Big Apple Stuff up - What Is a Fair Remedy?

Lbrooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 08:03
Last edited 26/11/2020 - 09:25

I have a little story for you.

Needed a new phone during stage 4 lockdown as my one was cooked

Normally always buy directly from Apple as they have the 14 day no questions asked return policy

Apple store not open due to lock down - cannot wait a week for delivery

Figure that Apple's 14 day policy might apply to their Authorised resellers (assuming they have some agreement in place to indemnify the reseller upon return)

Call up Apple to ask if this is the case

Apple rep. tells me it is after explicitly asking 3 seperate times on the phone

JB HI-FI have click and collect same day so I purchase iPhone SE right after the phone call to Apple and pick it up that day.

10 days later decide iPhone SE is not for me and with impending rumours about 12 mini coming, that seems the better option.

Call JB to return, lady tells me I cannot return it during stage 4 but the two week period will begin from when stores re-open properly.

Finally go in once stores open, manager tells me both Apple and the woman on the phone at JB were wrong and they do not employ Apple's 14 day policy.

So at this point, not really JB's fault as the woman who got it wrong was after it was purchased anyway - so I thank him for clarifying.

Call Apple and explain the situation - they have no case ID from the original call I made as it wan't linked to my iCloud when I call (I called the support number directly, not through the app or login and they never asked for my Apple ID on the phone).

I have no proof of what Apple told me on that phone call - so I contact the Apple Privacy team with the call log from my carrier and my details.

They manage to find the recording and send it to me - I now have the evidence and it's clear as day.

Send the call to my current case manager and she apologises for what was said to me and says she will look into what she can do.

I mention that in any case, this would constitute a failure to comply with s 59 ACL (Guarantee as to express warranty) added explanation of why it applies in these circumstances the comment section - she says she will forward this info to the ACL team at Apple.

She contacts me back saying the Apple ACL team do not agree that they are failing to comply with their legal obligations as their cannot be any repair, replace or refund remedy available as the goods were not purchased from Apple directly. I explain this is actually irrelevant to s59 as the remedy set out for s59 by s271 is damages - not repair/replace/refund (precisely because section 59 applies to manufacturers who make guarantees and representations in relation to the supply of goods by another supplier)

She offers me a 'goodwill' $300 Apple voucher that cannot be used on any of their main product lines (watch, iPhone, Mac).

I mention I am not quite happy with that and would like a contact the ACL team directly for clarification on the relevant legal position they have arrived at.

She forwards my legal view/explanation to the ACL team and now I am waiting to here back.

I must add that the Apple rep. managing this case has been lovely and really understanding, even if the offered remedy is underwhelming (she is probably just working within her means and authority).

So - I am not looking for any legal advice here - I have legal expertise in this area. There is a small rabbit hole of definitions/interpretation to be clarified over s 59 that I won't go into (unless someone is interested in knowing (now added in comments)), but I am of the view that these plainly fall into my favour. Being realistic, however, as long as Apple denies their legal obligations, it's probably not worth making any official legal threat over an iPhone. I guess I will make a complaint with Consumer Affairs VIC and they might force Apple's hand but also wouldn't be surprised if this takes forever assuming they even prove to be of much help.

In light of this, what would you expect from Apple in my position? I could re-sell the phone at a loss, buy something with the $300 voucher and sell it as well and probably break even (note that the iPhone SE was officially reduced in price since iPhone 12's came out and I had purchased not long before that ($819 128gb model which is now $759). Could probably get between 550-600 on Ebay judging from sold prices then minus Ebay fees/postage of course and time and hassle.

What do you ozbargainers think?

Poll Options

  • 5
    Apple offering fair remedy
  • 90
    Apple shouldn't offer anything
  • 10
    Apple should offer more
Mobile

Comments

  • whooah1979 on 26/11/2020 - 08:08

    Figure that Apple's 14 day policy might apply to their Authorised resellers (assuming they have some agreement in place to indemnify the reseller upon return)

    She contacts me back saying the ACL do not agree that they are failing to comply with their legal obligations as their cannot be any repair, replace or refund remedy available as the goods were not purchased from Apple directly.

    The Rep is right. The only option now is to take this matter to the VCAT.

    • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 08:33

      I should note that I meant the ACL Team* not the ACL it self.

  • Hvrd on 26/11/2020 - 08:16

    Would have thought that an Apple rep saying you can get a refund would be enough. But I guess you should always check with the reseller on their policy. I made the same mistake when I bought apple care from JB, went to get a refund within 30 days like you can with apple but they couldn't do anything.

    I would take the $300 voucher and sell it and that would cover the loss on selling the phone.

  • perhaps on 26/11/2020 - 08:18
    +2

    Cut your losses, sell the phone and move on I guess.

  • Flyingpotato on 26/11/2020 - 08:23
    +7

    I'm interested in your rabbit hole s 59 interpretation, if you care to elaborate!

    I know hindsight is 20/20, but why didn't you ask JB what their policy was prior to purchasing the phone if this was important to you?

    • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 08:46

      To be honest, I figured Apple would know better than JB - half the employees at JB dont seem to know what's go so I figured Apple would have the clearest answer on the question with regards to their agreements with Authorised resellers

    • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 08:54
      +2

      And in regards to s 59 -

      Guarantee as to express warranties

               (1)  If:

                 (a)  a person supplies, in trade or commerce, goods to a consumer; and

                 (b)  the supply does not occur by way of sale by auction;

      there is a guarantee that the manufacturer of the goods will comply with any express warranty given or made by the manufacturer in relation to the goods.

      Person here does not necessarily mean the manufacturer - this includes the supplier of the goods even though the guarantee is made by the manufacturer. This applies merely where the guarantee is made by the manufacturer in relation to the goods (so as not having to be sold by the manufacture themselves or of the goods materially themselves).

      Section 2 provides definitions:

      "Express warranty" - in relation to goods, means an undertaking, assertion or representation: (a) that relates to (ii) the provision of services that are or may at any time be required for the goods;

      So here, does not have to be a warranty in the most traditional sense, can be a mere representation.
      Next question, what does services mean?

      "services" - includes any rights, benefits, privileges or facilities that are, or are to be, provided, granted or conferred in trade or commerce

      So here, we can establish that an express warranty includes a representation that the manufacturer confers a right or benefit that may be required at any time - in these circumstances - a representation that the consumer will have the benefit of returning the product to an Authorised reseller for a refund within 14 days.

      S 271(5) sets out the remedies for S 59:

      Action for damages against manufacturers of goods

               (5)  If:

                 (a)  the guarantee under section 58 or 59(1) applies to a supply of goods to a consumer; and

                 (b)  the guarantee is not complied with;

      an affected person in relation to the goods may, by action against the manufacturer of the goods, recover damages from the manufacturer.

      Edited here: accidentally copy pasted 271(1) initially.

      This is pretty straightforward.

      Hope that was insightful

      • Flyingpotato on 26/11/2020 - 09:16
        +1

        Thanks for that!

        When I read your post I was initially skeptical about obtaining any remedy given the obvious privity of contract issue, but I think you are right that s 59 gets you around the problem.

        Good luck with it!

      • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 09:29
        +2

        And for anyone interested - s29(1)(m) is clearly made out on the facts here:

        (1) A person must not, in trade or commerce, in connection with the supply or possible supply of goods or services or in connection with the promotion by any means of the supply or use of goods or services:

        (m) make a false or misleading representation concerning the existence, exclusion or effect of any condition, warranty, guarantee, right or remedy

    • Randolph Duke on 26/11/2020 - 09:03
      +1

      I know hindsight is 20/20, but why didn't you ask JB what their policy was prior to purchasing the phone if this was important to you?

      This 100%

  • SnowDragon on 26/11/2020 - 08:27
    +10

    I didn't think anybody actually took policies like that serious.
    If I'm about to splash $800 on a phone I'd damn make sure I want it.

    Sell the phone for $600 (Gumtree - no fees), sell the voucher for $250, BAM $30 profit. Buy the new iPhone you actually want (and continue giving money to Apple - the people who just bent you over).

  • 87percent on 26/11/2020 - 08:37
    +10

    I always thought (the 14 day return) was only applicable from purchases directly from Apple??

  • DashCam AKA Rolts on 26/11/2020 - 08:43
    +1

    First World problem.

    • whooah1979 on 26/11/2020 - 09:06
      +6

      Australia is a "first world" country, so it's reasonable for us that have "first world" problems.

  • lunchbox99 on 26/11/2020 - 08:55
    +6

    I don’t think it matters (legally) what Apple told you because you didn’t buy it from Apple. Only information provided by JB is relevant to a sale from JB. It was JBs responsibility to tell you at sale time that this is not correct.

    In effect, I’m saying that Apple can’t legally represent terms of sale on behalf of JB. Only JB can do that. You would have to prove JB told you thus incorrect information. Apples offer of compensation is most likely goodwill rather than a legal obligation.

    EDIT. See your new explanation above. Good luck with that. Hope the time and effort is worth the cost of an iPhone SE

    • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 09:00
      +2

      You are correct in so far as Apple cannot comment on JB's internal policies - but this is not necessarily what happened.

      There is some sort of official relationship in place as an Authorised Apple Reseller and so within those agreements, it might be expected that a crossover policy would apply, hence why I contacted Apple to see if this was the case.

      Nevertheless, read my comment above regarding the legal position by reference to s 59 ACL. Manufacturers can be held liable for damages by making a false representation even though the goods are sold to the consumer by an independent supplier. I agree, Apple cannot make legal representations about JB's return policy, but if they do make a representation, and that representation turns out to be false, s 59 can apply.

      • lunchbox99 on 26/11/2020 - 09:02
        +2

        Yeah mate, I edited while you were typing. Good luck with the claim. Apple might come to the party as it’s no real loss (they usually do it for direct purchases) and you will be a pain in their backside.

      • zoombie on 26/11/2020 - 10:22
        +1

        I'm not sure why you think a call centre staff would know the intricate details of the contract between Apple and their Authorised Reseller.

        • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 11:01

          Fair call, but I dont think its really that intricate? Just about their return policy - I think its fair to assume they know about their return policy with regard to Authorised resellers? I think what must have happened is that the representative referenced what actually only applies in the US and Canada - https://www.apple.com/legal/sales-support/sales-policies/res….

  • pegaxs on 26/11/2020 - 09:20

    Not a warranty issue, just a change of mind issue… wonder what ACL says about exchanges after change of mind. Kind of like, if I bought a new Hyundai from Peter Skeetz Hyundai and after driving it for 10 days, I didn’t like it and then went back directly to Hyundai for a refund.

    Your issue is with JB, not Apple. You didn’t buy from the Apple store, so there is no reason that they have to entertain your request.

    • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 09:23
      +2

      Please see explanation of "express warranty" under ACL in my comment - it includes mere representations as to any rights and benefits in relation to the goods.

      My issue is with Apple, notably, a false representation made by them in connection with the supply of their goods.

      • pegaxs on 26/11/2020 - 09:47
        +1

        Your issue is with JB HiFi, as they were the ones that supplied you the goods. What do their terms and conditions say?

        Terms and conditions from one store do not automatically transfer to another. I can’t buy a blender from TGG and take it back to HN, because of a more generous return policy at HN.

        From what I have read on the Apple website, these terms and conditions are applicable to the online Apple Store or to Apple retail location… not to resellers.

        Standard Return Policy

        We fundamentally believe you will be thrilled with the products you purchase from the Apple Store.

        I also cant seem to find anything on the manufacturers website that says there is a 14 day return policy. I can only find that on the Apple Store. Apple is the manufacturer and Apple Store is the competitor to JB HiFi. So, can you show me anywhere on the manufacturers part of the website that says anything about "You'll love it or return it" that isnt related to the Apple Store?

        • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 10:05
          +2

          With all due respect, I think you are missing the point.

          Apple made a false representation about a guarantee about returning the items to an Authorised reseller.

          Apple is the manufacturer of the goods. They have an official relationship with the supplier - known as an "Authorised Reseller".

          Apple warranted that their return policy extends to Authorised resellers - how that operates, whether it is through indemnification of the reseller, or Apple can accept the direct return and compensate the reseller; is irrelevant, that is up to whatever agreement they have in place. It is not unreasonable for me to rely on what Apple told me - that this policy applies to Authorised resellers.

          What has occurred is detrimental reliance on a promise by Apple. The ACL provisions for things like this, like section 29 (false and misleading representation) and section 59 (consumer guarantees relating to express warranties). These do apply to manufacturers who make representations about their products or in relation to their products, even if they are sold by a third party supplier.

          I have no issue with JB because they did not promise anything themselves prior to sale.

          You analogies are not consistent at all with the circumstances in question - in fact, they are fundamentally different. TGG and HN are both suppliers of goods for a start.

          More consistent would be to suggests that the manufacturer of the blender has warranted you that if you by from TGG, that they have a relationship in place which allows you to return the product for a full refund within 14 days. Still, this is not entirely consistent, and the circumstances in my case reflect a much more reasonable reliance on the promise made by Apple than one could argue in this TGG example.

          What is in question here is a guarantee made by the manufacturer - JB's policies are wholly irrelevant. Apple made an express warranty about their product which turned out to be false - that is the problem here.

        • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 10:14
          +2

          Also, it is interesting to note that Apple actually have a procedure like this set up in the US and Canada - https://www.apple.com/legal/sales-support/sales-policies/res…

          Apple Authorized U.S. and Canada resellers have established their own return and refund policies. When you purchase Apple products from our authorized resellers, you must carefully follow their sales and return policies. If you reject the terms of Apple’s One Year Limited Warranty for iPad, iPhone, iPod touch or Mac hardware products (“Hardware Product”), you may return the Hardware Product to the Apple authorized reseller who sold it. If the authorized reseller won't accept the Hardware Product return, Apple will accept the return under the following circumstances:

          You contact Apple to request the Apple product return within 14 days of the purchase. [email protected]

          So if you were in America, and Apple did not accept the return of the iPhone even though it states this on their website, would you feel differently about the situation? What has occurred here is essentially the same - Apple made a express warranty to me to this effect.

          • pegaxs on 26/11/2020 - 10:24

            @brooksnk: With all due respect, I think you are missing the point.

            Apple made that representation via their "online store", not via JB HiFi or on behalf of any other retailer nor on their product page.

            I can find no such claim on the product website that gives any guarantee that they will refund any purchase in 14 days, let alone a purchase made through a 3rd party reseller. So, it isn't offering anything over an above the ACL if the product description from the manufacture doesn't make any such claims.

            Apple are the manufacturer, but they are also a retailer. You are taking the "retailer" part of their operation and applying it to their "manufacturing" section. If that is the case, then you need to show that when you purchased the phone, the manufacturing arm of the company made a promise of "14 day refund", as at the moment, you are using the retail stores claims and applying it to the manufactures terms and conditions.

            So, unless there is a claim on the product website (not the Apple retail store site, that doesn't include conditions for other retailers, such as JB HiFi anyway.), you are trying to apply the Apple Stores conditions to their manufacturing conditions. The 14 days promise is made by the Apple Store, not Apple (the manufacturer).

            Your beef is with JB HiFi and their terms and conditions, as that is who you purchased it off. And unless you can find something on the iPhone SE product page that says "14 days to be happy or return it", you are gonna have a hard time trying. If it goes to V/N/QCAT, all Apple Store will say is "they didn't buy it from us, that condition is only part of our online store, not to the product generally."

            What is in question here is a guarantee made by the manufacturer

            Was it, though? Or was it made via their "retail store"?

            Also, I don't care for laws in the US as they do not relate to Australia, so that whole part of your post is irrelevant.

            • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 10:31

              @pegaxs: I am not trying to apply the Apple stores' conditions at all.

              Apple expressly represented to me that their 14 day return policy applies to their products sold at Authorised resellers - I dont see how this could be any clearer.

              I am not taking the 'retailing' arm of the operations - they are the manufacturer of the goods and they made the guarantee, therefore the provisions cited apply - this is not disputable. Keep in mind the Apple store arm did not tell me this - I called their general support number which, according to them, is a "One stop for technical support, Apple hardware service and software support." - this is them acting in their capacity as the manufacturer of the goods.

              Again, you misunderstand the point about referencing the US policy. By the way, that was not law, that is an Apple US and Canada policy - its almost like you don't read at all. I was referencing it to help you understand something you clearly miss the point on.

              Again, there is no beef with JB, I am not trying to return the product to them, because they clearly have no obligation to accept the return as is now made clear after the fact. I am not even suggesting they ever did - I am suggesting, at minimum, Apple warranted that I could return the iPhone, whether it be to JB or Apple, for a full refund.

              • pegaxs on 26/11/2020 - 10:43

                @brooksnk: You are absolutely trying to apply Apples retail store policies to their manufacturing sector. I can find no such claims made on the product page, only on their retail store page and only for products purchased via their Apple Store.

                And it could be clearer if you could find he the terms and conditions on the “manufacturer’s” website that states that this is the case, or on the retail store website that says these terms and conditions apply to all authorised resellers.

                As far as I see it, the retail store made the claims, not the manufacturer. I am happy for you to supple the terms and conditions from Apple (not their online store) that says all iPhones have a 14 love it or return it, regardless of what authorised seller you buy it from.

                You purchased from JB, therefore JB terms and conditions. I got the feeling you pulled this shit with JB and they already told you to pull your head in and no refund for you. So now you’re trying to misrepresent your issue and try and create a loophole to get it through… Buyers remorse and all.

                Anyway, Apple are an easy enough push over, they have offered $300 already, just keep grinding it out and they will cave eventually. Squeaky wheels always get the most grease.

                • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 10:49
                  +1

                  @pegaxs: You literally do not read - I called up the support number - they EXPRESSLY stated that products purchased from an authorised reseller can be returned within 14 days - I literally have the recording of the call.

                  And I didn't complain to JB at all, I went in there, the manager explained that the information I received was wrong. I accepted it right away and did not make any fuss to them as they clearly had done nothing wrong.

                  Anyway, it seems you the legal stuff is a bit beyond you - not going to bother wasting my time trying to explain something to someone who clearly has no experience in the field and seems to think their subjective feelings on the matter override how the law actually operates.

                  • pegaxs on 26/11/2020 - 11:01
                    -1

                    @brooksnk: It seems that the legal stuff is a bit beyond you

                    And if you have so much experience as a consumer law lawyer, why are you consulting a bargain forum if it's such an open and shut case?

                    All Apple will have to say is, "Sorry, error in communications, staff member has been retrained/fired. It applies to our retail locations or our online store, not to 3rd party resellers."

                    I don't think you are going to set any case law precedent set with this one.

                    Good luck! :D

                    • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 11:04
                      -1

                      @pegaxs: As I clearly say in the post - I am not looking for any legal advice and that I am well versed on this.

                      I just was interested to see ozbargain's general view of what they think Apple should do in the circumstances generally. If someone wants to talk about the legal aspects of the matter, that is fine and I will respond.

                      And its absolutely fine that most people think Apple shouldn't offer anything! - I thought the forums here would be at minimum just interested in what happened and just wanted to see what the general thoughts were.

                      If you ever find yourself in a tricky situation - I hope you don't ever consider self representing! Good luck :)

                      • pegaxs on 26/11/2020 - 11:09

                        @brooksnk:

                        I am not looking for any legal advice

                        I'm not offering any (other than "read the T&C's")

                        I hope you don't ever consider self representing!

                        I'd certainly use my own self representation before I get to a point where I would ask someone who is begging for confirmation bias on a bargain website for their legal advice ;)

  • lint on 26/11/2020 - 10:23
    +1

    It sounds like you were intending to buy the SE as a stopgap that you would return for a full refund all along. Maybe you should've asked JB if they allowed that before you bought it from them.

    • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 10:39

      Core reason was that the battery life was much poorer than expected on the SE, I fully intended to keep the phone if I was happy with it.

  • apple2016 on 26/11/2020 - 10:31
    +1

    It would be interesting to see how this works out.
    I am quite sure Apple can deny a return and still win the case if taken to court. But will they do it something different.

  • beeawwb on 26/11/2020 - 11:03

    I'm no lawyer, but I've dealt with instances of promissory estoppel through my work before and this seems pretty reasonable to me. Below is from Wikipedia and edited for the current scenario, take with a grain of salt.

    Simply put, promissory estoppel has four necessary elements which the plaintiff must prove

    • There was a promise (from Apple to honour a warranty / return policy)
    • That was reasonably relied upon (by OP)
    • Resulting legal detriment to the promisee (OP)
    • Justice requires enforcement of the promise
    • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 11:09

      Yes, promissory estoppel is an interesting one - but there is a whole debate to be had over whether it can be used as a 'sword' instead of merely a 'shield' - different jurisdictions have made different determinations on this and the High Court is yet to have a final say on the matter - it remains a very funky area of law.

      I suppose its more of a shield scenario in substance, but cannot necessarily be a cause of action on its own, but either way, as a common law remedy, it's not really feasible over an $800 iPhone.

      This is why the consumer law is such an effective and important tool for consumers - it provides the backing of legislative force for matters like this.

  • apu on 26/11/2020 - 11:53

    Hey OP. Lots of detail here in your post and I don't have time to read it all as I'm too busy doing legal stuff in my day job. But isn't this a section 18 case?

    • brooksnk on 26/11/2020 - 12:07

      Yes, also applicable, more so s29(1)(m). I also referenced that to the ACL team, but I originally referenced s59 as it is a consumer guarantee which the Apple reps are somewhat trained in. But now as it has progressed to the ACL specialist team, I have also made reference to MDC

  • HeWhoKnows on 27/11/2020 - 09:56

    OP

    You admit there is absolutely nothting wrong with the phone
    There is absolutely no reason to return it for a refund or exchange.
    Change of mind returns is a policy at the store's discretion, not the law.
    And you did not purchase from the Apple Store in any case so you have NO CASE to answer for.
    Fair Trading wont see any problem either as there is nothing wrong with the phone.
    They will also tell you that change of mind returns are at the sellers discretion!

    Just do like everyone does here and everywhere else in the world and keep the phone you elected to purchase.
    After all its an Apple iphone and they all run the same iOS and pretty much the same bells and whistles mate.

    BTW
    This is NOT a Big Apple stuff up.
    Its YOUR BIG STUFF UP!
    Its YOUR FAILURE to ask (JB) questions

    Apple representatives cannot speak for other retailers returns policies and thats a fact.
    Hence YOU should have checked the iPhone Returns policy with JB HiFi first instead of being so arrogant and presumptuous.
    That is THE LAW and applicable common sence
    There is nothing more to answer for

    FURTHERMORE

    You seek compensation??
    For what may I ask?
    You purchased a phone of your choice and there is nothing wrong wth it.
    What are your losses for which you seek compensation?
    NOT MUCH!

    This case would be thrown out of court in a moment

    • brooksnk on 27/11/2020 - 11:24

      If you would like to understand why you are fundamentally incorrect about the 'case being thrown out of court' - I advise you to read my explanation of why the law applies in this case to offer compensation to someone in my position - once you have done that and still think the relevant law cited does not apply, I eagerly await your sound reasoning as to why you can still arrive at this conclusion of yours.

      So, if you seem to know the law so well as you claim, please tell me why either s18, 29 or 59 of the ACL is not relevant here.

      • HeWhoKnows on 28/11/2020 - 16:09
        -1

        You are halarious mate seriously

        Your expectations are beyond belief

        I ask again.. what loss have you suffered that requires compensation?

        Change of mind is not a loss as far as the law is concerned.

        And you purchased at JB HiFi who have no such returns policy.

        The courts have made their decision.
        Out you go and dont come back!

        • brooksnk on 02/12/2020 - 17:22
          +1

          The loss is not from change of mind - it is a loss based on an unfulfilled promise/guarantee/warranty. You literally have no legal understanding.

    • Pro-crastinator on 27/11/2020 - 12:52

      I’m not sure if you’ve attacked the OP enough to properly make your point? Have you considered capitalising some more words?

  • OzHunterNSW on 27/11/2020 - 11:35

    Seems you are well versed enough to deal with this capably yourself

    • HeWhoKnows on 28/11/2020 - 16:33
      +1

      LOL yes Typical backyard lawyer

  • Rev0lt on 27/11/2020 - 14:22
    +1

    Quit sooking and move on, you're lucky you were offered a $300 voucher.

    I have no doubt go an buy another iPhone after this too.

  • HeWhoKnows on 28/11/2020 - 16:30
    -1

    Dear Judge

    OP: I seek compensation from Apple

    JUDGE: Is there anything wrong with the phone?

    OP: No sir

    JUDGE: Then why do you seek compensation?

    OP: Because sir, I changed my mind and decided the phone doesnt suit me.

    JUDGE: Did anyone force you to buy the phone or was it your choice?

    OP: I chose it sir after doing a lot of research.

    JUDGE: And where did you purchase the phone?

    OP: At JB HiFi sir

    JUDGE: And do you feel JB HiFi have fully complied with the law? Have they fullfilled all thier legal obligations?

    OP: Yes sir. 100%

    JUDGE: Im sorry but I dont see any problem here. You chose the phone. You were happy to buy the phone. You decided where to buy it. And now you changed you mind.

    OP: yes sir.

    JUDGE: Please explain again to me why you require compensation

    OP: Well Ive decided I dont like the phone and I want apple to give me a new phone.

    JUDGE: But arent all iPhones basically the same? They all run the same iOS and so basically all have the same features. They all have great cameras. They just differ in size a little from one to another. And after doing your research you chose to buy a smaller model. Correct?

    OP: Yes sir that is correct.

    JUDGE: Im sorry but I dont understand that nature of your request for compensation. Could you please elaborate on the losses you suffered for which you require compensation

    OP: sir I have suffered no losses at all. I just decided I dont like the phone.

    JUDGE: Im sorry but there is no case for compensation in this matter. Pls pay for Apple's legal fees and the court fees as well. And I strongly advise you to stop trying to be a backyard lawyer. Good day sir. and dont come back!

    • brooksnk on 28/11/2020 - 23:55

      Jesus, I feel sorry for you.

      • Jalif on 29/11/2020 - 10:51

        You have "legal experience in the area" and you don't see the facts?

        You are saying you entered into an agreement with a third party based on information you have no record of, which you didn't confirm with the third party.

        I would put $100 that the call recording, if it exists would have the apple rep telling you purchases from Apple stores have a 14 day return policy and you hearing what you want.

        • brooksnk on 29/11/2020 - 19:41

          There is no agreement - a lot of lay people such as yourself seem to be of the naive view that laws do not exist to protect against conduct in which contracts/agreements do not occur. As one person pointed out earlier, at common law and in equity, a good example of this is estoppel (reliance on a promise that resulted in detriment where consideration of the promise has not passed). In statute, consumer law provisions heavily in this way.

          You fundamentally misunderstand the point at law in question here. There was an express warranty made by the manufacturer of a product sold by a supplier. Conduct by the manufacturer in relation to the sale of their products by a supplier to a consumer is protected by but not limited to section 59 ACL. Please go and read my explanation of this section in the comments before you consider replying. There are other sections which also apply, such as s18 and s29 (s29 being of particular relevance to the facts) that provision for misleading and/or deceptive conduct.

          Legal experience is about applying the law to the facts - it seems you do not know the law if you can’t see what sort of actions/obligations would arise out of the facts in question - as it appears you do not.

  • brooksnk on 30/11/2020 - 20:43

    Update for anyone interested: Apple requested JB to accept the return and in turn indemnify them for the loss.

    • Diji on 05/12/2020 - 11:57
      +1

      Grats!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join