booked battery replacement under AppleCare+ but expired at the time of my appointment

[lmfy2k]

Sorry you're having a hard time with them. How employees are incapable of understanding simple terms and conditions is beyond me

Basically, if the battery within the 1 year limited warranty drops below 80% and it hasn't met the 500 cycles minimum, it is considered faulty and would be replaced under warranty.
If you have the insurance (Applecare or Appecare+), in order to make it slightly more competitive with other insurance options they added on the bonus of having a free battery when it falls below 80% regardless of cycles.

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/iphone/repair/service

At the bottom of that page is breaks it down.

- The Apple Limited Warranty covers a battery that fails from an issue in manufacturing, but it doesn’t cover batteries that wear out from normal use.

- If your iPhone is covered by an AppleCare plan and the battery holds less than 80 per cent of its original capacity, we’ll service your product at no charge.

Applecare/Applecare+ do not take cycles into account, merely the 80% cut off. Again, sorry to hear you're having a hard time with them, this is literally Applecare 101 and they should know better

Many Thanks mate, il see what they reply with

 

[lmfy2k]

Result! Got a reply just now, they made me wait 12 hours though lol

Thanks for your email,

Looking at your case and the fact that your battery issue was reported within the warranty period, we agree that a system override to cover the battery replacement under warranty is applicable in your case.

In order to resolve this we will need you to return to store and we will process a refund for the battery replacement.

thanks all for your assistance!

 

[VaderDSL]

Hooray! Great news, although they should have sorted this from the get go!

 

[lmfy2k]

Hooray! Great news, although they should have sorted this from the get go!

Thanks for your help mate. It’s much appreciated

 

[flea.rider]

AND WHY DO PEOPLE BUY APPLE ? just for the run around .. and time on the phone ?

 

[lmfy2k]

AND WHY DO PEOPLE BUY APPLE ? just for the run around .. and time on the phone ?

No brand is perfect. There will always be some good and bad experiences.

 

[Squink]

AND WHY DO PEOPLE BUY APPLE ? just for the run around .. and time on the phone ?

Try dealing with Samsung. Apple’s customer service might screw up every once in a while. With Samsung, it’s a way of life.

 

[tom_e]

AND WHY DO PEOPLE BUY APPLE ? just for the run around .. and time on the phone ?

Good luck claiming a wear and tear battery replacement from any other brand...

 

[Alpherah]

The issue in this instance was that prices are set at the time service is created, not when the Appt is booked.
The technician got confused because systematically it wouldn’t show them you even had Apple care plus as it’s now expired - without digging deeper.

Legal T&C’s state the policy is only applicable at the point of service so long as still in coverage.
For better or worse - my store wouldn’t have agreed to cover the battery, nor refunded even if requested by Apple care - as rubbish as it seems - as there’s a big drive for retail stores to get back to sticking to policy to create a consistent experience.

For future reference - Apple Care are unable to override the decision of the retail store if the case is logged correctly (not just in matters like this - but in any cases - without a special department finding a clear error in following policy which this wouldn’t have been)


Tldr - get service before your left in this predicament

 

[Rainmaker]

The issue in this instance was that prices are set at the time service is created, not when the Appt is booked.
The technician got confused because systematically it wouldn’t show them you even had Apple care plus as it’s now expired - without digging deeper.

Legal T&C’s state the policy is only applicable at the point of service so long as still in coverage.
For better or worse - my store wouldn’t have agreed to cover the battery, nor refunded even if requested by Apple care - as rubbish as it seems - as there’s a big drive for retail stores to get back to sticking to policy to create a consistent experience.

For future reference - Apple Care are unable to override the decision of the retail store if the case is logged correctly (not just in matters like this - but in any cases - without a special department finding a clear error in following policy which this wouldn’t have been)


Tldr - get service before your left in this predicament

Apple's T&C don't trump the law though, do they. AppleCare+ is a paid insurance product, subject to all the same legal requirements. If a policy is in force and a policyholder makes the insurer (Apple) aware that a claim has arisen during the covered period (for example by completing an appointment for service on the Apple website, which is linked to the AC+ status), then when that insurer gets around to fitting the claimant in for an appointment is legally irrelevant, surely?

As well as wanting to install spyware on users' devices, are Apple now becoming a company that argues the toss, resulting in customers routinely needing to fall back on the law and escalation to get simple paid for services rendered? I'm asking as someone with 5 iPhones, 2 iPads, an iPad Pro and MacBook Pro - all of which are covered under AC+ and three of which are due imminent replacement. Apple's CSAM nonsense already has me reconsidering the replacements being Apple. This would be a cherry on the top.

 

[Hasnath]

A tip that has worked for a friend of mine is that he always found if you booked the last slot on a Saturday, the staff pretty much always turn a blind eye and do any warranty stuff regardless just so they can leave on time.

 

[Reuben klang]

Result! Got a reply just now, they made me wait 12 hours though lol



thanks all for your assistance!

Awesome that’s great news. Don’t know why they didn’t just do it in the first place though. Seems like a deliberate fault in their system to try make money as it should be a simple algorithm that sorts it.

 

[OldKitMan]

Good luck claiming a wear and tear battery replacement from any other brand...

My son had an Samsung S8 which was still in the 2 year warranty period, there was significant screen burn which was covered so we went to the Samsung shop in Edinburgh and they replaced the screen and also swapped the battery for a new one FOC without us even asking.

 

[Feek]

Apple's T&C don't trump the law though, do they. AppleCare+ is a paid insurance product, subject to all the same legal requirements. If a policy is in force and a policyholder makes the insurer (Apple) aware that a claim has arisen during the covered period (for example by completing an appointment for service on the Apple website, which is linked to the AC+ status), then when that insurer gets around to fitting the claimant in for an appointment is legally irrelevant, surely?

As well as wanting to install spyware on users' devices, are Apple now becoming a company that argues the toss, resulting in customers routinely needing to fall back on the law and escalation to get simple paid for services rendered? I'm asking as someone with 5 iPhones, 2 iPads, an iPad Pro and MacBook Pro - all of which are covered under AC+ and three of which are due imminent replacement. Apple's CSAM nonsense already has me reconsidering the replacements being Apple. This would be a cherry on the top.

It sounds like someone just made a mistake. It happens.

 

[Alpherah]

Apple's T&C don't trump the law though, do they. AppleCare+ is a paid insurance product, subject to all the same legal requirements. If a policy is in force and a policyholder makes the insurer (Apple) aware that a claim has arisen during the covered period (for example by completing an appointment for service on the Apple website, which is linked to the AC+ status), then when that insurer gets around to fitting the claimant in for an appointment is legally irrelevant, surely?

As well as wanting to install spyware on users' devices, are Apple now becoming a company that argues the toss, resulting in customers routinely needing to fall back on the law and escalation to get simple paid for services rendered? I'm asking as someone with 5 iPhones, 2 iPads, an iPad Pro and MacBook Pro - all of which are covered under AC+ and three of which are due imminent replacement. Apple's CSAM nonsense already has me reconsidering the replacements being Apple. This would be a cherry on the top.

Booking an appointment for service isn’t the same as making the company aware of an intention to make a claim.
Intention to make a claim would be calling Apple care and arranging for service on the device - like how any normal insurance policy works

 

[Rainmaker]

Booking an appointment for service isn’t the same as making the company aware of an intention to make a claim.
Intention to make a claim would be calling Apple care and arranging for service on the device - like how any normal insurance policy works

In this case that's exactly what booking in your Apple device, via Apple's website, which confirms you're covered by Apple's insurance, is. Whether you call or use the web service (provided specifically for that purpose, and which confirms your AC+ status) is irrelevant. I'm deaf and have speech difficulties - are you saying my AC+ insurance is useless because I can't physically call to arrange service under the policy? Nonsense. When we had a burst pipe a couple of years ago, my home insurer didn't refuse to pay out because I asked for repairs via the website - they just sent someone around and paid for a new floor.

I'd wager a court wouldn't agree with you, and it's also somewhat moot. You can make a claim after any policy lapses, for a claimable incident which arose within the period of insurance. For example - given that the seller, insurer and repairer are all the same party here - by turning up for a pre-booked service and saying 'this was insured by you at the time I made you aware of the need for repair'.

If someone does a hit and run in their car, and their identity is discovered a few months later (it happens), do you really think the insurer gets to say 'Ah but the policy is lapsed now'? No, any damages or claimable incident arising within the period covered is legally the insurer's responsibility. Again, this would qualify, as you made the intention clear when you booked a service appointment within the AC+ policy period - and I'd be willing to stand a court case on the fact. Luckily, the store saw sense in the OP's case.

What are you suggesting the OP should have done? Call Apple and specifically state that he wanted it noted that he was covered and wanted a new battery? I've done that - they just tell you to make an appointment online (COVID fun) or they are happy to do it for you on the phone there and then. The Apple website literally pops up to say your device is covered, and then offers an appointment. Are you a manager at the Apple store? Your recalcitrant stance on this is disconcerting if it reflects wider Apple policy. As Feek said, I was rather hoping/assuming the store simply made a mistake. You seem too be pushing hard that it's policy and it's correct.

 

[lmfy2k]

It sounds like someone just made a mistake. It happens.

OP here, I dealt with 2 different sales stuff and both kept using the word “consumed”, I guess they are told to use it as buzz word.

not had chance to go back this weekend. Tbh with the 13 launch, I didn’t really want to attempt it, will pop in tomorrow for the refund.