Apple to small claims

Firblog

Hi, I've started a case against apple in the small claims court.

Bought a 10.9" ipad at Christmas 22, in Feb 24 it stopped charging, you can see some damage in the charging port - blackened little contacts. This tablet has been well taken care of, immaculate and only ever apple cable and charger used to power it.

Apple will fix the issue for a price as they say it is outside the "apple one year limited warranty"

They also say

"without prejudice to the above the claimant has failed to produce any evidence that the device was not of merchantable quality(ie fit for the purpose or purposes for which goods of that kind are commonly bought and as durable as it is reasonable to expect having regard to any description applied to them, the price, and all the other relevant circumstances; at the time of purchase, pursuant to section 14(3) of the sale of goods act 1893?? - doubt that's correct (the 1893 act) as substituted by section 10 of the sale of goods and supply of services act 1980

Accordingly the respondent denies the claimants claim.

I take it that my response to this is to dispute their claim that it was '' as durable as it is reasonable to expect having regard to any description applied to them, the price, and all other relevant circumstances at the time of purchase" - I mean an ipad that costs €500+ should last more that 14 months?

I have to respond to the registrar in writing, what should I write?

Cheers

SuperBowserWorld

Isn't it 6 years in Ireland ?

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/consumer/shopping/guarantees-and-warranties/

Firblog

Sorry, isn't what 6 years?

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122142672#Comment_122142672

statutory rights he linked to it.

28064212

The 1893 act is still in force, the 1980 act amended it. The technical title to cite them together is "Sale of Goods Acts, 1893 and 1980".

6 years is just the maximum limit where you can still raise a problem. That doesn't mean every product must last six years - due regard will be given to what is reasonable and could be expected. You can't buy a child's toy for €5 and then get your money back because it breaks 5 years later.

OP, I would simply respond that you don't believe 14 months is a reasonable time frame to expect from such a product. Depending on the question framed and space, you could add what you've said about the price and care you've taken

Firblog

Yeah, if i'd bought a cheap €100 tablet or if the ipad had been poorly taken care of I'd have no issue. But Apple is supposed to be a premium brand, well made, a quality product for which you pay extra, definitely should last longer than 14 months.

Firblog

Well Apple took their time to come back to the registrar after my response on May 16th, hearing set for November - weekend in Cork on the cards then :)

I suppose I just bring the tablet to show how well it was taken care of and stick to the line that it was premium price for a premium product and should last longer than 14 months? Don't want a repair as I have already purchased a replacement, so refund would be good.

Don't suppose I can ask for some costs? :)

blackbox

A win in the SCC might be directing Apple to repair it free of charge or for a reduced fee. What exactly have you claimed for?

Your costs (the SCC fee) will not be refunded.

Firblog

Looking to get refunded the price paid for faulty tablet.

LambshankRedemption

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122462781#Comment_122462781

Not going to happen.

Best you can hope for is a replacement.

Sultan of Bling

I imagine Apple won't bother their a$$ showing up in court and the judge will just hear your side of the story (keep it short and sweet, they don't want to hear your life story) and then rule in your favour by default.

Firblog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122462795#Comment_122462795

Supposed to be repair/replace/refund the 3 options, when the issue first appeared I would have accepted either of the first 2 options no problem, but as they didn't offer any solution I then had to buy a replacement myself, so only solution that is fair to me now is refund; I don't need 2 tablets to do the same job.

LambshankRedemption

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122462808#Comment_122462808

I understand your point of view, I am just saying there is no way Apple will give you a refund for a 14 month old tablet.

If they give you a replacement you can sell it.

noodler

Interested to know how it goes.

14.months is a disgrace

Firblog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122462818#Comment_122462818

When the issue was first reported Apple had the choice of resolution, Repair/Replace/Refund - it chose none of the above, it does not now have a choice in the resolution - that will be the judge's decision.

LambshankRedemption

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122462849#Comment_122462849

Have you documented all your interactions with Apple?

PixelCrafter

Most likely that will just end up in Apple doing a repair of the port or a swap out for a refurbished model.

Irish consumer law would be unlikely to accept that a 12 month hard limit on a warranty for a pricy tablet is adequate tbh.

Keep all documents and communication with Apple on file.

A lot of these cases are very much paper based.

Ted222

Apple could go either way.

Even if you are successful (which I don’t think is a forgone conclusion), they could appeal the judgment.

While you might think this would be the more expensive option, they might be anxious to avoid a legal precedent that made them responsible for the repair of items outside the warranty period.

It wouldn’t be the first time a company had taken this stance.

LambshankRedemption

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122462932#Comment_122462932

I used to work for Apple. When I was signing my contract, I had to sign so many pieces of paper I actually asked the HR lady was I signing for a job or buying a house? They must employ more lawyers than software engineers.

The OP being successful is far from a foregone conclusion, and actually I predict they will offer him a refurbed replacement - not a refund.

AndrewJRenko

Fair play to the OP for making a stand. Did you buy direct from Apple or from a reseller?

Firblog

Bought direct from Apple. If they offer a repair or replacement in court I will tell the judge what I've said here, that it would have been an acceptable solution before I was forced to buy a new one - either of those two solutions now is just rewarding Apple as they got another sale out of it.

Firblog

Well today was the big day and Apple ambushed me… I bought the ipad for my (v small company) and their solicitor told Judge that Ltd companies need to have legal representation - supreme court decision Allied Irish Bank Plc vs Auqua Fresh Fish Ltd.

Was given a half hour + to find a solicitor to stand in for me but no luck, so asked for case to be put back and will be back down in Nov with a Solicitor.

rock22

If it is a business to business contract then I am not too sure the same protections apply. Also not sure if the Small Claims procedure applies.

best speak to your solicitor

blackbox

I'm surprised anyone has to have a solicitor at the SCC. I thought the idea of the SCC was to keep down costs.

28064212

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122709928#Comment_122709928

Eight posts, and not once did it occur to you to mention that this was a B2B transaction? TBH, you're lucky the judge didn't throw the case out right there and then.

Pro-tip: if you're looking for assistance on the internet, don't hide absolutely critcial information.

Firblog

You do know that the small claims process is available for businesses to use? Why would a judge throw a business case out?

From citizens info site

"The small claims procedure (also known as the Small Claims Court) is a service which provides an inexpensive way for consumers and businesses to resolve disputes without employing a solicitor. The service is provided by the local District Court offices."

Not made with hands

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122710134#Comment_122710134

They can also appeal to the circuit court and if they win there an award of costs can be made against you. Tread carefully.

28064212

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122710134#Comment_122710134

I do. Do you know that the laws surrounding B2B claims are completely different to B2C claims? You're in the Consumer Issues category. The very first reply linked you to consumer rights.

chrisd2019

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122710134#Comment_122710134

The Judge didn't throw the case out, he/she told you your company needed a legal representative.

Read your post with interest though, pity you didn't mention the business angle earlier. Have personal experience of interactions with Apple site in Cork, am not surprised they had a legal representative bring up a technicality.

Firblog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122710189#Comment_122710189

Yes the link was to citizens info, from where I got the quotation I posted about using the small claims for business disputes

drunkmonkey

From a lot of experience in these cases you're pissing up a down pipe.

Consumer law says 6yrs. What a lot of people don't understand is a manufacturing problem needs to have shown it's face within the first 6mts.

14 mts later, can you prove it hasn't left your sight. I thought not. Move on and get it repaired.

28064212

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122710535#Comment_122710535

using the small claims for business disputes

Business disputes. Business. Consumer law has absolutely zero relevance. Yes, the small claims court takes B2B cases. Those cases are judged under business law, not consumer law.

Do you honestly think the fact that it was a business that purchased the item wasn't an absolutely critical piece of information?

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122710134#Comment_122710134

The citizens advice bureau is just an informed option, not the actual law as you have just learned. Don't for a minute expect that Apple will play nice on this, it's a B2B transaction and your device was out of warranty, if they don't defend it, they open the flood gates for a lot of other businesses to take the same road.

Given the tax write off on the damaged device plus the costs of employing a solicitor, you need to figure out how much you want to potentially spend on this exercise.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122710222#Comment_122710222

l don't think he could even if he wanted to as you say the company, a separate legal entity, was not represented, so it would be over turned on appeal. Next round, Apple will probably seek to have it dismissed. They unlike the OP know how to play the game.

Firblog

Thank you all for your suggestions 😁

raxy

I wonder what the cost of hiring a solicitor will be compared to the cost of a new ipad, or a repaired charging port.

Considering you've already bought a new ipad despite suing apple because their product is not up to standard seems bizarre to me.

Firblog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711012#Comment_122711012

Don't know why you find that bizarre; all products have a certain failure rate, the failure rate for ipads is very low - given this why wouldn't I buy another? I would indeed be hugely unlucky to purchase a 2nd faulty one

balanced24

Took Apple to SCC also, offered a lump sum before the hearing, I asked for more and they accepted it.

Court was crowded and I didn’t feel like having to get up so got to keep product and a lump sum so I was happy.

Was first time didn’t realise you could be there for hours listening to some really dull days including lots of licensing cases.

raxy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711048#Comment_122711048

The first 1 wasn't faulty though, it developed a minor fault outside warranty & now you're going to hire a solicitor to try fight apple to get a refund.

Firblog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122710635#Comment_122710635

Well the courts service seem to have the same opinion as the citizens advice bureau

"The Small Claims procedure is a service provided by District Court offices and is designed to handle consumer or business claims inexpensively without involving a solicitor"

Small Claims Procedure | The Courts Service of Ireland

Not made with hands

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711098#Comment_122711098

"Without involving a solicitor"

I've a lot of court dealing unfortunately and one thing I know I'd pay absolutely no heed of anything you read on the courts websites.

It's all on the day and you've already been told you need a solicitor.

On the other hand stand up the next day with a printout of that page from their website and tell them you don't need a solicitor.

You just don't know, it's all on the day as I said.

Firblog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711079#Comment_122711079

Where did I say it was faulty? I said there was a failure rate, and this one failed, yes outside of warranty, but there is the 'reasonable expectation' that a tablet that cost €600ish would last longer than 14 months

Peregrinus

The system is indeed designed to handle small claims inexpensively without involving a solicitor, but unfortunately the design was framed with individuals in mind. They didn't really think about the situation of an artificial person like a limited company.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, a limited company is a legal person — a different person from the individuals who are shareholders in, or directors of, the company. That's why the shareholders and directors are not personally liable for the company's debts. Getting this separate legal personality, with associated insulation from liablity, is the main reason why people form limited companies in the first place.

But it has its disadvantages, and one of them arises here. When a company is a party to a court case, the shareholders and directors are not parties. They can't represent the company in the court proceedings because, in court proceedings, a party can only represent themselves, or be reprsented by a qualified legal practitioner. A limited company, being a fictional person, can't represent itself, so representation by a qualified legal practitioner is the only option.

You'd think they miight have created an exception to this rule for the small claims procedure, so that a limited company could be represented by a director. But they didn't. Which is why I say that, when they say the system is designed so that parties won't need to have solicitors, they weren't thinking of corporate parties; they were thinking of individual parties.

cython

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711112#Comment_122711112

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711048#Comment_122711048

That you refer here to the idea of a 2nd faulty one pretty much implies that you consider the first faulty to some degree.....

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711098#Comment_122711098

Well today was the big day and Apple ambushed me… I bought the ipad for my (v small company) and their solicitor told Judge that Ltd companies need to have legal representation - supreme court decision Allied Irish Bank Plc vs Auqua Fresh Fish Ltd.

Was given a half hour + to find a solicitor to stand in for me but no luck, so asked for case to be put back and will be back down in Nov with a Solicitor.

You have a Supreme Court decision that the judge complied with… you better have very deep pockets if you want to attempt to over turn a decision of the Supreme court.

Firblog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711200#Comment_122711200

I don't believe it implies that at all, but you do so we best leave it at that; neither of us gonna convince the other differently on here 👍️

Soc_Alt

Question. Will the court and solicitor fees be more than you will get from the expected outcome of the case?

Firblog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711430#Comment_122711430

Feck knows, but I will most probably get a solicitor to represent us for the next sitting - how much does it cost for a solicitor to rep for a 15 min case? 200 - 300?

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711112#Comment_122711112

You are long on opinions and short on facts! You can't unilaterally change the terms and conditions of a contract, unless the legislation allows for it, which is what you are trying to do by claiming the 12 month period should be extended at your discretion. You are going to have to come with some kind of implied consent on the side of Apple or find a very sympathetic judge, who is likely to be overturned on appeal.

Firblog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711449#Comment_122711449

You're fairly short on the aul facts yourself

Any link to the contract?

28064212

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122711112#Comment_122711112

"Reasonable expectation" is a reference to consumer law, it does not apply