Digital Mobile, iPhone and refunds

Forums › One New Zealand (including Vodafone, WxC, Farmside) › Digital Mobile, iPhone and refunds

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

2102 posts

Uber Geek

#162329 4-Sep-2008 22:55

natedog:
raab: Thanks for your replies. I did talk to the branch manager but he wasn't very willing. I basically said you I've paid $1100 for a phone and it's already been replaced twice is it possible to get a refund rather than having to go through this process, and who's to say I won't be back with dust under the screen in future trying to imply that I'm not happy with the build quality of iPhones. But he just said apple policy this, refund not possible, cga wont cover you. Unfortunately I couldn't really argue against that because I don't know the law enough hence coming on here to ask.

It took a week to get the first replacement so I've no idea how long it'll take to get the second :/

itxtme: I personally would not put up with the phone being sent away. You havent even used the damned thing! Why cant they just give you a replacement!?

Apparently the only way to get a replacement is for them to send it away, even Vodafone have to

Raab this page might be useful to get clued up on the law.

"If the problem is a serious one (the goods are unsafe, substantially do not meet acceptable quality, fitness for particular purpose, description or sample), you can choose to return (reject) the goods and get your money back"

I would argue that, if all the phones have the same fault, there is a serious design fault and they do not meet acceptable quality. Obviously, this is a fault the retailer will not be able to remedy within a reasonable time so they will have no choice but to offer you a refund. I'm sure if you mention lodging a claim at the disputes tribunal, given that the disputes tribunals look primarily at the equity of the dispute rather than the strict rule of law, they will not want it to go this far and it will be far easier for them to give you a refund. By the sounds of it, you deserve one!

Good luck

I would argue that the phone never met the requirements "do not meet acceptable quality" and therefore demmand a refund as is your right under the CGA. This is not a fault that happened post use, this happened before you even turned the phone on. Tell the retailer this, demmand a refund - i would have!

billgates

4705 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#162334 5-Sep-2008 00:43

itxtme:
natedog:
raab: Thanks for your replies. I did talk to the branch manager but he wasn't very willing. I basically said you I've paid $1100 for a phone and it's already been replaced twice is it possible to get a refund rather than having to go through this process, and who's to say I won't be back with dust under the screen in future trying to imply that I'm not happy with the build quality of iPhones. But he just said apple policy this, refund not possible, cga wont cover you. Unfortunately I couldn't really argue against that because I don't know the law enough hence coming on here to ask.

It took a week to get the first replacement so I've no idea how long it'll take to get the second :/

itxtme: I personally would not put up with the phone being sent away. You havent even used the damned thing! Why cant they just give you a replacement!?

Apparently the only way to get a replacement is for them to send it away, even Vodafone have to

Raab this page might be useful to get clued up on the law.

"If the problem is a serious one (the goods are unsafe, substantially do not meet acceptable quality, fitness for particular purpose, description or sample), you can choose to return (reject) the goods and get your money back"

I would argue that, if all the phones have the same fault, there is a serious design fault and they do not meet acceptable quality. Obviously, this is a fault the retailer will not be able to remedy within a reasonable time so they will have no choice but to offer you a refund. I'm sure if you mention lodging a claim at the disputes tribunal, given that the disputes tribunals look primarily at the equity of the dispute rather than the strict rule of law, they will not want it to go this far and it will be far easier for them to give you a refund. By the sounds of it, you deserve one!

Good luck

I would argue that the phone never met the requirements "do not meet acceptable quality" and therefore demmand a refund as is your right under the CGA. This is not a fault that happened post use, this happened before you even turned the phone on. Tell the retailer this, demmand a refund - i would have!

And how can you be so sure that dust getting under the screen is a design fault and not factory reassembly stuff up for the 2nd replacment? @OP wait for the 3rd replacement to arrive and see if that too is damaged/gets dust under the screen.

itxtme

2102 posts

Uber Geek

#162399 5-Sep-2008 10:33

And how can you be so sure that dust getting under the screen is a design fault and not factory reassembly stuff up for the 2nd replacment? @OP wait for the 3rd replacement to arrive and see if that too is damaged/gets dust under the screen.

You cant honestly tell me that if you got your brand new iphone home opened it and there was dust under it you wouldnt a) ask for it to be replaced NOW, or b) ask for your money back.

Why would anyone buy a phone and that very same day have to send it back for "warranty" problems. Im sorry but the product never met the requirements for sale at POS nor after "being fixed"

billgates

4705 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#162435 5-Sep-2008 11:58

itxtme:
And how can you be so sure that dust getting under the screen is a design fault and not factory reassembly stuff up for the 2nd replacment? @OP wait for the 3rd replacement to arrive and see if that too is damaged/gets dust under the screen.

You cant honestly tell me that if you got your brand new iphone home opened it and there was dust under it you wouldnt a) ask for it to be replaced NOW, or b) ask for your money back.

Why would anyone buy a phone and that very same day have to send it back for "warranty" problems. Im sorry but the product never met the requirements for sale at POS nor after "being fixed"

And how will first mobile be so sure that you have not opened the iphone into pieces or dropped it or done water damager which voids the warranty? First mobile is not authorised to open up iphones or any apple product. Only apple can check that. This is why it needs to be sent back and checked by Apple.

raab

262 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#162452 5-Sep-2008 13:16

The first iPhone I bought had a chip where you put the simcard in and glue seeping out the bottom edges and the second replacement iphone had the dust under the screen and a chip where you put the simcard in. Looks like the cutting machine that punches the hole where you put the simcard in is either faulty or Apple of laxed their QA standards to push out more units to meet demand.

JoeBloggs

355 posts

Ultimate Geek

#162459 5-Sep-2008 13:36

As I've said, if you want a refund or change of model, you will need to employ the services of a lawyer. The ambiguous nature of many of our laws is apparent in "substantially do not meet acceptable quality". You can argue black and blue that dust under the screen is substantial - likewise I will guarantee you that Vodafone and Apple will both argue that it is not substantial. This is where an intermediary is required but the cost of a lawyer will most likely nullify the point of the whole exercise. From experience, you may get some help from the Disputes Tribunal but they usually err on the side of caution when handing out judgements - this means they usually rule that the retailer/supplier is ordered to repair the fault within x days with the stipulation that if not completed correctly you are entitled to a refund. In this case they repair properly

nexttothemoon

35 posts

Geek

#163245 9-Sep-2008 10:14

They should definitely be giving you a credit off the phone or the use of a "loaner" phone while yours is being repaired. That's like going onto a new car lot... paying cash up front and then being told you have to wait 2 weeks as your car has defects that need to be fixed before you can actually drove it. That isn't a warranty issue.. it's a faulty product from the start.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

raab

262 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#163473 10-Sep-2008 12:29

I bought the phone outright as I don't like the plans so already had another 021 phone I was using prior to buying it.

Anyway I got the replacement yesterday and all is well. I guess time will tell whether I get dust under the screen though so at the moment I'm going through the fun of finding a decent screen protector for it. I accidentally bought the DLO anti-glare ones which make the screen look rubbish and some from a company called gecko which don't even fit the iphone properly.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#163800 11-Sep-2008 15:52

Interesting thread - and makes me lean further in the Nokia direction with each post!

It is a shame that consumer protection is not a little stronger here in NZ. In the UK, if you buy something with a credit card, the card company can be forced to deal with having it replaced because there is a legal obligation on them to (in effect) not lend you money to buy faulty goods. It was always one of the major reasons to choose card over cash - but I do not think such a provision exists here.

I hope you get it sorted!

JoeBloggs

355 posts

Ultimate Geek

#163909 12-Sep-2008 02:41

Wow geektastic. I couldn't imagine having my credit card company deal with faulty goods for 'my' purchasing decisions. It does sound great though. Nokia all the way

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#163920 12-Sep-2008 07:51

JoeBloggs: Wow geektastic. I couldn't imagine having my credit card company deal with faulty goods for 'my' purchasing decisions. It does sound great though. Nokia all the way

Great isn't it? Here it is in b&w:

"If the goods cost more than £100 and less than £30,000 and you paid part or all of the purchase price using your credit card, then you will have additional rights against the credit card company under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. This states that the credit card company will have equal liability with the trader for any breach of contract."

JoeBloggs

355 posts

Ultimate Geek

#164027 12-Sep-2008 16:26

That's crazy. I'm not even sure why they would create such a law. It must be risky business dealing in credit cards for the banks there.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#164032 12-Sep-2008 16:50

JoeBloggs:
That's crazy. I'm not even sure why they would create such a law. It must be risky business dealing in credit cards for the banks there.

I guess they must like risk then:

"UK consumers spent £92.6 billion on credit cards and debit cards in the second quarter of this year, an increase of 7.5% on the same period in 2007.

According to Apacs, there are now 30.8 million credit card holders in the UK."

JoeBloggs

355 posts

Ultimate Geek

#164242 13-Sep-2008 17:08

gross profit / risk = net profit You poms love your credit cards.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#164255 13-Sep-2008 18:10

JoeBloggs:
gross profit / risk = net profit You poms love your credit cards.

It's true - they are popular. I still have one UK one kept for travelling/emergences - the credit limit equates to NZ$40,000! Of course I don't use it - no sterling to pay the bill!!

1 | 2 | 3 | 4