A judge in the Netherlands has ruled that Apple must replace broken iOS devices with new iPhones or iPads, as opposed to refurbished or “remanufactured” units.
The case involves a woman who bought an iPad Air 2 with AppleCare back in 2015. After just four months, the iPad began having problems with the tablet’s WiFi technology, which prompted Apple to give her a remanufactured iPad as a replacement.
This refers to an iPad that has been made from refurbished parts, but which Apple says conforms to the same manufacturing and inspection standards as its new devices.
But when the woman rejected the iPad, the case went to court — with a judge now ruling that when a new device has been bought and replaced, Apple must give the customer another new device in its place. It is, however, okay for a refurbished iPad or iPhone to be replaced with a refurbished unit.
This backs up a previous ruling from a Netherlands court about refurbished handsets, although Apple had argued that a remanufactured unit is distinct from a refurbished one, and so shouldn’t count under the same rules.
The Netherlands court is fining Apple 100 euros ($109) per day that the woman is left without a new iPad.
From Apple’s perspective, reusing old parts is both a good money-saving strategy and also part of its mission to recycle. From a customer’s perspective, however, refurbished units may be less desirable for a number of reasons — including the fact that Apple itself sells them for less than it does new devices, thereby placing less value on them.
Currently Apple is attempting to gain permission to import and sell refurbished iPhones in India, where it hopes it can use the lower prices to open up a new possible audience of Apple fans.
Do you think Apple should be able to replace a broken device with a refurbished or remanufactured one? Leave your comments below.
Source: Tweakers
Via: 9to5Mac
Luke Dormehl is a U.K.-based journalist and author, with a background working in documentary film for Channel 4 and the BBC. He is the author of The Apple Revolution and The Formula: How Algorithms Solve All Our Problems … and Create More, both published by Penguin/Random House. His tech writing has also appeared in Wired, Fast Company, Techmeme and other publications.
11 responses to “Judge rules that Apple must replace broken iPad with brand new one”
I agree with the Netherlands court ruling. Of course, if it was abuse by the consumer that lead to the defect or malfunction (simple wear & tear) then I could see otherwise.
While I would agree that 4-month-old iPad should be replaced with a brand new one (who decides the cut-off date?), I’ve bought Apple refurbs for years without any problems.
By many state laws, if you purchase a new car and it falls under lemon laws, the entire price must be refunded. Not a used car replacement. If Apple couldn’t fix it, it seems a new one is waranted.
I agree with everyone else that if a new machine fails, they should replace it with a new machine.
This being said, I am 100% satisfied with Apple’s factory refurbished units. They are indistinguishable from new, right down to the protective cling stickers, and they have the same warranty protection, including eligibility for AppleCare. I’ve purchased multiple series of laptops over the years, as well as desktops (consumer models and Mac Pros) and monitors. I’ve always stayed within 1-3 years of current models and haven’t bought a “new” Mac since the G5 tower.
One other thing – There have been a couple of times over the years that I did have a new machine fail during the standard warranty period. I took them to an Apple Store and both times they pulled a brand new machine from retail inventory. They unsealed the box on the counter in front of me, transferred the drives and RAM, took it to the back for a quick scan and I was on my way.
She bought a NEW iPad and it had problems. Apple needs to step up and give her a NEW device. That’s what she paid for and expected. The decision is logical and makes sense. If she broke it, then that’s a different story.
I don’t get it – If the new device had malfunctioning parts, how is that going to stop another new device from having malfunctioning parts? Apple’s refurbished standards are the same as it’s new devices so what is the difference to the user? I know how you guys might think that in theory it’s worse because of the ‘refurbished’ idea but there really is no difference from the standpoint of the device itself. Especially when new devices can be just as faulty, even from Apple itself. Sometimes it’s just chance.
All this will accomplish is higher prices to cover this requirement for those countries affected. Looks good on the surface, but the hidden results will just cost people more.
does the person realize that refurbished units are better in a lot of ways? they are inspected individually instead of in lots and come with the same warranty.
A new device should be replaced with a new device but only under a certain time period. After a while, your new device would be considered used, so being replaced with a refurbished unit seems reasonable to me. I’ve also never had refurbished Apple products really go bad on me, except my current MacBook Pro but I bought that in 2012
When I sold my mini 2 to GameStop, they didn’t give me less for it being a refurb.
Interesting. I had an iPad that was replaced with a refurbished one and it did not last very long. Based on my personal experience, the refurbished iPads cannot guarantee the same longevity you would expect from a new iPad.