they decided to add a term like 1st born must be killed to appease the apple gods would that make it ok?

I'm not sure what the law / CGA has to do with this.

Apple replace products under warranty like any other supplier. Like many suppliers, they use refurbished products, something that is not illegal. The CGA does no specify that a warranty replacement must be a brand new item. This isn't over riding the CGA and actually has nothing to do with the CGA.

The CGA also doesn't grant continuous possession of a product, if if something breaks (using the phone of the OP as an example), there is is no legal requirement for the supplier to replace the product or offer a loan product while it's being repaired/replaced.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#572060 22-Jan-2012 18:56

mattwnz:
peroski: If you want something done right, don't bother asking Telecom.

My friend contacted Apple direct and they are replacing her phone with a new one.

Apple obviously have a better understanding of the CGA than Telecom or perhaps they just care more about keeping their customers happy, either way case solved!

Thanks to everyone for their advice.

That is good to hear. I believe if they had purchased it overseas, such as an apple store, they would have just switched it too. It is good to know it is better to deal with the manufacturer in this sort of problem. Just wondering though why the retailer couldn't do this, if they didn't contact apple themselves.

I'm actually lost as to how what Apple did is different to what Telecom are doing.

If you have purchased a faulty iPhone direct from Apple and have a warranty issue you send it back to their authorised repair centre who will repair or replace the phone, quite possibly with a refurbished device.

If you have purchased a phone from Telecom and have a warranty issue they will return it to an authorised Apple repair centre who will repair or replace the phone, quite possibly with a refurbished device.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#572068 22-Jan-2012 19:05

rscole86: The main problem here is

"has no damage."

Having worked for a number of years in retail, we saw a few products come back like this. Unfortunately for the masses, a few have actually damaged their product through neglect, which means retailers have a strict inspection process, before replacing items such as yours.

I've also heard a story from a major retailer where a group of customers appear to have swindled a signifiant amount of money off them when some products were given immediate instore replacements. It seems many of these goods actually originated from this retailer and where actual warranty claims that were not disposed of properly.

Turns out they were visiting stores buying identical model replacement products to faulty items they had in their possession. The catch was things such as phone batteries were being swapped and some space appliances had been entirely rebuilt to ensure that serial numbers matched. This gave them an as new device/appliance, and a faulty replacement to return. Once this was returned for an on the spot replacement they ended up with one brand new and a working product which could both be sold.

For every honest customer, there are plenty out there trying to rip retailers off..

peroski

37 posts

Geek

#572071 22-Jan-2012 19:15

I'm not sure what the law / CGA has to do with this.

"If the goods you buy turn out to be faulty you are covered by the Consumer Guarantees Act"
http://www.consumeraffairs.govt.nz

peroski

37 posts

Geek

#572074 22-Jan-2012 19:22

I'm actually lost as to how what Apple did is different to what Telecom are doing.

If you have purchased a faulty iPhone direct from Apple and have a warranty issue you send it back to their authorised repair centre who will repair or replace the phone, quite possibly with a refurbished device.

If you have purchased a phone from Telecom and have a warranty issue they will return it to an authorised Apple repair centre who will repair or replace the phone, quite possibly with a refurbished device.

I'm at a loss as to how you can't follow the thread.

The product had a substantial problem.
Under the CGA (which does apply) she is entitled to reject the goods and receive a full refund.
She can choose to have it repaired but it's her decision.

Telecom were going to do the latter and repair the phone even though she wanted a brand new replacement (effectively getting a full refund)

Apple have given her a brand new replacement i.e. not forcing her to get the phone repaired

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#572082 22-Jan-2012 19:34

peroski:

I'm actually lost as to how what Apple did is different to what Telecom are doing.

If you have purchased a faulty iPhone direct from Apple and have a warranty issue you send it back to their authorised repair centre who will repair or replace the phone, quite possibly with a refurbished device.

If you have purchased a phone from Telecom and have a warranty issue they will return it to an authorised Apple repair centre who will repair or replace the phone, quite possibly with a refurbished device.

I'm at a loss as to how you can't follow the thread.

The product had a substantial problem.
Under the CGA (which does apply) she is entitled to reject the goods and receive a full refund.
She can choose to have it repaired but it's her decision.

Telecom were going to do the latter and repair the phone even though she wanted a brand new replacement (effectively getting a full refund)

Apple have given her a brand new replacement i.e. not forcing her to get the phone repaired

iPhones are tyically not repaired under warranty. They are returned to Apple's service agents and if found to be faulty a replacement device is immediately sent out. This policy is no different no matter where you buy your device from.

The issue here is that Telecom (or any retailer) aren't in a position to assess the issues that may or may not exist with a phone so will return it to Apple's service agents to assess. As I also pointed out when a retailer returns the goods to be assessed there is no requirement for them to offer a replacement or loan device.

If she wanted her money back she could demand that and the issue would be solved. If she wants the device replaced Telecom aren't doing anthing wrong that I can see.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6