Im curious as to how many people here have encountered the captioned subject matter, and know and feel that their right to warranty or service had been taken away from them by the insertion of fine print, like liquid damage ( which in itself is laughable being these devices are being sold on the basis of being and as advertised, ”water resistant” phones) Essentially it would interesting to know if there are enough people in the Philippines to join together in representing as a class, this serious issue. Read: https://www.wired.com/2013/04/iphone-warranty-flap/ If Apple knows it us having battery issues for iphones 6 and later, and issues a corresponding recall or discounted service to remedy whether the unit is 1 year or younger, or if extended warranty is purchased, then why must they try to raise other unrelated variables to preclude them from willfully living up to their responsibility or commitment to service or remedy the fact? ASSUMING and precluding cheaters of the world that purposely abuse and commit such willful acts to take advantage of Apple. if you research well enough, Apple is very careful to know in which countries Consumers have Protection from existing laws; tantamount to saying they will act according to local laws only. The USA has very strong consumer laws that are acted and enforceable, But unfortunately we in the PH may be treated like 3rd class consumers in the eyes of Apple and their Service Providers. A consumer protection law does exist, but not easily enforceable, and time and resource consuming for the normal Juan de la cruz, despite the hefty price tag of Apple products. This is a sad fact, and i wish Apple will change this practice otherwise i do not believe Steve Jobs would be proud. Apple is declining relative to others and their after sales tactics are not helping reverse this course, if not, it is adding to their decline. any thoughts on the matter? Who’s in.
^First of all, there’s no need for the bold print letters for emphasis. We all hear and read fine with normal ones. Second, Steve Jobs is dead, and so is his supposed legacy that went with him. This is a new age for Apple, one different from his own, and standing up to it without regard to those principles held dearly by those who built Apple before. Third, it’s all about the money. Bottom line. Money solves everything. Big corporations do it. Small corporations do, too. Apple is just being that. It is what it is. Fourth, welcome to PhilMug. Good to have you here.
Thank you for the warm welcome. Its quite worrisome to think that such practice, if common place, can be accepted and rationalized. Laws and standards should be absolute, not relative. If money is the thrust, money will be the downfall. If its cheaper to pay off legal fees than to offer proper service and undeceptive warranties and practices, than it becomes a business decision at the mercy of consumers who do not fight for their rights. bold face - first time poster here, overlooked. Will pay attention next post/here. Apple post steve jobs, if tim cook was hand selected by steve, i would hope his legacy to continue on in the same way it was built. No more vision, and thirst as with typical success stories, they become complacent. Competition is fiercer than ever in this space.
I'm really on the fence here. To be fair with Apple, et al., it's a slippery slope. But to share a bit of background, I've been dunking phones in water since 2013, back when the first mass-produced, water-resistant smartphone was released; the Sony Xperia Z (IP55/57). I've even gone so far as swimming with it in the pool. A year later, I started to see condensation forming behind the lens so I stopped doing it. April, 2013 I replaced the Z with the Z3 Dual (IP65/68) and practically did the same thing.... never really learning from my previous mistake. A year later, a similar thing happened after one particular swim. The lens fogged up and this time, it also stopped detecting the SIM card. Thankfully, it was only temporary and after a couple of days (giving it time to dry up), it was working again. I then moved on to a Samsung S8+ (IP68) and with the "third time's a charm" cliche, I decided to be a grownup and stopped exposing this phone to water beyond what is considered normal handling (ie. Picking it up with wet hands or using it in a light drizzle).... NO more dunking in a bucket or swimming in the pool with it. Sorry for the long story. Anyway, it used to be my belief that smartphones advertised as water-resistant should stand up to the manufacturer's claim. I think that is a reasonable expectation. However, unlike water-resistant watches (not smartwatches), there's just so many orifices to protect on a smartphone.... so many seals that can go bad that it's just plain ill-advised to play chicken with it. Hence, the slippery slope. Where do you draw the line? When does an issue stop being your responsibility and starts becoming the manufacturer's? It's not easy to attribute an issue to a factory defect, especially with water damage. The burden of proof still rests on the consumer. In such claims, how do you prove that the problem weren't caused by abuse or misuse? This is sort of a your word against theirs type of deal, IMO.
I'm not sure what Apple's inner workings are, but I will guess what's going on in their policy. Apple makes a product that can be used in water, but the insurance coverage they have does not. So, basically, if they include perils like water damage, they'll have to increase the prices. Apple probably has insurance coverage against law suits. With that, I'm pretty sure you'll need an Ace lawyer or deep pockets to fight them. Let's say you do fight them, how much resources are you willing to give up? Remember Netscape vs Microsoft? Microsoft can spend a million dollars a month in legal fees, but Netscape can't. Ok, let's say you do win, how much will you win? a replacement device?
Precisely why Class Action is necessary, to help defray the costs and to share in the benefit. Some Lawyers accept a performance based reward/fee in lieu, esp if knowing the chances of winning or the case is big enough. Very big cases are won this way, taking on corporate greed/anti-consumer practices that are not kept in check.
Thank you for your views and lenthy reply. Partly in reply, i just came across this video, posted only a few days ago: https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=419770472052059 LinusTech is very credible and knows his Tech related stuff. The problem he faces is more along the lines of the problem i have with Apple, except in his case, there are other reasons. The refusal of service is just unacceptable and as he calls it, theres really no “recourse” Apple is giving. Their refusal to service product must be their thrust to garner more sales, but my hunch tells me this strategy will back fire faster than they think, and Apple underestimates how fast word of such experiences get around. QUOTE="oj88, post: 1527451, member: 66553"]I'm really on the fence here. To be fair with Apple, et al., it's a slippery slope. But to share a bit of background, I've been dunking phones in water since 2013, back when the first mass-produced, water-resistant smartphone was released; the Sony Xperia Z (IP55/57). I've even gone so far as swimming with it in the pool. A year later, I started to see condensation forming behind the lens so I stopped doing it. April, 2013 I replaced the Z with the Z3 Dual (IP65/68) and practically did the same thing.... never really learning from my previous mistake. A year later, a similar thing happened after one particular swim. The lens fogged up and this time, it also stopped detecting the SIM card. Thankfully, it was only temporary and after a couple of days (giving it time to dry up), it was working again. I then moved on to a Samsung S8+ (IP68) and with the "third time's a charm" cliche, I decided to be a grownup and stopped exposing this phone to water beyond what is considered normal handling (ie. Picking it up with wet hands or using it in a light drizzle).... NO more dunking in a bucket or swimming in the pool with it. Sorry for the long story. Anyway, it used to be my belief that smartphones advertised as water-resistant should stand up to the manufacturer's claim. I think that is a reasonable expectation. However, unlike water-resistant watches (not smartwatches), there's just so many orifices to protect on a smartphone.... so many seals that can go bad that it's just plain ill-advised to play chicken with it. Hence, the slippery slope. Where do you draw the line? When does an issue stop being your responsibility and starts becoming the manufacturer's? It's not easy to attribute an issue to a factory defect, especially with water damage. The burden of proof still rests on the consumer. In such claims, how do you prove that the problem weren't caused by abuse or misuse? This is sort of a your word against theirs type of deal, IMO.[/QUOTE]
Mm....I think you ve been watching too many reruns of Erin Brochovich. Realistically, class action lawsuits have never prospered in the Philippine courts. Can a Philippine lawyer even sue Apple, Inc.? Your best bet is to course your complaints to the DTI as an aggrieved consumer. I have yet to hear of a "class action lawsuit" that succeeded. Well, there is the Pepsi 349 fiasco but the defendant in that case was Pepsi Cola Philippines. Local company, thousands of civil and criminal cases filed against it. But in the end, the Supreme Court ultimately ruled in Pepsi's favor. Different circumstances but just to demonstrate that the rules work differently here. Judging from the posts here since 2008, I can only vaguely recall of a few cases where the warranty was voided because of water damage even though the owner claimed that the device was never used near a body of water. Suntok the buwan. Gluck.
^In most cases, the consumer bears the burden of proving that the product he got is defective at some point, did not live up to specifications set, is unworthy, or is outright a dud or lemon. There are warranties, and there a proofs of breakage, liquid damage, spillage and the like that, however, are subject to these warranties.
