iPhone Replacement Devices / Consumer Act

Forums › Apple iOS and devices › iPhone Replacement Devices / Consumer Act

TranceManNZ

43 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 2

#196652 8-Jun-2016 06:43

I have an iPhone 6S which has developed a battery issue. Apple have now agreed to replace my device but are only going to replace with a “service device” / “as new device”

This seems very wrong to me as under the consumer act I should be getting like for like? I did not purchase a second hand refurbished iPhone so I should be offered one as replacement?

Has anyone tested this case with Apple and if so do you have any pointers on how to proceed?

1 | 2 | 3

9184 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4834

#1567597 8-Jun-2016 07:02

The service phones are a very high standard, don't think you'd tell it from a brand new one. Unless your current one has never left the box, you probably end up with a better phone.

TranceManNZ

43 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 2

#1567599 8-Jun-2016 07:08

Regardless, it's still not new. I have no way knowing how the device has been used previously.
Does this fit inside the consumer laws of NZ?

alasta

6888 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3362

Trusted

Subscriber

#1567601 8-Jun-2016 07:09

How old is your faulty phone? If it's a DOA then they should replace it with a new unit, but if it's more than a few weeks old then this would be an unrealistic expectation.

TranceManNZ

43 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 2

#1567608 8-Jun-2016 07:20

Regardless of age the device is still within its warranty period and should fall under the act.
The act states repair, replace or refund. I have given them the opportunity to repair the device and they have chosen to replace.
I was under the impression that refurbished goods are not suitable replacements under the act.

Maybe I am wrong?

alasta

6888 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3362

Trusted

Subscriber

#1567609 8-Jun-2016 07:28

Why would you prefer a repair over a replacement device that is almost guaranteed to be in better condition than a repair of your existing device? Not to mention a much faster turnaround.

CYaBro

4708 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1182

ID Verified

Trusted

#1567611 8-Jun-2016 07:35

This is what Apple have told us about them.
The replacement devices are not refurbished, they are remanufactured and come off the same factory line as a brand new device.
They have brand new housings, brand new screens, and brand new batteries.
The other parts inside could be a mix of new parts, or reused from other devices, but they have been fully checked and tested before being installed.

Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

TranceManNZ

43 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 2

#1567612 8-Jun-2016 07:37

Almost guaranteed being the point. I am very anal about the way I look after my things.

I guess the question here is, does this practice fall into NZ consumer law or are Apple just pushing the boundaries here?

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1567614 8-Jun-2016 07:38

TranceManNZ: Regardless, it's still not new. I have no way knowing how the device has been used previously.
Does this fit inside the consumer laws of NZ?

Neither is your phone. So you have like for like. Actually better than like for like as you get a new case, new screen, new battery as Cyabro advised.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1630
Inactive user

#1567666 8-Jun-2016 08:47

TranceManNZ: Almost guaranteed being the point. I am very anal about the way I look after my things.

I guess the question here is, does this practice fall into NZ consumer law or are Apple just pushing the boundaries here?

no this is perfectly acceptable under the law

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1567676 8-Jun-2016 09:03

TranceManNZ: Regardless, it's still not new. I have no way knowing how the device has been used previously.
Does this fit inside the consumer laws of NZ?

Replacing with a factory refurbished product is common place within many industries, and complies with the law. The only people who don't agree with this are Consumer.

Apple have only ever swapped products with refurbishments since day dot under warranty or Apple Care - they don't repair products.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#1567721 8-Jun-2016 09:57

sbiddle:

TranceManNZ: Regardless, it's still not new. I have no way knowing how the device has been used previously.
Does this fit inside the consumer laws of NZ?

Replacing with a factory refurbished product is common place within many industries, and complies with the law. The only people who don't agree with this are Consumer.

Apple have only ever swapped products with refurbishments since day dot under warranty or Apple Care - they don't repair products.

The disputes tribunal also agrees with 'consumer'.

If this ended up in the disputes tribunal the OP would win.

Just because something is 'common place' does not make it compliant with the law.

I've had a refurbished ipod in the past, and apple said it was as good as new with fresh battery and case. But, I reckon they were not being truthful because this unit always had battery issues.

Geekzone

Want to support Geekzone and browse the site without the ads? Subscribe to Geekzone now (monthly, annual and lifetime options).

CYaBro

4708 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1182

ID Verified

Trusted

#1567868 8-Jun-2016 12:21

surfisup1000:

sbiddle:

TranceManNZ: Regardless, it's still not new. I have no way knowing how the device has been used previously.
Does this fit inside the consumer laws of NZ?

Replacing with a factory refurbished product is common place within many industries, and complies with the law. The only people who don't agree with this are Consumer.

Apple have only ever swapped products with refurbishments since day dot under warranty or Apple Care - they don't repair products.

The disputes tribunal also agrees with 'consumer'.

If this ended up in the disputes tribunal the OP would win.

Just because something is 'common place' does not make it compliant with the law.

I've had a refurbished ipod in the past, and apple said it was as good as new with fresh battery and case. But, I reckon they were not being truthful because this unit always had battery issues.

There is a big difference between a refurbished product and a remanufactured product.

I have seen refurbished iOS devices from many of the online daily deal sites, and places like that.

They are a device that has maybe had a new screen put on it, or a new battery put in it (not by an Apple Authorised Service Provider!), and then some attempt to clean the outside of the device to make it look new.

If I put an Apple remanufactured device and a brand new device in front of you, you would not be able to tell the difference because there is no difference.

If I put a refurbished device and a brand new device in front of you it wouldn't be hard to tell which is which.

Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

TranceManNZ

43 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 2

#1567870 8-Jun-2016 12:25

But that is purely cosmetic. Neither device is brand new as originally purchased.
Therefore neither can be used as a replacement product under the consumer law.
I think I might spend the $45 and lodge a complaint with the tribunal.

timmmay

20858 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5350

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1567871 8-Jun-2016 12:28

Based on the responses in the thread it seems remanufactured is basically new. You will have an easier, lower stress life if you go with what their standard is and raise an objection only if the replacement they give you is unacceptable.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1630
Inactive user

#1567875 8-Jun-2016 12:32

TranceManNZ: But that is purely cosmetic. Neither device is brand new as originally purchased.

Therefore neither can be used as a replacement product under the consumer law.

I think I might spend the $45 and lodge a complaint with the tribunal.

Sounds like fun. Good luck.

1 | 2 | 3