[Macworld]

Post your comments for EU law forces Apple two-year warranty here

[pawhite524]

Apple was wrong when it offered the USA type conditions of warranty in the EU which mandates minimum of 2 yrs of warranty. If it meets the letter of the EU law then the criticism makes no sense.
This author has failed to state whether it meets the letter of the law or not at this point.

[AdrianHoppe]

there is no two-year warranty under EU law. first of all it's not EU law, but a directive, which every member state has to adopt. secondly it is not a warranty, but a two-year statute of limitations on defects, that were there PRIOR to purchase.
A warranty is something totally different, namely a guarantee, that the product well work for a specified period of time.
What that means is, in the first year, you're covered by Apple's one-year warranty. If it breaks in the second year, you have to prove, that the defect was there from the beginning, which in most cases might be almost impossible. plus, who wants to spend thousands on court costs, lawyers and experts over something that cost a couple of hundred or one to two thousand...
I'd still get AppleCare.
Finally, I don't know why they would be criticized for their explanation, as it is one of the easiest and best explanation about this, that I have ever read, since most people, who are not legal professionals, don't know that the difference between the "EU warranty" and a manufacturer's warranty is.

[chimerical77]

pawhite524, on 03 April 2012 - 01:37 PM, said:

Apple was wrong when it offered the USA type conditions of warranty in the EU which mandates minimum of 2 yrs of warranty. If it meets the letter of the EU law then the criticism makes no sense.
This author has failed to state whether it meets the letter of the law or not at this point.

Why can't the law be wrong?

[dotf]

AdrianHoppe, on 03 April 2012 - 01:41 PM, said:

there is no two-year warranty under EU law. first of all it's not EU law, but a directive, which every member state has to adopt. secondly it is not a warranty, but a two-year statute of limitations on defects, that were there PRIOR to purchase.
A warranty is something totally different, namely a guarantee, that the product well work for a specified period of time.
What that means is, in the first year, you're covered by Apple's one-year warranty. If it breaks in the second year, you have to prove, that the defect was there from the beginning, which in most cases might be almost impossible. plus, who wants to spend thousands on court costs, lawyers and experts over something that cost a couple of hundred or one to two thousand...
I'd still get AppleCare.
Finally, I don't know why they would be criticized for their explanation, as it is one of the easiest and best explanation about this, that I have ever read, since most people, who are not legal professionals, don't know that the difference between the "EU warranty" and a manufacturer's warranty is.

You are clearly NOT a legal professional, if you still argue that the 1999/44/EC "is not a EU law". The European Court of Justice applies the direct effect's doctrine, where even unimplemented/badly implemented directives actually have direct legal force.

In fact, according to the regulator, A. breached the EU legislation for unfair commercial practices, misleading consumers that its products had a one-year manufacturer warranty, and through the sale of the AppleCare warranty extension.

What that means is that EU consumers are clearly entitled to a guarantee of at least two years, applying for the sale of all consumer goods everywhere in the European Union - and everyone must conform. That's all.

[Rhywun]

Huh, why stop at two years? Why not four, or twenty?! I wonder if this makes Apple maintain two steams of products - one built-to-last for European standards, and one for the rest of the world...?

[snagitseven]

I guess this explains why products are usually more expensive in Europe than the U.S. The 2 year warranty is built into the higher cost or in other words, the customer will be required to pay for a two year warranty whether or not they want it. At the end of the day, Manufacturers will not absorb the extra cost and will pass it on to the consumer one way or the other.

@dotf need not reply.

[AdrianHoppe]

dotf, on 03 April 2012 - 03:23 PM, said:

AdrianHoppe, on 03 April 2012 - 01:41 PM, said:

there is no two-year warranty under EU law. first of all it's not EU law, but a directive, which every member state has to adopt. secondly it is not a warranty, but a two-year statute of limitations on defects, that were there PRIOR to purchase.
A warranty is something totally different, namely a guarantee, that the product well work for a specified period of time.
What that means is, in the first year, you're covered by Apple's one-year warranty. If it breaks in the second year, you have to prove, that the defect was there from the beginning, which in most cases might be almost impossible. plus, who wants to spend thousands on court costs, lawyers and experts over something that cost a couple of hundred or one to two thousand...
I'd still get AppleCare.
Finally, I don't know why they would be criticized for their explanation, as it is one of the easiest and best explanation about this, that I have ever read, since most people, who are not legal professionals, don't know that the difference between the "EU warranty" and a manufacturer's warranty is.

You are clearly NOT a legal professional, if you still argue that the 1999/44/EC "is not a EU law". The European Court of Justice applies the direct effect's doctrine, where even unimplemented/badly implemented directives actually have direct legal force.

In fact, according to the regulator, A. breached the EU legislation for unfair commercial practices, misleading consumers that its products had a one-year manufacturer warranty, and through the sale of the AppleCare warranty extension.

What that means is that EU consumers are clearly entitled to a guarantee of at least two years, applying for the sale of all consumer goods everywhere in the European Union - and everyone must conform. That's all.

Don't get hung up on semantics, please. Obviously 1999/44/EC is EU law, but as a directive it neither gives the consumers the right to a two-year warranty, nor does it create an obligation towards Apple to give a two-year warranty. I only obligates the member states to implement consumer law according to the directive.

under this consumer law, if your product was defect when you purchased it, you have two years to get it replaced or fixed. Simple as that. Also, under EU consumer law, the consumer only has rights against the seller of the product, while a warranty is given by the manufacturer.

Now, Apple might have been misleading in they eyes of the regulators, I don't know. I think, though, that the chart on the legal paage, explains it quite nicely.

What's plain wrong, is the statement, that Apple had to create a two-year warranty. A warranty covers you, when something breaks after you bought it. This is clearly not the case in 1999/44/EC.

[Teejay]

snagitseven, on 03 April 2012 - 06:54 PM, said:

I guess this explains why products are usually more expensive in Europe than the U.S. The 2 year warranty is built into the higher cost or in other words, the customer will be required to pay for a two year warranty whether or not they want it. At the end of the day, Manufacturers will not absorb the extra cost and will pass it on to the consumer one way or the other.

@dotf need not reply.

A quick check on various Apple stores for the base 16GB iPad shows prices here in Canada (519 CDN) are about what they are in EU (526US), and we do not have anything like the EU 2 year warranty. There are many variables in the final cost of electronics, but for sure warranty is one of them. Any purchase with premium credit card can double the original manufacturer's or store brand warranty for up to one year. However I have never met anyone who actually used that for 2 year warranty and I still get Applecare for some products.

This post has been edited by Teejay: 03 April 2012 - 08:48 PM

[JohnFH]

AdrianHoppe, on 03 April 2012 - 08:30 PM, said:

dotf, on 03 April 2012 - 03:23 PM, said:

AdrianHoppe, on 03 April 2012 - 01:41 PM, said:

there is no two-year warranty under EU law. first of all it's not EU law, but a directive, which every member state has to adopt. secondly it is not a warranty, but a two-year statute of limitations on defects, that were there PRIOR to purchase.
A warranty is something totally different, namely a guarantee, that the product well work for a specified period of time.
What that means is, in the first year, you're covered by Apple's one-year warranty. If it breaks in the second year, you have to prove, that the defect was there from the beginning, which in most cases might be almost impossible. plus, who wants to spend thousands on court costs, lawyers and experts over something that cost a couple of hundred or one to two thousand...
I'd still get AppleCare.
Finally, I don't know why they would be criticized for their explanation, as it is one of the easiest and best explanation about this, that I have ever read, since most people, who are not legal professionals, don't know that the difference between the "EU warranty" and a manufacturer's warranty is.

You are clearly NOT a legal professional, if you still argue that the 1999/44/EC "is not a EU law". The European Court of Justice applies the direct effect's doctrine, where even unimplemented/badly implemented directives actually have direct legal force.

In fact, according to the regulator, A. breached the EU legislation for unfair commercial practices, misleading consumers that its products had a one-year manufacturer warranty, and through the sale of the AppleCare warranty extension.

What that means is that EU consumers are clearly entitled to a guarantee of at least two years, applying for the sale of all consumer goods everywhere in the European Union - and everyone must conform. That's all.

Don't get hung up on semantics, please. Obviously 1999/44/EC is EU law, but as a directive it neither gives the consumers the right to a two-year warranty, nor does it create an obligation towards Apple to give a two-year warranty. I only obligates the member states to implement consumer law according to the directive.

under this consumer law, if your product was defect when you purchased it, you have two years to get it replaced or fixed. Simple as that. Also, under EU consumer law, the consumer only has rights against the seller of the product, while a warranty is given by the manufacturer.

Now, Apple might have been misleading in they eyes of the regulators, I don't know. I think, though, that the chart on the legal paage, explains it quite nicely.

What's plain wrong, is the statement, that Apple had to create a two-year warranty. A warranty covers you, when something breaks after you bought it. This is clearly not the case in 1999/44/EC.

AdrianHoppe

you are wrong. It is a EU law. Nor does the product have to be defective PRIOR to purchase. There is a 6 months period in which you can show that the product was not Fit for Purpose - which means money back or brand-new replacement. Anything over that still comes under the 2 year law - which does create an obligation for Apple, Sony, Ford, anybody!! BTW, semantics do not come into it. A directive is an order to member states and all those operating within them to comply with a law decided by the EU. What does "only obligates the member states to implement consumer law according to the directive" mean? Not what you think, but what Apple is now obliged to respect. And Apple trying to weasel out of it by using phrases such as “defects present when customer takes delivery.” will only mean more fines in the future, I'm afraid.

Why doesn't the company just stand by the law (which they will have to anyway), and by the quality of its products? No contest. Apple loses on this - but will gain if it respects the EU LAW!

This post has been edited by JohnFH: 03 April 2012 - 11:58 PM

[klahanas]

JohnFH, on 03 April 2012 - 11:57 PM, said:

AdrianHoppe, on 03 April 2012 - 08:30 PM, said:

dotf, on 03 April 2012 - 03:23 PM, said:

AdrianHoppe, on 03 April 2012 - 01:41 PM, said:

there is no two-year warranty under EU law. first of all it's not EU law, but a directive, which every member state has to adopt. secondly it is not a warranty, but a two-year statute of limitations on defects, that were there PRIOR to purchase.
A warranty is something totally different, namely a guarantee, that the product well work for a specified period of time.
What that means is, in the first year, you're covered by Apple's one-year warranty. If it breaks in the second year, you have to prove, that the defect was there from the beginning, which in most cases might be almost impossible. plus, who wants to spend thousands on court costs, lawyers and experts over something that cost a couple of hundred or one to two thousand...
I'd still get AppleCare.
Finally, I don't know why they would be criticized for their explanation, as it is one of the easiest and best explanation about this, that I have ever read, since most people, who are not legal professionals, don't know that the difference between the "EU warranty" and a manufacturer's warranty is.

You are clearly NOT a legal professional, if you still argue that the 1999/44/EC "is not a EU law". The European Court of Justice applies the direct effect's doctrine, where even unimplemented/badly implemented directives actually have direct legal force.

In fact, according to the regulator, A. breached the EU legislation for unfair commercial practices, misleading consumers that its products had a one-year manufacturer warranty, and through the sale of the AppleCare warranty extension.

What that means is that EU consumers are clearly entitled to a guarantee of at least two years, applying for the sale of all consumer goods everywhere in the European Union - and everyone must conform. That's all.

Don't get hung up on semantics, please. Obviously 1999/44/EC is EU law, but as a directive it neither gives the consumers the right to a two-year warranty, nor does it create an obligation towards Apple to give a two-year warranty. I only obligates the member states to implement consumer law according to the directive.

under this consumer law, if your product was defect when you purchased it, you have two years to get it replaced or fixed. Simple as that. Also, under EU consumer law, the consumer only has rights against the seller of the product, while a warranty is given by the manufacturer.

Now, Apple might have been misleading in they eyes of the regulators, I don't know. I think, though, that the chart on the legal paage, explains it quite nicely.

What's plain wrong, is the statement, that Apple had to create a two-year warranty. A warranty covers you, when something breaks after you bought it. This is clearly not the case in 1999/44/EC.

AdrianHoppe

you are wrong. It is a EU law. Nor does the product have to be defective PRIOR to purchase. There is a 6 months period in which you can show that the product was not Fit for Purpose - which means money back or brand-new replacement. Anything over that still comes under the 2 year law - which does create an obligation for Apple, Sony, Ford, anybody!! BTW, semantics do not come into it. A directive is an order to member states and all those operating within them to comply with a law decided by the EU. What does "only obligates the member states to implement consumer law according to the directive" mean? Not what you think, but what Apple is now obliged to respect. And Apple trying to weasel out of it by using phrases such as “defects present when customer takes delivery.” will only mean more fines in the future, I'm afraid.

Why doesn't the company just stand by the law (which they will have to anyway), and by the quality of its products? No contest. Apple loses on this - but will gain if it respects the EU LAW!

Interesting angle. Could it be argued that the need to jailbreak (which is unsanctioned and unsupported by Apple) by some users is a demonstration of being "Not Fit for Purpose"?

[markbyrn]

What about the Applecare+ program where you get coverage for accidental damage? Is that available in the EU?

[NikoNikorocksComxfn3]

Can we vote that in here in the states?

[klahanas]

NikoNikorocksComxfn3, on 04 April 2012 - 04:30 AM, said:

Can we vote that in here in the states?

Of course we can. But where are we going to find "consumer friendly" politicians and not just a bunch of beaurocrats?