

Apple forced to increase warranty to two years in Australia - testrun
http://www.cnet.com.au/accc-makes-apple-revise-consumer-guarantees-339346271.htm

======
adnrw
Apple have been required to do this for a long time, they just never really
advertised it (and per the ACCC judgement, have been misrepresenting what they
are obligated to do).

That being said, they have definitely been repairing products up to two years
after purchase for the last little while (up to a year or so). We've had a
couple of phones replaced and an iMac repaired that we've had for about 18
months without any issues.

~~~
nwh
Yeah, they did for mine and tried to charge me for it. The invoice for the
charges was a "misprint" was was hastily taken out of my hands and replaced
with a blank one when I mentioned that the warranty period was two years.

------
andy_ppp
I was under the impression you should expect electronics and white goods to
last a full 5 years in the UK. It's not unreasonable to expect things to still
work after this time, especially with Apple's premium.

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 says that goods should be as follows:

    
    
      Of satisfactory quality.
      This means the goods must meet the standards that any reasonable person would expect, taking into account the description, the price and all other relevant information. In some circumstances, the retailer may be liable for any statement made by the manufacturer about the goods.
    
      Satisfactory quality includes the appearance and finish of the goods, their safety and durability and whether they are free from defects (including minor faults)
      Fit for the purpose that goods of this type are generally sold. They must also be fit for any specific or particular purpose made known to the seller at the time of the agreement.

~~~
bowlofpetunias
There is a minimum warranty throughout the EU, and most countries go well
beyond that.

This is why Apple was forced to change their Apple Care plan, since most of
what you would buy is already guaranteed by law.

(Apple isn't the only one that tries that, many brick & mortar electronics
retailers still try to sell people "insurance" that for 90% exists of rights
you already have.)

~~~
sbuk
In my experience, AppleCare covers more than a warranty, which only covers
defective devices or parts thereof. For example, AppleCare+ for iPads and
iPhones covers accidental damage. Consumer law hinges on what is and what
isn't reasonable. So a cracked screen due to consumer clumsiness wouldn't be
replaced under normal warranty terms as the law says it's unreasonable _for
the retailer_ to be expected to cover that. A failed switch, however, should
be replaced _a cost to the retailer_ unless there are reasonable grounds to
deny so, i.e. evidence of tampering, which would include bodged self repairs.

------
kalleboo
They've had to do this in the EU for a while now (information here
[http://www.apple.com/uk/legal/statutory-
warranty/](http://www.apple.com/uk/legal/statutory-warranty/) ) I'm surprised
they're trying to pull a fast one in Australia.

------
jbuzbee
Apple price increase in 3,2,1...

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction

~~~
danielbarla
> For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction

Yes, like (probable) loss of market share when you increase prices
arbitrarily. It all balances out eventually.

~~~
naturalethic
Government mandates are indeed arbitrary. Gold star.

~~~
danielbarla
Granted, the Aus government has a history of over-protective, arbitrary
mandates (e.g. hot tap regulations [1]). I don't feel strongly in either
direction, although I have an aversion to silly and wasteful rules.

That said, in the case of mandatory warranty policy, I can definitely see some
merit. It definitely seems like certain appliances are being sold in a lemon
market [2] (think blenders, etc), where the market is flooded with sub-
standard, cheap products. These can become the norm and set overly low price
expectations, making it difficult for good products to compete.

How this applies to top-end smartphones is another discussion. I don't see why
it should be difficult for a them to honor the policy, given their focus on
quality. What's important is that all companies honor the mandate, and compete
on an equal footing w.r.t. consumer expectations.

[1]
[http://www.phaa.net.au/documents/130201_Hot%20Tap%20Water%20...](http://www.phaa.net.au/documents/130201_Hot%20Tap%20Water%20Temperature%20and%20Scalds%20Policy%20FINAL.pdf)

[2]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons)

~~~
venus
What's so arbitrary and over-protective about the tap regulations you linked
to? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me, and the statistics presented about the
decline in third degree burns is a great outcome.

Isn't that exactly what government is supposed to do?

~~~
danielbarla
Perhaps it wasn't the best example in that sense, it seems they have done
their homework. It was just the first one that came to mind, and I've heard
several people express disgust with it (and other, similar regulations).

Personally, I don't have a strong feeling about these types of things; on the
one hand, they are probably correct, and they probably do more good than harm.
On the other hand, having an over-regulated country might have a negative
effect on both the competitiveness of the economy (companies having to
navigate a minefield of regulations, driving costs up), as well as coming at
the cost of personal freedoms (along the lines of: hey, if I want to have a
tap running at 70 degrees, should I not be allowed to?). These are just silly
examples, but I think you get the idea.

~~~
venus
I get what you're trying to say, but yeah, that's a bad example. I think it's
extremely reasonable to regulate that things are safe by default - in fact,
that is a core functionality of government. If you really want a tap that will
output water hot enough to give 3rd degree burns in one second, I am sure that
is possible, the point is that by default it does not.

As for competitiveness, I'm not sure how having more burns victims being paid
for by medicare is great for the economy, nor do I see how it's efficient for
every homebuilder to be forced to go and become an expert on burns so they
know exactly what delivery temperature their taps should be set to. It's far
more efficient to have a central expert organisation do this research, then
declare it the standard.

I don't agree with it all the time, of course. Bicycle helmets would be my #1
example, where I think the regulatory authorities have made a big mistake not
considering all the externalities and second order ramifications of their
policy.

------
fosk
This already happened in Italy[1] and in other european countries like
Belgium[2]

[1] [http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/12/apple-hit-
with-12-milli...](http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/12/apple-hit-
with-12-million-fine-for-misleading-italian-consumers/)

[2] [http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/01/following-fine-in-
italy...](http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/01/following-fine-in-italy-
belgian-group-sues-apple-for-warranty-practices/)

------
stevewillows
It's funny, my early 2008 macbook pros faulty graphics card gave up the ghost
today. Turns out there was an extended warranty for people's who died up until
last year. In a sense I was lucky it lasted as long as it did, but despite
this 'good fortune' I'm still out a laptop.

When I took it to the genius bar asking why they didn't do a recall, they
suggested I part it out.

------
joseph_cooney
So if I bought an extra 2 years of applecare for my MBP do I get half that
credited back, since it is only one 'extra' year?

~~~
teamonkey
At least in the UK, AppleCare exceeds the service requirements of the
warranty. If a component fails through normal use, the warranty has you
covered. If your case is cracked because you dropped your laptop, warranty
might not cover it but AppleCare will.

~~~
tehwalrus
Or your house insurance will cover accidental damage (as well as theft of your
bag on a train/in a cafe, etc).

I was delighted when my house insurance bill went down considerably, because
my newer Macbook was worth just less than £1000, where the previous one had
been just over - meaning it became covered by the policy without a separate
declaration, and an additional fee.

~~~
sbuk
I suppose 1 benefit AppleCare provides is no excess fees; the whole cost of
repair is covered.

------
naturalethic
Add one year of apple care to the retail price.

------
camus2
Apple is the only business that might take your gear out of warranty and fix
it for you.I broke my macbook screen 2 times and they replaced it for free
even if it was not under warranty anymore. That's the main reason why i buy
Apple's gear, but i guess i pay a premium for that upfront.

~~~
robbiep
My sister (totally tech naive) got a new (1 model out of date, but 2 models
newer than her old one) MacBook Pro after having 3-4 problems with it (all
under warranty) in her final 2 months of warranty and into her third year of
ownership (I had made her get AppleCare).

I've always been very happy with apple service

