Apple Is Forced By EU To Give 2 Years Warranty On All Its Products 270
dsmalle writes "Apple has adapted its warranty to cover 2 years, under pressure of the European Union and after European consumer organizations sued Apple. From the article: 'The warranty conditions have been changed and these changes can be found on the website of Apple. Products that are purchased on the website of the manufacturer or in stores are now under warranty for two years, as it is required by the EU warranty guidelines. However, the warranty for Apple products that have been purchased elsewhere will not change and they will only be given a limited one-year warranty.'"
As An American... (Score:5, Informative)
Some of the only comparable laws I can think of in the US have to do with automobile emissions systems. If your car starts spewing too much pollution before 90,000 miles, the manufacturer is on the hook regardless of what warranty they sold with the car.
Re:This does not seem fair (Score:4, Informative)
It's manufacturer warranty - the retailer has nothing to do with this.
Re:As An American... (Score:5, Informative)
This is really amusing to me, that the EU has laws that mandate minimum warranty policies for devices sold.
Actually, it's much more than that.
Not only was Apple not selling devices with the warranty required by law, but Apple was trying to upsell additional Applecare warranty to cover the mandatory warranty time period.
Of course, if it's out of warranty, you're probably SOL since Apple designs most of its products to be non-repairable.
Silly headline.... (Score:5, Informative)
.... Just silly... Apple wasn't "forced by EU", was forced by the EU directives that were transposed to law in all EU countries. The headline should be: "Apple forced to abide the law in EU countries".... since it wasn't until now. It's not something that just happened to "fall" on our laps here in EU countries just now... it's decade and an half old law.
Nothing has changed : Apple just explains it (Score:4, Informative)
Apple was forced by EU to be more forthcoming about warranty policies.
Apple provided warranty, as a MANUFACTURER, is limited to 1 year and Apple pushed it warranty extension for 2 to 3 years (2 years for iOS devices, 3 years for Macs). It covers a range of issues that can appear after the sell.
EU wasn't really happy with this because EU law mandates a 2 years warranty by the SELLER, for issue existing before the sell. EU thought that Apple was forcing clients to get a warranty extension even if they were entitled to a 2 year coverage (similar but not exactly identical).
Now Apple clearly states this distinction.
So if you bought your Apple product in another shop, after 1 year, you need to get in contact with that shop, that will contact Apple to identify the issue and see if this is linked to a preexisting problem or link to your usage. In the later case, your "seller provided" warranty won't help you.
Re:This does not seem fair (Score:5, Informative)
It is a retailer warranty. It only applies as Apple sells something directly to consumers.
In other cases, other retailers have to get Apple to fix the stuff, but Apple isn't directly liable.
Apple Is NOT Giving A 2 Year Warranty (Score:4, Informative)
As usual, TFS and TFA got it all wrong.
As so clearly painted out on Apple's website [apple.com], there are two factors in play.
Apple's warranty continues to stand at 1 year. If anything short of intentional damage happens in that one year, you get full Apple tech support.
EU Consumer Law meanwhile covers a 2 year period, and as the weaker program takes effect during the second year of ownership. Pay attention here, this is important: if the buyer can prove the product was defective when it was sold, then and only then can they take the product to the seller (who is not necessarily Apple) for coverage. This is not the same as a 2 year warranty as you do not get any direct support from Apple - no phone support, no Apple Store, no authorized service providers; you get what the seller can provide, unless that seller is Apple. And even then Apple will not give the buyer the same treatment as a full warranty, and the burden of proof is on the buyer to prove that the product was defective at the time of sale.
For a real warranty over 1 year you still need to purchase an AppleCare plan. That gets you full and direct Apple support, and more importantly there is no burden of proof on the buyer to prove that the product was defective at the time of sale.
afaik they only clarified it (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Apple Is NOT Giving A 2 Year Warranty (Score:3, Informative)
For a real warranty over 1 year you still need to purchase an AppleCare plan. That gets you full and direct Apple support, and more importantly there is no burden of proof on the buyer to prove that the product was defective at the time of sale.
The burden of proof is on the seller for the first 6 months, and on the buyer afterwards. Still "burden of proof" doesn't mean it's required to provide evidence of a production defect. Most judges will take the absence of evidence of abuse on the device as proof enough that the issue is due to a production defect. After all either it's not working correctly due to a production defect, or is not working correctly due to damage and damage is easy to demonstrate.
Note that components are supposed to last 2 years. If they break sooner under normal usage they still fall under the "production defect" category even if they were working correctly at the time of delivery.
Both article and summary misleading (Score:3, Informative)
1.) A mandatory warranty that all _sellers_ of goods have to give by law, which is valid for two years. This covers only problems that existed prior to the purchase. So for example, if some part breaks simple to being worn out, the _seller_ has no obligation to cover it. If a problem occurs within the first six month after purchase, it is assumed by law that the problem existed prior to the purchase. The burden of proof that the problem did not exist prior to the purchase is up to the _seller_. In practice, such proof is difficult, and thus _seller_ will usually handle the problem. After six month up to two years, the burden of proof is up to the buyer. Since again, this is almost impossible to do without an expensive expertise, this effectively limits this warranty up to six month. Note that this is an issue between the _seller_ and the _buyer_, even though if a defect occurs and the seller is not the manufacturer, say the seller is amazon, the seller when faced with a defective product will claim the same warranty to the manufacturer. Some might have other agreements with the manufacturer.
2.) Almost all manufacturers give on top a voluntary warranty to the customer of two years. This warranty is completely voluntary, and the customer has no real legal means to enforce it.
What happened here is that Apple is one of the very few manufacturers who only give voluntary warranty of one year. They (essentially the apple store) tried to sell additional warranties for up to three years (Apple Care), but without making it clear, that the buyer can anyway claim warranty against the seller of goods for up to two years (even though, this is hardly enforceable after six month, unless it is a problem so widespread that it would, say, lead to a class-action lawsuit in the US). The judges asked Apple to make this more explicit. Instead, Apple finally went ahead and introduced voluntary warranty conditions that are similar to any other manufacturer in Europe.
Re:As An American... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:As An American... (Score:5, Informative)
The summary and story is somewhat misleading. Under EU law, Apple has supported 2 years but it wasn't clear to a consumer in the EU. The warranty policy on Apple website listed 1 year.**
**Local warranty laws apply. Your country may support a longer warranty.
Worse yet, they were selling extended warranties which adds more years but not clearly stating that consumers already got 2 years. There wasn't consensus about the length from some anecdotal testimony so Apple may have to review this with all of their employees. This stems from the earlier Italian ruling. Italy did not rule that Apple was breaking laws by not offering a 2yr warranty but rather it was somewhat confusing to the customer and that an asterisk on the warranty agreement wasn't good enough. Needlessly upselling also was noted.
Re:As An American... (Score:5, Informative)
In the EU, you can't change the laws by writing terms on your website, or providing some arbitrary "agreement" with the product. All it takes is for someone to challenge it, and Apple will get a slap on the wrist and get told that the law applies.
And now that someone did challenge this 1 year warranty "agreement", Apple has got their slap on the wrist and changed their heinous ways.
That's all there is to it really...
Re:This does not seem fair (Score:5, Informative)
It is a retailer warranty. It only applies as Apple sells something directly to consumers.
In other cases, other retailers have to get Apple to fix the stuff, but Apple isn't directly liable.
No, it's a manufacturer warranty, but generally handled by the retailer, who acts as a go-between for the customer and manufacturer.
I.e. if your iGizmo breaks down, you take it to the retailer, who sends it to Apple, who fixes it under warranty. This is in the interest of the consumer, who has a single point of contact. The manufacturer (or, rather, brand name holder) is still the liable part.
This in contrast to US conditions, where the customer usually has to contact the manufacturer directly.
In addition to the mandatory warranty, the purchaser also has reclamation rights not limited to a fixed term, but the reasonably expected lifetime of a product. For consumer electronics, this is generally interpreted to be in the ballpark of the warranty or shorter, but if you buy, say, house siding that cracks after ten years, or a water heater that that breaks down after four years, you probably have a good case for getting it fixed by the manufacturer.
A big difference between that and regular warranty is that for regular warranty, the manufacturer is liable by default and has to show that the customer misused the product to get out of it, while for the reclamation rights, the customer has the burden of evidence.
Still, it is useful, and while I lived in Europe, I exercised this right a couple of times (broken washer/dryer, guitar neck that warped).
Re:This does not seem fair (Score:5, Informative)
No, it's a manufacturer warranty, but generally handled by the retailer, who acts as a go-between for the customer and manufacturer.
Not really. I as the consumer enter a contract with the retailer. I pay them money and they provide me with a product, they are responsible for delivering a decent product and therefore have to give a warranty. Where they got the product from and how they provide the warranty is none of my concern, I didn't enter a contract with the manufacturer, as far as I know they don't exist.
Re:This does not seem fair (Score:4, Informative)
i think you just proved his point 100%. the retailer acts as a go-between. the manufacturer doesn't exist TO YOU. but they do exist. and they are the one that provides the warranty
While they may well be involved in the implementation of the service that makes the warranty work, the retailer provides the warranty (except in the UK if you've paid by credit card, in which case it is the credit card company that does it formally). It's their responsibility in law to get things fixed for you, and that can't be passed on to anyone else. Of course, the retailer may well just pass the faulty item along to the maker for fixing, but if the maker stalls them or messes about then it's the retailer who has to make you good. They sometimes need reminding of this, but it rarely reaches court these days as the laws in the area are very strict and have to be to avoid trouble from slimy retailers and manufacturers; this area is very well tested in other areas of consumer products, and electronics firms are by-and-large relatively honest. (That's a reflection on how bad some other market sectors have been in the past, really.)
Re:This does not seem fair (Score:2, Informative)
Apparently you don't understand EU law. For instance in the Czech Republic, which implemented the EU regulations in question, the manufacturer is not obligated to provide the customer with jack diddly-squat. The customer has a contractual relationship with the retailer, and it is the retailer who is liable for all warranty repairs. He may at his own discretion: 1) fix the defect himself, 2) send the item to the manufacturer or to its designated representatives, or 3) replace the item. Now in cases where Apple also acts as the retailer, then they are liable. But for those purchasing from other retailers, either internet or brick-and-mortar shops, it is the retailer that is liable for all warranty claims.
Re:...or is it? (Score:5, Informative)
"If there really is that kind of law, could some kind soul tell me where to find it?"
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/consumers/protection_of_consumers/l32022_en.htm [europa.eu]
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31999L0044:EN:NOT [europa.eu]
Re:As An American... (Score:5, Informative)
In Europe you cant waive basic rights. if your country law say you can do lawsuits, no matter what the ToS try to sell you, isnt valid. This warranty case is just that, the ToS says something that isnt valid as the above law already gave you that rights