Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The thing to remember here is they are not YOUR devices.

You never took delivery of them, they have been stolen from Apple. In turn Apple are essentially stealing your money by not delivering what you ordered.

IANAL, but I suspect responsibility for the items may depend on who requested UberEats do the pickup. If Apple did, then I would consider it Apple's problem since they are the ones chasing the delivery service; if the OP did it with UberEats outside of Apple then it is an issue with UberEats since the OP authorized them to take possession from Apple.
 
IANAL, but I suspect responsibility for the items may depend on who requested UberEats do the pickup. If Apple did, then I would consider it Apple's problem since they are the ones chasing the delivery service; if the OP did it with UberEats outside of Apple then it is an issue with UberEats since the OP authorized them to take possession from Apple.
Consumer law on the sale of goods is the same in many many countries and that is when a consumer buys a product off a company, this creates a 'contract of sale' between the seller and the buyer. Consumer advocacy groups have said time and time again that consumers are not to deal with the delivery company/courier because it is not their responsibility. Every company will have in it's terms and conditions of sale a section on items going missing or not delivered. The consumer is to follow what it say's in that section of the terms and conditions.

In the OP's case, someone kindly posted a section of Apple's terms and conditions on lost/stolen items and it clearly states, and I quote 'the risk of loss of, or damage to, product(s) shall pass to you when you, or a person designated by you, acquires physical possession of the product(s)'. The OP did not take physical possession of the macbooks therefore that section of the terms and conditions becomes invalid which means liability returns back to Apple. No one knows the step by step procedure of investigation that Apple carries out when an item is reported missing/stolen because only Apple knows the procedure. Did the Apple lady dealing with the case follow the procedure properly or did she miss a few things out? The only way to know that is if the OP took out a breach of contract case against Apple because a lawyer would be able to ask to see the procedure but doing so is going to cost way way more than the cost of 2 macbooks.

the OP is stuck in the middle of two decision makers who do not want to talk to the police who have the evidence to prove the macbooks were not delivered under Apples terms and conditions of sale 'acquires physical possession of the product(s)'. All it would take is a simple phone call to the police from the bank dealing with the chargeback, 'Hello I am X from bank (name), I am the one handling a chargeback case for (name of OP), the police case number x. The (name of OP) informs me there is CCTV video evidence that the products were not actually delivered to (name of OP). can you confirm this is correct'. All the police officer who saw the CCTV footage has to say is 'Yes' then that's it, job done as far as the bank is concerned, chargeback approved regardless of what Apple say.
 
Just spoke with bank to see if Apple responded to the dispute and they didnt. Dispute was logged Nov 7th and Apple has 35 days from this day (I previously stated it was 3 months).

I asked the bank if they wanted the police report number and I stated the police have the cctv footage and they said no. If Apple disputes I have a chance to then provide my evidence and it's VISA that makes the final decision not the bank.

The most frustrating part is these companies are somehow making the distinction that drivers gps at address of building = package was handed to customer. Yes it gives them an out but if anyone has any damn empathy one would look at this situation and say, maybe we should ask for more evidence.
 
Last edited:
Just spoke with bank to see if Apple responded to the dispute and they didnt. Dispute was logged Nov 7th and Apple has 35 days from this day (I previously stated it was 3 months).

I asked the bank if they wanted the police report number and I stated the police have the cctv footage and they said no. If Apple disputes I have a chance to then provide my evidence and it's VISA that makes the final decision not the bank.

The most frustrating part is these companies are somehow making the distinction that drivers gps at address of building = package was handed to customer. Yes it gives them an out but if anyone has any damn empathy one would look at this situation and say, maybe we should ask for more evidence.
I cannot understand why the the bank (now disclosed as VISA) keeps saying no to wanting the police number and the CCTV. VISA would be able to make an instant decision if they contacted the police. They do not need to wait because it allows Apple to wind down the 35 days being on the 34th day they contact VISA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Six0Four
Finally got someone nice at Apple management. She let me explain the whole situation for 20 minutes. She said it is very odd that Apple relations turned their back on me and she is sending this up for another escalation and someone may contact me. She gave me the proper number for the Police to call that the Apple relations lady would not give me. This lady I just spoke to said she documented everything we talked about.

She said just because Apple closed the investigation doesnt necessarily mean Apple will dispute the chargeback.

She said it will be very helpful if the Police call in to this number. Once verified as law enforcement they will be transferred to people that handle these cases.

About the serial numbers, I seem to remember her mentioning nothing can be done because there is no Apple Care or something to this effect.

The only issue is trying to get the Police to sit and call Apple and have the patience to jump through their hoops. These are Downtown street cops that have violent crime happening so how much work they want to put in for this theft is anyones guess.
 
I cannot understand why the the bank (now disclosed as VISA) keeps saying no to wanting the police number and the CCTV. VISA would be able to make an instant decision if they contacted the police. They do not need to wait because it allows Apple to wind down the 35 days being on the 34th day they contact VISA.
It is easier for the bank or VISA to wait for the decision from Apple. If Apple agrees to the charge back, then the bank does not have to bother with the police and info from the client. If Apple disputes the chargeback, which seems likely, then the bank or VISA will have to deal with the info provided by the client. The bank has no issue with waiting the 35 days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert
Finally got someone nice at Apple management. She let me explain the whole situation for 20 minutes. She said it is very odd that Apple relations turned their back on me and she is sending this up for another escalation and someone may contact me. She gave me the proper number for the Police to call that the Apple relations lady would not give me. This lady I just spoke to said she documented everything we talked about.

She said just because Apple closed the investigation doesnt necessarily mean Apple will dispute the chargeback.

She said it will be very helpful if the Police call in to this number. Once verified as law enforcement they will be transferred to people that handle these cases.

About the serial numbers, I seem to remember her mentioning nothing can be done because there is no Apple Care or something to this effect.

The only issue is trying to get the Police to sit and call Apple and have the patience to jump through their hoops. These are Downtown street cops that have violent crime happening so how much work they want to put in for this theft is anyones guess.
Perhaps someone at Apple started to get the whole picture and saw this not ending well for them.
 
Perhaps someone at Apple started to get the whole picture and saw this not ending well for them.

Probably some intern who knows that $2500 is a substantial amount of money for most people. The Apple employees who first dealt with the customer in a dismissive manner are overpaid entitled pricks with Apple shares and Teslas in the parking lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ericdjensen
You think they could do this? Just block the devices off my request? I can try but in the end I dont know what this will achieve aside from the thief getting screwed which isnt a bad thing. Or the person that bought them off the thief...
You are identified as the individual who purchased the MacBooks, which makes you the owner. The invoice is in your name, so you have every right to assert this. Why not take the matter up with Apple Canada?

Also, instead of speaking to an unseen person over the phone, consider writing to them. You could send the letter via registered mail, if that service is still offered by Canada Post.

You live in a high-rise, so the Uber Eats delivery person will need to come up to your door to deliver the parcel. If you've ordered a pizza, they'll have to come up and knock on your door to hand it over.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: zkap
You are identified as the individual who purchased the MacBooks, which makes you the owner. The invoice is in your name, so you have every right to assert this. Why not take the matter up with Apple Canada?

I think he should avoid asserting ownership over the items as that would undermine the argument that he is not liable for their loss since he never took possession of them. He should continue with the argument that it was up to Apple to get them into his hands. Whatever happened before then was their responsibility and it's up to them to figure out how to deal with it.
 
I think he should avoid asserting ownership over the items as that would undermine the argument that he is not liable for their loss since he never took possession of them. He should continue with the argument that it was up to Apple to get them into his hands. Whatever happened before then was their responsibility and it's up to them to figure out how to deal with it.
If Apple believes that the MacBooks were delivered and considers the case closed, it’s entirely reasonable for the person who paid for them to request that those MacBooks be blocked. That’s one of the reasons I suggested seeking legal advice. Speaking over the phone with unseen representatives is unlikely to yield any results. There are plenty of places in Edmonton that offer free legal advice, including services provided by the City. It’s been 20 days now, and $2,500 CAD is a significant amount of money!
 
Consumer law on the sale of goods is the same in many many countries and that is when a consumer buys a product off a company, this creates a 'contract of sale' between the seller and the buyer. Consumer advocacy groups have said time and time again that consumers are not to deal with the delivery company/courier because it is not their responsibility. Every company will have in it's terms and conditions of sale a section on items going missing or not delivered. The consumer is to follow what it say's in that section of the terms and conditions.

In the OP's case, someone kindly posted a section of Apple's terms and conditions on lost/stolen items and it clearly states, and I quote 'the risk of loss of, or damage to, product(s) shall pass to you when you, or a person designated by you
That could be key. Did the OP arrange the pickup or Apple. If it was the OP then that may make UberEats “a person designated by you,” just as if you sent a friend you had authorized for pickup.

This isn’t a case of Apple arranging a doorstep delivery via FedEx et al where I expect them to be responsible.
 
That could be key. Did the OP arrange the pickup or Apple. If it was the OP then that may make UberEats “a person designated by you,” just as if you sent a friend you had authorized for pickup.

This isn’t a case of Apple arranging a doorstep delivery via FedEx et al where I expect them to be responsible.

In the original first posting the OP clearly states "Paid for their [Apple's] same day delivery service which they [Apple] use Uber for".
I added the '[Apple]' parts in the previous quote, because that is how I interprete it.

Also it is clarified in various other posts in this thread that the OP did not choose the Uber delivery him/herself but Apple did.

Seems to me that Apple arranged this delivery via Uber and therefore the responsibility lies with Apple.
 
Last edited:
In the original first posting the OP clearly states "Paid for their [Apple's] same day delivery service which they [Apple] use Uber for".
I added the '[Apple]' parts in the previous quote, because that is how I interprete it.

Also it is clarified in various other posts in this thread that the OP did not choose the Uber delivery him/herself but Apple did.

Seems to me that Apple arranged this delivery via Uber and therefore the responsibility lies with Apple.

Yea, then I would expect it's Apple's problem. I am surprised they don't require a signature.
 
Yea, then I would expect it's Apple's problem. I am surprised they don't require a signature.
It's rather peculiar, isn't it? I had to provide a PIN number to the courier to collect the package from Apple.
 
It's rather peculiar, isn't it? I had to provide a PIN number to the courier to collect the package from Apple.

I do this for Amazon but it doesnt stop theft from a driver. It stops it being delivered to the wrong place.
 
I do this for Amazon but it doesnt stop theft from a driver. It stops it being delivered to the wrong place.
The driver can't enter a PIN number he doesn't know, can he? The PIN is generated by the system and sent to the recipient's phone.
 
The driver can't enter a PIN number he doesn't know, can he? The PIN is generated by the system and sent to the recipient's phone.

How does the driver know you have the right pin? He just enters what you say in the system and if it takes it takes?
 
How does the driver know you have the right pin? He just enters what you say in the system and if it takes it takes?
When he enters the correct PIN number into the system, it allows him to hand over the parcel. It's the system that does that, not the driver. Only the recipient knows the correct PIN number, as it is sent to their phone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
When he enters the correct PIN number into the system, it allows him to hand over the parcel. It's the system that does that, not the driver. Only the recipient knows the correct PIN number, as it is sent to their phone.

Oh ok my bad. Can't understand why Apple doesnt do this with UberEats. But dont know why they use UberEats in the first place.
 
Oh ok my bad. Can't understand why Apple doesnt do this with UberEats. But dont know why they use UberEats in the first place.
If you look at one of my earlier posts the information is in the link i provided. A company called PostMaster used to be Apples local delivery courier but Uber bought the company in 2020. Apple kept the contract going hence Uber became Apple's local deliver courier.
 
Just spoke with the cop on my case and he said he was reviewing the CCTV footage and he said "Unfortunately it added nothing relevant to the file", since it just shows tenants of the building going in and out. But then said it is a good thing for me since it "reinforces the fact you did not receive what you paid for". He was thinking of it from a cops point of view in catching the thief, footage not being much help.

He will be calling Apple probably on Monday to let them know.

Was just thinking, Apple is probably one of VISA's biggest customers so if it comes down to a dispute between them and I.... 😳

Good thing I have a cop on my side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eriamjh1138@DAN
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.