3 ms·
WOW, 5 years for a smartphone? I'm all for longer warranties but honestly that seems excessive to enforce. There's no way an even 4 year old smartphone wouldn't
by givinguflac 10y ago
WOW, 5 years for a smartphone? I'm all for longer warranties but honestly that seems excessive to enforce. There's no way an even 4 year old smartphone wouldn't have at least some consumer caused damage. How do they account for that? If I beat the hell out of my phone but still insist there's "a problem" they have to just eat the cost?
- shakna 10y agoNot guaranteed if you caused the damage. Its against manufacturing defects, and designed to fight planned obsolescence. EDIT: Most warranties here don't cover consumer-caused damage either. If they do, extended warranty makes sense, but it's few and far between.
- jay_kyburz 10y agoThose times look a little exaggerated to me. My understanding is that it will be up to the magistrate to decide what is a reasonable life expectancy of a device. (Based on how the product was marketed and sold)
- shakna 10y agoYes, a magistrate decides. The times listed already have a set precedent. What goes into deciding reasonableness usually involves: * Cost of product vs average income of average household * Reliability advertised * Average income of the targeted audience * Audience reliance upon the product As a quick example, an iPhone sells for about $1400, which is about 2% of the average income, and is a daily use item. The device breaking causes disruption to the consumer, and has already cost a somewhat sizeable part of their income. They're entitled to the time necessary to offset such a purchase, and interest rates and insurance rates are used as the guide here. Both of which use 4.8 years for 2%.