Apple and the Consumer Guarantees Act

Forums › Apple iOS and devices › Apple and the Consumer Guarantees Act

1 | 2

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80652 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41042

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#954939 19-Dec-2013 16:04

nathan: Good on them for finally coming to the table but what a bloody hassle, it took them to be forced into it by the Aussie consumer protection laws

Apple do an amazing job of keeping up their margins, making people love them with their alluring brand, while shafting them and tricking them into buying AppleCare extended warranties at the same time

I would says Apple doesn't have someone in this country and their help desk overseas don't even know what to do regarding our law. They must have pretty good accountants that know our fiscal laws though.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1630
Inactive user

#954973 19-Dec-2013 16:36

chiefie:
nathan:
chiefie: Here's the Apple NZ's Statuory Warranty information: http://www.apple.com/nz/legal/statutory-warranty/

interestingly this only recently changed to make any mention of the NZ CGA

prior to that it was just a standard 1 year warranty and tough sh*t

I found the Apple NZ's Statutory Warranty few months back, and I think it was around the time when iPhone 5s/iOS7 was mentioned, and the link was very visible in their products' pages (at the very bottom spot).

yes it changed a few months ago, I still call that recently. Obviously very begrudgingly. There must be amazing margins and profits to be had on AppleCare.

JayJWLH

40 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 1

#956177 22-Dec-2013 14:43

surfisup1000:
bazzer:
I don't believe that is the correct interpretation. No one would knowingly purchase goods with any fault, would they? So any fault could be considered to be of a substantial character.

You are right -- but, how else can you interpret this? It seems pretty clear.

That is where you try to draw the line between what is a minor fault, and what is a substantial fault. If you wouldn't have purchased the goods knowing that that the fault you were having would have occured, then the fault could be considered substantial, and hence the remedy available to you would include a full replacement (you don't have to accept a refurbished replacement), or a full refund (they don't have to force you into store credit, the way you paid for it in the first place is fine). It is reasonable to accept that when you buy a product, it may come under some kind of minor fault causing it to require some repair. I personally would accept that when I buy a product that somewhere down the line it will have to be sent back for repairs once or twice for a minor fault, and continue using it just fine (provided the repair is done using reasonable skill and care, and done within a reasonable period of time, at their cost including postage).

JayJWLH

40 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 1

#956181 22-Dec-2013 15:01

We have for a long time been covered by the Consumers Guarantees Act. Under the CGA, goods need to be durable and last a reasonable period of time. How long a product is expected to last can have a lot to do with things such as the price you paid for the goods, any claims made about the product at the point of sale (maybe it was advertised as extra-durable?), as well as some other reasonable factor such as how long the goods last for other people.

What people might have seen is that we have been made to feel compelled to purchase extended warranties when in fact those warranties are a complete waste of money. I've done my research, and I've found extended warranties only useful if you plan to use the goods a lot (such as using your washing machine constantly for a big family), or for business use, otherwise they offer no value whatsoever (yet you are forking your money over to the retailer, who is fear mongering you about what could happen if you don't buy it by misleading you). Even the standard manufacturers warranty usually tries to limit your rights under the CGA, which is completely illegal to enforce. The problem right now is that the warranty papers will happily claim that they don't limit your rights under consumer laws, but do not tell you a single thing about what your rights are. I think in the UK they have to tell you about your rights in summary, but here in NZ and Australia there is no such obligation, something that should be changed in law (it is still going through parliament) The warranty only talks about what THEY think of the protection you have, not that your iPad could in fact still be repaired free of charge three years after purchase, two years after your one year warranty. The Commerce Commission enforces the Fair Trading Act, so just like in Australia can prosecute Apple for misleading customers about their rights. If you can ever discuss a faulty claim with the manufacturer or retailer (the place you purchased it from is most legally responsible) in writing, and they mislead you about your rights under the CGA, then you can make a complaint to the Commerce Commission about it. The Commerce Commission won't fight for you on an individual basis (what they do is in big shots), but it will give them the ammunition they need to prosecute, and in the mean time you can always take the matter to the disputes tribunal if they won't budge.

I've been giving advice about the CGA for quite a while now, and helped people interpret it and apply it.

http://www.consumer.org.nz/reports/consumer-guarantees-act

1 | 2