Me, the CGA and Apple... Advice

Forums › Mac OS › Me, the CGA and Apple... Advice

thecripplernz

252 posts

Ultimate Geek

#78933 10-Mar-2011 13:28

Hello Everyone

My Late 2008 Aluminium Macbook has developed problems... The screen has been randomly shutting off a lot, which is only fixed by shutting the lid several times and opening again, there is also some discoloration on the right side of the screen when watching Videos...

My question here isn't about what the problem could be, its about the repair process and the Consumer Guarantees Act.

Now I believe that 2 and a half years isn't a reasonable amount of time for a Macbook to last before having issues, and the CGA says my goods should last a reasonable amount of time

How should I go about this?

I called the Apple hotline and they reckon its faulty Hardware (costly), and Citizens Advice weren't much help either...

The Macbook was purchased through the Apple store online, so I cant really take it back to anywhere... There are authorized repair places around, but are they likely to be any help when I dont believe I should have to pay for the repair?

Has anybody been through this before? Or know any repair place in Auckland that might be of any help?

Btw: I have been very careful with my Macbook its entire life and am sure the Fault is not caused by me

Thanks

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

4705 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#447285 10-Mar-2011 13:56

2 and half years old laptop sits in the grey area to be honest. Only thing you can do is lodge a case in disputes tribunal and hope for a win?

Do whatever you want to do man.

Lias

5589 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#447292 10-Mar-2011 14:09

http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/2419413/Warranty-ruling-a-grey-area

AFAIK that's the only published case of a computer out of warranty having gone all the way to tribunal. That decision, whilst not binding on future ajdudication, said 5 years is a reasonable life for a computer.

May be of use.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup.

wreck90

780 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#447303 10-Mar-2011 14:27

Laptops get a bashing.

You are constantly flexing the electronics, they are more likely to be bumped, dropped, and squashed, and experience harsher climatic conditions than your average hide-under-the-desk Home pc.

I could see 2-3 years lifespan for a really well used laptop that has been carried while travelling too.

gehenna

8499 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#447307 10-Mar-2011 14:31

AppleCare lasts for 2 years beyond your initial 12 month warranty, so 3 years in total. As far as I know if you claim with Apple within that 3 year period - citing the CGA instead of using AppleCare, they will help you out.

DeroyBoy

262 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#447315 10-Mar-2011 14:53

I have an iMac less than 2 years old which is having problems so would be interested to know weather you have any luck getting apple to fix your laptop.

alasta

6703 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#447434 10-Mar-2011 22:59

It is a common misconception that the CGA allows you to simply approach the retailer or manufacturer and lodge a claim in order for the fault to be immediately remedied. In reality the retailer or manufacturer has no obligation to you unless you have a binding ruling from the Disputes Tribunal.

Your first step is to make a formal request for Apple to provide a remedy if you haven't already done so. If that gives you no joy then you need to consider whether pursuing action in the Disputes Tribunal is worthwhile, but that option is certainly open to you.

thecripplernz

252 posts

Ultimate Geek

#449248 17-Mar-2011 14:37

Thanks for the advice guys, will let you know how I go

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#449530 18-Mar-2011 11:20

alasta: It is a common misconception that the CGA allows you to simply approach the retailer or manufacturer and lodge a claim in order for the fault to be immediately remedied. In reality the retailer or manufacturer has no obligation to you unless you have a binding ruling from the Disputes Tribunal.

No it is not.

The CGA places an obligation on the retailer and importer/manufacturer to provide a remedy.

You sometimes need to take it to the disputes tribunal to clarify what that remedy should be.

josephhinvest

1543 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#449547 18-Mar-2011 12:18

graemeh:
alasta: It is a common misconception that the CGA allows you to simply approach the retailer or manufacturer and lodge a claim in order for the fault to be immediately remedied. In reality the retailer or manufacturer has no obligation to you unless you have a binding ruling from the Disputes Tribunal.

No it is not.

The CGA places an obligation on the retailer and importer/manufacturer to provide a remedy.

You sometimes need to take it to the disputes tribunal to clarify what that remedy should be.

While the retailer might be obliged to remedy the situation, the hard part is actually getting them to do it.
They may not do anything without a ruling from the disputes tribunal, without one they can still just decline to do anything about the issue.

alasta

6703 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#449569 18-Mar-2011 13:38

jofizz:
graemeh: No it is not.

The CGA places an obligation on the retailer and importer/manufacturer to provide a remedy.

You sometimes need to take it to the disputes tribunal to clarify what that remedy should be.

While the retailer might be obliged to remedy the situation, the hard part is actually getting them to do it.
They may not do anything without a ruling from the disputes tribunal, without one they can still just decline to do anything about the issue.

Exactly. Apart from good PR there is no rational reason why a retailer would come to the party without a Disputes Tribunal ruling against them.

Dunnersfella

4086 posts

Uber Geek

#449602 18-Mar-2011 14:23

2.5 years should be okay for an alloy Macbook in my books... the plastic versions just seem considerably more fragile from my experience.
Still, if Apple are happy to extend the warranty for another 2 years on top of the standard warranty... then 3 years total could be okay. Unless they can prove neglect / water damage etc.

RustyGonad

495 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#449606 18-Mar-2011 14:25

alasta:
jofizz:
graemeh: No it is not.

The CGA places an obligation on the retailer and importer/manufacturer to provide a remedy.

You sometimes need to take it to the disputes tribunal to clarify what that remedy should be.

While the retailer might be obliged to remedy the situation, the hard part is actually getting them to do it.
They may not do anything without a ruling from the disputes tribunal, without one they can still just decline to do anything about the issue.

Exactly. Apart from good PR there is no rational reason why a retailer would come to the party without a Disputes Tribunal ruling against them.

Apart from the small fact that the CGA is a Law!

Continued breaches of this and other NZ trading laws can and will lead to civil and possibly criminal legal action/prosecution being taken against any retailer who blatently disregards these laws.

Any retailer who doesn't find that as a "rational" enough reason won't stay in business for long.

Some of you guys really need to brush up on your facts before hit the keyboards, epsecially in areas where you clearly have no experience or relevant comment other that to add fear, uncertainty and doubt, which is based on pure ignorance...

alasta

6703 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#449733 18-Mar-2011 19:03

RustyGonad: Continued breaches of this and other NZ trading laws can and will lead to civil and possibly criminal legal action/prosecution being taken against any retailer who blatently disregards these laws.

Is there any legal precedent for this?

Some of you guys really need to brush up on your facts before hit the keyboards, epsecially in areas where you clearly have no experience or relevant comment other that to add fear, uncertainty and doubt, which is based on pure ignorance...

Thanks for turning the thread into a slagging match. That always makes for a helpful and constructive discussion.

RustyGonad

495 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#449810 19-Mar-2011 10:08

alasta:
RustyGonad: Continued breaches of this and other NZ trading laws can and will lead to civil and possibly criminal legal action/prosecution being taken against any retailer who blatently disregards these laws.

Is there any legal precedent for this?

Some of you guys really need to brush up on your facts before hit the keyboards, epsecially in areas where you clearly have no experience or relevant comment other that to add fear, uncertainty and doubt, which is based on pure ignorance...

Thanks for turning the thread into a slagging match. That always makes for a helpful and constructive discussion.

I'm not starting a slagging match. You make claims about being constructive, and yet you comments are helpful in what repect???

It does however get extremely tiring to find the same people offering the same ill informed views on the CGA. Yes this includes you. The same people have been asked to present facts in other threads relating to the topic, and yet all they continue to propogate is poorly informed opinion.

With relation to your request for legal precedent refer here:

http://www.comcom.govt.nz/misleading-consumers-about-their-rights/

It specifically details what happens if a trader continues to breach the discussed law. It also specfically details how breaching the CGA can lead to a breach in the Fair Trading Act (FTA). Guess which one they use to prosecute? Maybe even do some research on the FTA, specifically relating to misleading consumers.

For some examples of prosecutions you requested:

http://www.comcom.govt.nz/fair-trading-media-releases/

And a couple that would have quite possibly fallen under the "not fit for intended purpose" category, which ended up in greater prosectution, including personal fines:

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK0703/S00244.htm
http://ndu.org.nz/free_tag/corporate_criminals
http://www.energysafety.govt.nz/templates/MultipageDocumentTOC____41229.aspx

Hopefully you can understand the under why the FTA is used for prosecution rather than the CGA. That is single cases will land in the Disputes Tribunal, multiple breaches may end up breaching the FTA.

If you continue to fail to see whats going on, go open a car dealership, and knowingly flout the CGA, by say knowingly selling a car with faulty brakes (not being fit for the intended purpose), wait till the car injures or possibly kills someone, and see how long you remain a free man, you'll get more than bad PR...

Here's another source of information for you:

http://www.consumerblogs.org.nz/tech/2009/04/squaring-up-to-dell.html

Some great information in there for the orignal poster. That includes the guy who beat Dell, the guy who beat Sony, and alot of other good stuff. If you use google you will find many other examples of Dispute Tribunal hearings directly related to the CGA, many of which include costs and other damages issued against the retailer.

And as a final point heres an informed opinion on where they appear to be heading, with the law reviews:
http://www.bellgully.com/resources/resource.00534.asp

There are also many examples within Geekzone, from members on here who have successfully used the CGA, without having to go anywhere near the Disputes Tribunal. This includes myself (F&P, Samsung x 2, MS etc) and many others in forums which, you and others have participated, and yet continue to propogate the same poorly researched information. They key is people who sucessfully use the legislation to their advantage have taken a small amount of time to either read it, or published advice from Consumer (consumer.org.nz) - Fair Go, recently aired a program which held similar views to consumer.

So - how about next time you offer up advice in a CGA related thread you consider whether or not it is actually contructive.

Thats all I've got to say on it.

thecripplernz

252 posts

Ultimate Geek

#449820 19-Mar-2011 11:08

Hey Guys

Went to file my claim yesterday but there is more information needed than notified on the Claim form, such as Apples Trading name in NZ as well as their physical address, No PO boxes allowed...

Makes things more difficult :(

1 | 2 | 3 | 4