Faulty Phone outside of warranty

I have a Iphone 5 with Three that is in a 2 year contract.

I have about 6 months of the contract remaining however the phone has developed a fault and no longer works.

It started rebooting and eventually went into recovery mode. I have tried to recover the phone to no avail, it keeps saying error in Itunes, I have tried various other computers to see if the same issue arises but it still comes up with the recovery error.

I was looking for a authroised repairer on the apple website when I came across this statement by Apple.

Under Irish consumer law, consumers are entitled to a free of charge repair or replacement, discount or refund by the seller, of defective goods or goods which do not conform with the contract of sale. These rights expire six years from delivery of the goods.

https://www.apple.com/ie/legal/statutory-warranty/


Is it the case that I am entitled to a free repair? According to the website I have to contact my supplier, in my case that is Three.ie.

Is this 6 year rule normal with items you purchase? I have never been aware of this before and find it strange because why would people buy extended warranties ?

THanks for any help.

slimjimmc

As I understand it:
Under consumer law you are entitled to a free repair, replacement or refund if a defect occurs within the reasonable lifetime of the product. The lifetime is basically what a reasonable person would expect it to last.
The 6 year is the time limit you have under the Statute of Limitations to take legal action. It is not a 6 year warranty/guarantee and it doesn't guarantee a particular outcome; it just means your case can be heard by a court (e.g Small Claims Court). For example, if a defect occurred in year 5 and neither you nor the seller can settle it among yourselves then you have until year 6 to take the seller to court. If the judge deems the reasonable life of an iPhone is 4 years you may not be entitled to anything as the product has lasted as long as expected.

Depending on the T&Cs an extended warranty may give you specific extra benefits than consumer rights. For example the warranty may guarantee a replacement phone whereas you may not get that under consumer rights. You may also get cover for accidental damage which consumer law does not provide. Often extended warranties are relatively expensive so read the T&Cs and compare against insurance policies to see if you get better value.

dudara

The 6 years refers to how long you have to seek redress.

In your case, I'd start with Three, as they are the retailer. Apple are excellent to deal with when the phone is in warranty, but once outside, they charge for repairs.

P. Breathnach

slimjimmc wrote: »

As I understand it:
Under consumer law you are entitled to a free repair, replacement or refund if a defect occurs within the reasonable lifetime of the product. The lifetime is basically what a reasonable person would expect it to last....

Given the frequency with which large numbers of users "upgrade" their phones, the idea of a reasonable lifetime for a phone is unknown territory for many!

But you have a clincher: the phone hasn't even made it to the end of the two-year contract. That has to be an unarguable minimum lifetime (personally, I'd expect 4-5 years from a phone). Three would look pretty bad if they refused to look after you within the minimum contract period. I am assuming in this discussion that the phone has not been abused.

On your question about extended warranties: I never buy them, as I think they are spectacularly bad value. You often get a little for your money in that (a) there might be an insurance element built in, and (b) if the product fails, it can be easier to get some redress. But those small benefits are inordinately expensive.

blade1

Is eu law two years warranty on goods?

dudara

blade1 wrote: »

Is eu law two years warranty on goods?

That was not enacted in Ireland as our consumer law was deemed to provide stronger protection.

blade1

dudara wrote: »

That was not enacted in Ireland as our consumer law was deemed to provide stronger protection.

And is it?

coffee_cake

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Given the frequency with which large numbers of users "upgrade" their phones, the idea of a reasonable lifetime for a phone is unknown territory for many!

I had an issue with the battery on my phone. Lady in shop said oh 2 years is it, time to get a new one really so

Eh... no. 2 years??? come on ...
apparently i can't just replace the battery in it :mad:

Anyway OP I think within contract is definitely within reasonable lifetime, talk to them

timetogo

blade1 wrote: »

And is it?

Look all the way up to post two to see if it is.


Hint: it is.

jahalpin

Apple are the only large mobile phone "manufacturer" not to offer a 2 year warranty on their products

2 years would be a reasonable lifespan for a smartphone due to the nature of the components used.

From the statement on the Apple website, it sounds like the retailer will have to pay for the repair themselves even though the retailer actually made the least margin on the phone

Del2005

jahalpin wrote: »

Apple are the only large mobile phone "manufacturer" not to offer a 2 year warranty on their products

2 years would be a reasonable lifespan for a smartphone due to the nature of the components used.

From the statement on the Apple website, it sounds like the retailer will have to pay for the repair themselves even though the retailer actually made the least margin on the phone

2 years for a device that cost several hundred Euro:eek::eek: A phone should last way more than two years, the only thing on a phone that should have issues within 2 years is the battery and then that's down to consumer use. All the other components are made with much longer time frames in mind as they go into devices other than phones that don't get replaced as often.

The Apple website is quoting Irish law, when you buy something your contract is with the company that sold it to you so it's up to the retailer to rectify the issue. If it starts costing the retailer money to rectify issues then they'll just have to stop stocking the product until it's quality control has been improved.

blade1

timetogo wrote: »

Look all the way up to post two to see if it is.


Hint: it is.

Is it though?
Going by that, it's down to the opinion of a judge.
Shur a judge wouldn't be an expert on phones.
At least with the 2 year guarantee, you know where you stand.

beauf

Note Irish law is different but.


http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/mac/eu-law-forces-apple-highlight-two-year-warranty-3348755/

timetogo

blade1 wrote: »

Is it though?
Going by that, it's down to the opinion of a judge.
Shur a judge wouldn't be an expert on phones.
At least with the 2 year guarantee, you know where you stand.

I'd take my chances with the Irish law rather than take a fixed 2 years. I'm sure a judge wouldn't be an expert on phones but they're not total idiots.

Would they even need to be an expert in a phone. Can you think of any consumer electronic device that costs about €600 that you'd think it would be acceptable for it to stop working after 2 years of normal use? I'm sure there must be some but I can't think of any.

With the Irish law you could get 3 or 4 years out of a device and have the replacement / repair cost (or a portion of it) covered by the supplier.

Of course if anybody can post on here that they've been to the small claims court within two years with a device that they didn't damage and the court found in favour of the supplier then all of the above is pointless

blade1

timetogo wrote: »

I'd take my chances with the Irish law rather than take a fixed 2 years. I'm sure a judge wouldn't be an expert on phones but they're not total idiots.

Would they even need to be an expert in a phone. Can you think of any consumer electronic device that costs about €600 that you'd think it would be acceptable for it to stop working after 2 years of normal use? I'm sure there must be some but I can't think of any.

With the Irish law you could get 3 or 4 years out of a device and have the replacement / repair cost (or a portion of it) covered by the supplier.

Of course if anybody can post on here that they've been to the small claims court within two years with a device that they didn't damage and the court found in favour of the supplier then all of the above is pointless

You may be right,I'm a bit sceptical when dealing with those in the law profession (I have my reasons)
But two different judges could give two different rulings and to me then there's a chance of some people losing out.
Say, does a phone that cost €500 get less time than a phone that cost €800?

timetogo

blade1 wrote: »

You may be right,I'm a bit sceptical when dealing with those in the law profession (I have my reasons)
But two different judges could give two different rulings and to me then there's a chance of some people losing out.
Say, does a phone that cost €500 get less time than a phone that cost €800?

Yep, I used to work in the Four Courts. I know the judges are in a world of their own. Really, you have to see some of them walking around with their tip staff like they're a king and ask yourself if you're still on planet Earth.

But I haven't heard of anybody reasonably getting less than 2 years out of a device.

I'm sure a €500 phone could be argued to not last as long as an €800 one. I'd argue that for €800 I would reasonably expect that to last 5 years. For a €50 phone I'd probably argue that 2 years was good enough. That's the trouble with our law though, it's all subjective. I think though that even with it being subjective it's better than just saying 2 years and that's it for everything.

blade1

timetogo wrote: »

Yep, I used to work in the Four Courts. I know the judges are in a world of their own. Really, you have to see some of them walking around with their tip staff like they're a king and ask yourself if you're still on planet Earth.

But I haven't heard of anybody reasonably getting less than 2 years out of a device.

I'm sure a €500 phone could be argued to not last as long as an €800 one. I'd argue that for €800 I would reasonably expect that to last 5 years. For a €50 phone I'd probably argue that 2 years was good enough. That's the trouble with our law though, it's all subjective. I think though that even with it being subjective it's better than just saying 2 years and that's it for everything.

See, the thing is,let's take iphone for example.
The difference in price with iPhones is due to the amount of space on them.
Why should a 128gig iphone get more warranty time than a 16gig iPhone?

timetogo

blade1 wrote: »

See, the thing is,let's take iphone for example.
The difference in price with iPhones is due to the amount of space on them.
Why should a 128gig iphone get more warranty time than a 16gig iPhone?

Because it's more expensive. I know there's little technical difference (and I know that an extra 112Gb should really only cost an extra €50 but that's another days argument).

In one of your first posts you said you'd prefer to have 2 years warranty.

What price would you say would be acceptable to fail at 2 years? Whether it's €300 or €800 I'd still say 2 years is too little.
My point is that for most devices in Ireland we'd get more than 2 years with the current system. I wouldn't argue about a cheap €50 phone. For something like that the 1 year warranty wouldn't be argued about.

blade1

The longer the better!
I have a tv that I paid €1450 2 years ago.
How long do you reckon I can expect that to be covered?

timetogo

blade1 wrote: »

The longer the better!
I have a tv that I paid €1450 2 years ago.
How long do you reckon I can expect that to be covered?

No idea. Probably more than 2 years though.

blade1

timetogo wrote: »

No idea. Probably more than 2 years though.

The tv is actually exactly 2 years old today!

How does it work though?

If you go back to the shop and tell them you bought item over 2 years ago and now it's broke.

Does the shop decide,ok you paid x amount so yeah they'll replace it.

Or do they say "no way, you have it over 2 years,we'll see you in court?"

theteal

blade1 wrote: »

The tv is actually exactly 2 years old today!

How does it work though?

If you go back to the shop and tell them you bought item over 2 years ago and now it's broke.

Does the shop decide,ok you paid x amount so yeah they'll replace it.

Or do they say "no way, you have it over 2 years,we'll see you in court?"

They'll tell you where to go. They'll hope you drop it and never hear from you again. They may reconsider when the receive notice of SCC proceedings. When you go to court, just prove that the item wasn't mistreated and the judge will deem in your favour (but he/she will deduct the for the 2 years use you've got from it)

blade1

theteal wrote: »

They'll tell you where to go. They'll hope you drop it and never hear from you again. They may reconsider when the receive notice of SCC proceedings. When you go to court, just prove that the item wasn't mistreated and the judge will deem in your favour (but he/she will deduct the for the 2 years use you've got from it)

And for items that cost more than the scc limit?
Would people risk going to court?
What kind of cost would they be facing if the judge ruled against them?

timetogo

blade1 wrote: »

And for items that cost more than the scc limit?
Would people risk going to court?
What kind of cost would they be facing if the judge ruled against them?

For Question 1 - Whats the SCC limit? I can't see a mention of a limit to the amount you can claim against on their site. (http://www.courts.ie/courts.ie/library3.nsf/pagecurrent/781D7D5227918A618025715C004CAEF3?opendocument&l=en&p=110)

For Question 3 - The cost of the of the application, €25.

You should have an idea about question 3 before you apply. E.g. if you've used your €1500 TV for 3 years and it hasn't been abused then you would have a reasonable idea that you're not really gambling with your €25. And if you're dealing with a decent retailer they shouldn't push you down the small claims route for a reasonable request. For example if I have to take a retailer to the SCC and I win I'll tell everybody that the retailer made me do that.

dudara

blade1 wrote: »

The tv is actually exactly 2 years old today!

How does it work though?

If you go back to the shop and tell them you bought item over 2 years ago and now it's broke.

Does the shop decide,ok you paid x amount so yeah they'll replace it.

Or do they say "no way, you have it over 2 years,we'll see you in court?"

The shop would likely want to determine if the breakage is due to user error/misuse rather than something intrinsic to the device. The longer something lasts, the more likely that breakage will be due to use/misuse and less likely that it will be due to defects.

All these factors have to be balanced against each other when a device fails.

blade1

1, I think it's €2000 but I'm not sure.
And 2, how do you abuse a tv?
On second thoughts, I don't want to know!:pac:

timetogo

blade1 wrote: »

1, I think it's €2000 but I'm not sure.
And 2, how do you abuse a tv?
On second thoughts, I don't want to know!:pac:

If it's €2000 I'd imagine it'd be mentioned on the site.

If you have a toddler its easy to see a TV get some abuse. I'm not sure where your mind was :pac:

Edit: you seem to be right. It mentions €2K here
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/courts_system/small_claims_court.html

El Inho

The warranty is your warranty and thats that.

Apple and Sony are the only major mobiles with a one year warranty.

If you're buying into them on contract take insurance. Other than that, the second year is no man's land.

timetogo

El Inho wrote: »

The warranty is your warranty and thats that.

Apple and Sony are the only major mobiles with a one year warranty.

If you're buying into them on contract take insurance. Other than that, the second year is no man's land.

Good god can you read the rest of the thread. Even the second post explains Irish consumer law.

The warranty is a warranty and that's not that. Consumer law in Ireland beats a manufacturers warranty nearly every time.
And in my opinion you only ever need insurance for accidental damage or loss / theft which are not the scenarios asked about in the OP.

blade1

Oh no!!!:pac::pac:

timetogo

blade1 wrote: »

Oh no!!!:pac::pac:

Tis time to give up :pac: