Faulty iPod and Amazon returns

[Englander]

So much to my displeasure, my 8GB 1st gen iPod Touch seems to have died on me. In it's last ounce of life, I took it off the charger, the screen went all black and then turned off. I've rummaged across the intertubes but to no avail - no amount of holding the sleep and home button for 10 seconds at a time seems to resuscitate my poor iPod.

During my travels, I noticed one person said that Apple has a 1 year hardware warranty and as is typical, that deadline passed about half a month ago! I'm struggling to find the relevant sections for returning it/replacing it on Amazon, i.e. what's the length of their warranty and do I even qualify.

Any pointers are more than welcome, including any suggestions to raise it from the dead (and yes, it is fully charged!)

Thanks, Michael

[TheAnimus]

I would ring them up, explain very kindly the problem.

There is an expected life on everything sold, you should expect a music player to last 14 months say. They will probably help you i've found amazon to be stella in the past when it comes to this sort of thing.

That said, this is an apple product so it could be argued that the reasonable life is 3 months, and your lucky to not have a burn mark on your leg.

[Singh400]

That said, this is an apple product so it could be argued that the reasonable life is 3 months, and your lucky to not have a burn mark on your leg.

Ouch. Buuurrrrrnnnnedd.

[Infinite]

****ing Steve Jobs

I swear Apple put a self breaking timer that activates somewhere between 12-16 months. Im on my 4th iPod, the 3 in the past have never made it past 16 months Q_Q

My current one is at 10 months....

[Englander]

****ing Steve Jobs

I swear Apple put a self breaking timer that activates somewhere between 12-16 months. Im on my 4th iPod, the 3 in the past have never made it past 16 months Q_Q

My current one is at 10 months....

What happened with regards to replacing them - did you get a free replacement or did you have to go down to the shops and buy a whole new one?

I've dropped them an e-mail using the contact us section on their site asking what the situation is with regards to repairs/refund/replacement so let's see what they come back with

EDIT: well, I can't fault Amazon's service - they offered a very swift reply but unfortunately the general jist was that there was nothing they could do about it but gave me lots of links to contact Apple and moan at them. +1 for the self breaking timer

[Saracen]

....

EDIT: well, I can't fault Amazon's service - they offered a very swift reply but unfortunately the general jist was that there was nothing they could do about it but gave me lots of links to contact Apple and moan at them. +1 for the self breaking timer

Remember that just because a warranty expires doesn't mean you don't have any further comeback, though usually against the seller, not the manufacturer.

Whether you have any comeback in this case will depend on exactly what happened, and on what you can prove .... and on whether you're prepared to go through the cost and hassle of pushing it. But goods should last a reasonable period, and if they don't, you at the least have a potential claim against Amazon on the basis of your Sale of Goods Act rights, not under the warranty.

It's very common for retailers to maintain that once out of warranty, there's nothing more they can do. It simply isn't true. If, repeat IF the fault is an inherent one in the product (i.e. poor quality manufacturing, faulty components, etc) then you can claim against the seller for up to 6 years (in England and Wales, and a bit different in Scotland). The problem is that you may have to prove that the problem was inherent, and not a result of excessive use, wear and tear, damage, etc, and it may be neither easy nor cheap to do so.

Were it me, and were I sure that the reason for the failure wasn't due to damage, or rough handling, etc, then for something only a couple of weeks out of warranty, I'd be pushing Amazon on the basis of the Sale of Goods Act's "satisfactory quality" provisions. Obviously, be polite, and be reasonable, but also be firm and make it clear (if it is the case) that you don't think 12.5 months use is "satisfactory" ... after all, my Creative Labs players is about 3 years old and works like its brand new.

I'm not saying you'll get anywhere, but you might, and it certainly isn't the case that just because the warranty has expired that Amazon can wash their hands of the sale.

[Englander]

Well, in light of this new information, I reckon a new email is in order. Hopefully some good will come from it but we'll see

[Englander]

Just a little update, this is what they say about it breaking half a month after warranty is up: "As you used the product satisfactorily for a period of 12 months it is not established that the product did not conform to the contract (i.e. was defective) at the time of purchase."

They then went on to say that they wouldn't offer a full reimbursement but have offered £25 or £35 Amazon vouchers.

Have I got as much as I can from them or shall I remain adamant that it does not fall within the provisions set down by the Sale of Goods Act and go for a full refund?

Many many thanks to Saracen who's already netted me £35

[this_is_gav]

£25 or £35? Have they given you a choice?

[Lucio]

Personally, I'd accept their offer if I were you, it's a reasonable compromise between getting the unit refurbished and saves having to find an electrical engineer to testify that the unit hasn't lasted it's expected lifespan (and where you'd find one of those outside of Apple, who'se qualified enough I don't know)

[Hicks12]

he ment 25 cash or 35 credit i guess, id say its very fair since its not actually their product!. Use it to buy a quality mp3 player... Sandisk sansa clip+ is out shortly(out in america already) and the fuze is just awesum, picked mine up today!.

Didnt see you had an ipod touch that broke! A suitable replacement would be a cowon S9 8 or 16gb, tons better!.

[Saracen]

Just a little update, this is what they say about it breaking half a month after warranty is up: "As you used the product satisfactorily for a period of 12 months it is not established that the product did not conform to the contract (i.e. was defective) at the time of purchase."

They then went on to say that they wouldn't offer a full reimbursement but have offered £25 or £35 Amazon vouchers.

Have I got as much as I can from them or shall I remain adamant that it does not fall within the provisions set down by the Sale of Goods Act and go for a full refund?

Many many thanks to Saracen who's already netted me £35

You would be very lucky to get a "full" refund, and certainly, the Sale of Goods Act doesn't entitle you to it, not after anything but a fairly short period of time.

What Amazon have said about "conforming to contract" is also true ... if not the whole story. Essentially, if the product didn't "conform to contract" at the time of sale, you have a Sale of Goods Act claim, but it may not be easy to prove.

If a product packs up, either there is a reason for it doing so, like it's been abused, damaged, overused, etc, or there was a problem when it was sold. All things being equal, anything you buy should last a "reasonable" period of time. How long that is varies .... you wouldn't expect a banana to have the same durability as a new car. So ..... for your device, what would a court regard as "reasonable"? Probably several years, at least, though ultimately, only the court can say. So if it didn't last that long, why not? Cheap components? Faulty or poor quality manufacture? Or is it something that's happened to the goods after you got them?

So, putting it a bit simplistically, if the goods don't last a reasonable length of time, and the reason they didn't is something that was inherent in them at the time of sale (such as faulty components or poor quality manufacture), then they didn't "conform to contract" at the time of sale.

The issue is .... proving it.

And that is why Amazon are correct in saying that "it is not established" that they don't conform to contract, but that doesn't mean that that couldn't be established. If, for example, the fault is one that is common with that device, or was the subject of a product recall, it might be easy to establish it. But at this stage, it will be for you to prove that the goods didn't conform to contract, or it will be presumed that they did.

Essentially, consumer rights legislation in the UK says that for the first 6 months after purchase, t will be presumed that defective goods didn't conform to contract at the time of sale, unless the seller can prove they did (i.e. prove the fault is down to something you did). But after that 6-month cut-off, the burden of proof reverses and the presumption of the statute is that they did conform to contract, unless you can prove they did not. For you to prove that, you will probably need to get a report from an independent engineer .... and that needs to be by an engineer approved by the court, ands you will have to pay for it ... though you should get reimbursed if you win the case.

So, point 1) .... are you prepared to pursue the argument? If so, you need to argue your case a bit more with Amazon. And you need to be prepared, if necessary, to go through the hassle of makinga Small Claims court claim, and then probably enduring the risk of losing and having to pay for that report yourself.

Point 2) .... if you pursue tha case and win ... what will you get. It very likely won't be a full refund. A deduction would usually be made for use you've had from the product so far. So ...

- how long would the product be expected to last? For argument's sake, say 3 years.
- what did it cost? For argument's sake, £120.
- how long did it actually last? In round terms, 12 months.

So what benefit have you had? If it last 12 months and should have lasted 36 months, you've had one third (12/36ths) of the expected life, and in monetary terms, that's one third of £120, i.e. £40.

So your refund, if you get one, will be the cost (£120) less the benefit you've already had (£40) .... or a refund of around £80 .... plus, probably, your costs.

So, upside (based on those figures) ... a refund of about £80.

Downside? You lose the case, and pay the court costs. I haven't looked it up, but it'll be a fixed fee, probably of the order of £50 or so. But you also probably have to pay for that engineer's report, which could be a couple of hundred. You might also end up paying the other side's costs, but the nature of the small claims court is that unless you've been grossly unreasonable, they won't be able to claim professional legal fees like solicitors, so their costs should be fairly small.

The result of all that is that if you fight it and lose, it could cost you quite a bit more than you stand to gain if you fight in and win. And that doesn't take account of the time and hassle. So, on money grounds, it probably doesn't make sense to go as far as a court case. If you agree, you could go back to Amazon and say that while you don't disagree that conformity hasn't yet been established, that for a product such as this to fail in so short a period isn't reasonable, and that you are completely confident that the failure isn't anything to do with your handling or use of the product as you treat your possessions with considerable care and respect. Therefore, while you appreciate their offer, you feel that it's a short and doesn't represent a fair charge towards the use you've had from a product that should have lasted better than it does. As you want another player anyway, and it'll cost you £x from them, you feel that £y in vouchers would be fairer on both parties, and are they able to amend their offer in that way?

In other words, make clear that you're reasonable and not expecting the world, but ... negotiate.

I did take small claims court action against an insurance company years ago for less that you're talking about, but that was because they'd mucked me about, delayed and obfuscated for months and tried everything they could to duck out of a a claim when I knew I had them dead to rights. In other words, they annoyed me into be petty about it, and I nailed them for a sum that ultimately amounted to less than £30 in a disagreement over a three grand claim. Had they agreed the bulk of the claim straight away, I would have accepted a sensible offer, but having had months of hassle from them where I was convinced they were simply trying to wear me down, I decided that it was all or nothing and if it took a court case then, win or lose, so be it. Shot of settling in full, it WAS going to court, and I filled in the claim forms, faxed them a copy and, eventually, gave them a tight deadline. I meant it too. I got a cheque for the full amount by motorbike courier, and didn't even need to actually file the claim with the court.

I refer to my motives in the above as "principle", but in reality, they'd mucked me about to the point where I was so pee'd off with them that it was as much about petty anger as principle. It worked, though. On my side, though, was that the courts REALLY don't like dealing with cases that they don't have to, and if one side is being unreasonable, they usually get punished ... especially if that side is a big corporate jerking a lone consumer around, as in my case. I have good reason to expect the court would have clobbered the insurance company, had it gone to court, and that they knew that. In your case, Amazon have so far been pretty reasonble, so the same logic doesn't apply.

So, for what it's worth, my advice is ... it's not worth going to court over this. Were it me, I'd go back to Amazon with a comment something like the above, and try for a better offer. Legally (IMHO, and I'm not a lawyer) you have a good Sale of Goods Act case in principle, but being right in=s no good if you can't prove your case and I think you might have a job doing that.

If you go back to them and argue for a better offer, and do it politely, they're not likely to retract the offer they've already made, so you have little or nothing to lose by trying it. If they don't improve the offer, then you have to decide to either :-

- accept
- bluff
- be prepared to try the court route, and be prepared to risk losing.

Given that the product is so close to the warranty period, it might even be that you may win without that engineer's report, simply on the basis of the length of time, but that fails if Amazon could argue you'd abused the device, or it'd been harshly treated or battered. My three year (-ish) Creative Labs player is in excellent condition and would be hard to tell from brand new, because I'm very careful how I treat it. If yours is battered and scuffed, it won't enhance your chances.

So were it me, I'd present a reasonable and reasoned argument for why they should improve their offer, but if they didn't, in your circumstances, I'd probably take it. On the other hand, if they'd jerked me about the way that insurer did, I'd be quite prepared to take it to court even if I expected to lose because I know it'd cause them a lot more hassle and aggravation than it would me, and I'd cheerfully accept whatever it cost me just to know I'd been a right pain in the proverbial to them. If people treat me reasonably, I treat them the same way. Jerk me about and I can be nasty enough to return the treatment in any way I can.

[Saracen]

....

Many many thanks to Saracen who's already netted me £35

You're welcome. HEXUS esprit de corps strikes again.

[Englander]

Longest post in the world

Crikey, I'll report back with my comments on that post at the end of time, when I've finished reading it :S

EDIT: Before I begin, that was a very interesting post and I am greatly appreciative of the effort gone into posting it.

Anyway, you've made some very fair and reasonable comments but I'll begin with the discussion of taking them to court. I quite agree with you when you say "In your case, Amazon have so far been pretty reasonable" and hence I'm not interested in going as far as the court room (aside from the fact that I'm only 17 and am more concrned about going back to school on Monday!).

I am fairly pleased with their current offer, to the point where I already have a draft email ready to send which accepts the £35 (on the recommendation of Hicks and Lucio [and for clarification, it was £25 cash of £35 voucher]) which I would've sent tomorrow morning pending more replies to this thread over night. However, in light of this new development, I am tempted to negotiate for a bit more, if just out of curiosity's sake to see how they will respond. I'll try and boost them up to 50% of the initial cost of the iPod, which assumes that iPods should only live for 2 years and see what they say to that. In my previous email I was suggesting a full refund, which in hindsight may be a bit unfair to them as I have had very good usage out of the iPod over the last year (pretty much daily use, several hours a day - especially if I leave it on overnight playing music).

So, I think I'll start writing a new email now and will hopefully get a reply by tomorrow. If I win a few extra pounds, wahay, if I don't then I'll stick with the £35 which I'd still be content with *polite mode: on*

Thanks

[Lucio]

Crikey, I'll report back with my comments on that post at the end of time, when I've finished reading it :S

See ya in 2012!

[Englander]

See ya in 2012!

It only took 7 minutes in the end

Still, I've worked out that an offer of £35 assumes an expected lifespan of 484 days (here's my possibly dodgy maths: 170 (initial price excl. shipping) - 35 (voucher) = 135.
135/384 (number of days usage) = 35p per day
So £35 compensates me for an extra 100 days of use = 484 days, or 1.326 years.

In my email, I'm currently arguing that a lifespan of 2 years is a more reasonable expectation and am therefore requesting 50% of £170 (original price) i.e. £85. Quite a big jump from £35 but hopefully my logic and questionable maths will win them over