Applecare+ is NOT what they advertise regarding accidental damage

[Psyclism]

I’m not sure majority of people are like that.

Not saying I'd do that either, but the thought would certainly cross my mind.

 

[riotrhythm]

Apple's rule is that it has to impede functionality. Same goes for my watch. Had a scratch on the screen and they told me it would have to be physically damaged to the point where I cannot use it properly to cover under AppleCare.

 

[hipnetic]

You're dropping it wrong.

 

[iAmRod]

You're 100% correct that this is certainly what the policy states (and now I know), but it's not at ALL what Apple implies with their language on the sales portion of the Applecare page. Nowhere on the sales page do they state that the device has to "fail due to accidental damage". Just that "accidental damage" is covered. That is disingenuous at best.

Really am sorry you had to learn this "the hard way". But it is a "sales" page, it's not the actual wording of the agreement. Your story is a good example of always read the fine print before you buy... these guys are in it to make money, not save you any of yours. (sorry for sounding so cynical.. that's not directed at you.. it really irks me to hear a story like yours, so can only imagine how it bothers you)

 

[konqerror]

What they're doing is incentivizing people to make what would be an otherwise relatively inexpensive fix into something truly catastrophic and costly. Won't fix my dented and scratched up lid? Ok, I'll drop it from a third story balcony and make sure it fits within their "requirements".

"accidentally" run it over with your car, then it won't be functional...

And then you learn that the contract (see post above) says damage from "handling" and catastrophic damage by throwing it off a balcony or running it over with a car is not "accidental damage from handling" (and is insurance fraud). Thereby saving Apple money.

Search in the forums, been examples of denied claims because of this.

 

[jerryk]

Always read the entire contract before signing.

 

[mightyjabba]

I'd be interested to see what OP's machine actually looks like. But I feel like if Apple is going to charge $379 for AppleCare+ plus $299 for an "other" repair (limited to two instances, remember), it's not unreasonable at all to expect them to cover cases like this. It's really the $99 "enclosure damage" part that seems a little suspect, because I would think that there are few cases where enclosure damage would adversely affect functionality. In what kinds of cases would this $99 fee apply then?

 

[CE3]

Just drop it again

In the bathtub.

 

[mikethebigo]

To all of you saying they should cause additional catastrophic damage to justify the repair, the ironic thing is there is also a clause in the agreement that says that catastrophic damage from liquid or crushing is also not covered 😂

Found a thread where someone spilled coffee on his Mac, which is exactly the kind of thing I bought AC+ for, but apparently the Apple Store refused to cover repair despite AC+ because there was too much damage.

Sounds like OP just can't win. And it sounds like the contract is designed so Apple kind of always has a way out if they want to use it.

 

[CE3]

To all of you saying they should cause additional catastrophic damage to justify the repair, the ironic thing is there is also a clause in the agreement that says that catastrophic damage from liquid or crushing is also not covered ?

Found a thread where someone spilled coffee on his Mac, which is exactly the kind of thing I bought AC+ for, but apparently the Apple Store refused to cover repair despite AC+ because there was too much damage.

Sounds like OP just can't win. And it sounds like the contract is designed so Apple kind of always has a way out if they want to use it.

I’ve never had to file an ADH claim, but the accidental handling protection they advertise is also one of the major reasons I’ve opted for AppleCare+ many times. Clearly I was a fool to not read the fine print believing their plans were better than this.

 

[konqerror]

To all of you saying they should cause additional catastrophic damage to justify the repair, the ironic thing is there is also a clause in the agreement that says that catastrophic damage from liquid or crushing is also not covered ?

Found a thread where someone spilled coffee on his Mac, which is exactly the kind of thing I bought AC+ for, but apparently the Apple Store refused to cover repair despite AC+ because there was too much damage.

Provide the citation please. Because spills are specifically mentioned as covered.

If during the Plan Term you submit a valid claim notifying Apple that the Covered Device has failed due to accidental damage from handling resulting from an unexpected and unintentional external event (e.g., drops and damages caused by liquid contact from spills) (“ADH”),

 

[junkw]

Provide the citation please. Because spills are specifically mentioned as covered.

3. What is not Covered?


Apple will not provide Hardware Service or ADH Service in the following circumstances:


(b) to protect against excessive or catastrophic physical damage to Covered Equipment (e.g., products that have been crushed or bent) or excessive or catastrophic damage to Covered Equipment caused by liquid contact (e.g., products that have been partially or wholly submerged in liquid);


https://www.apple.com/legal/sales-support/applecare/applecareplus/docs/applecareplusmac_caen_tc.html

 

[konqerror]

3. What is not Covered?


Apple will not provide Hardware Service or ADH Service in the following circumstances:


(b) to protect against excessive or catastrophic physical damage to Covered Equipment (e.g., products that have been crushed or bent) or excessive or catastrophic damage to Covered Equipment caused by liquid contact (e.g., products that have been partially or wholly submerged in liquid);


https://www.apple.com/legal/sales-support/applecare/applecareplus/docs/applecareplusmac_caen_tc.html

Yes, if you read previous posts, I am aware of catastrophic damage like dropping it into a swimming pool. However, your quote still doesn't prove the previous poster's claim about coffee spills not being covered.

 

[mikethebigo]

3. What is not Covered?


Apple will not provide Hardware Service or ADH Service in the following circumstances:


(b) to protect against excessive or catastrophic physical damage to Covered Equipment (e.g., products that have been crushed or bent) or excessive or catastrophic damage to Covered Equipment caused by liquid contact (e.g., products that have been partially or wholly submerged in liquid);


https://www.apple.com/legal/sales-support/applecare/applecareplus/docs/applecareplusmac_caen_tc.html

Yep, and here's the thread I referred to.

https://www.reddit.com/r/mac/comments/8g6cme [automerge]1576034973[/automerge]

Yes, if you read previous posts, I am aware of catastrophic damage like dropping it into a swimming pool. However, your quote still doesn't prove the previous poster's claim about coffee spills not being covered.

See here, it didn't have to be submerged, it just had to be too costly to repair from the coffee spill. Notice in the terms, partial or whole submersion is just an example. They don't cover any liquid damage that causes "excessive or catastrophic damage." So even if just a splash of liquid totally borks your computer, Apple is within their right to deny repair.

 

[RumorConsumer]

Simply because too many people took advantage of Apple being generous with their replacements.

As a person who was generous but judicious it was more a boundaries issue than a "took advantage of" issue.

 

[konqerror]

Yep, and here's the thread I referred to.

https://www.reddit.com/r/mac/comments/8g6cme [automerge]1576034973[/automerge]

See here, it didn't have to be submerged, it just had to be too costly to repair from the coffee spill. Notice in the terms, partial or whole submersion is just an example. They don't cover any liquid damage that causes "excessive or catastrophic damage." So even if just a splash of liquid totally borks your computer, Apple is within their right to deny repair.

I suspect there's a second side of the story, like a scratch on the case wasn't covered so he put it in a swimming pool. Again, spills are explicitly listed as ADH.

Also cited post is in Japan. AppleCare+ might be different there. It's heavily regulated as insurance in the US.

 

[mikethebigo]

I suspect there's a second side of the story, like a scratch on the case wasn't covered so he put it in a swimming pool. Again, spills are explicitly listed as ADH.

Also cited post is in Japan. AppleCare+ might be different there. It's heavily regulated as insurance in the US.

Take a look one more time at the terms

excessive or catastrophic damage to Covered Equipment caused by liquid contact (e.g., products that have been partially or wholly submerged in liquid);

So spills are covered, unless the damage is excessive or catastrophic. The submersion thing is an e.g. - meaning it's not the limit of the term, it's just one example. Any liquid damage that totals the computer, according to the terms, is not covered as it is the definition of "catastrophic damage."

 

[Psyclism]

Take a look one more time at the terms

excessive or catastrophic damage to Covered Equipment caused by liquid contact (e.g., products that have been partially or wholly submerged in liquid);

So spills are covered, unless the damage is excessive or catastrophic. The submersion thing is an e.g. - meaning it's not the limit of the term, it's just one example. Any liquid damage that totals the computer, according to the term, is not covered as it is the definition of "catastrophic damage."

Which is total and absolute crap, as far as I'm concerned. These laptops are composed of 3 primary components - the motherboard, the battery/case/keyboard assembly and the topcase/screen. A thimble of water dropped onto the keyboard that shorts out even a single capacitor in the motherboard would be an unrepairable catastrophic failure requiring the replacement of the entire motherboard, including CPU, memory and SSD. So basically Apple is saying "we cover liquid damage as long as the liquid doesn't do any damage". If this is the case, then AppleCare+ is a total con-job and isn't worth the paper it's printed on. They'll cover accidental drops, as long as the accidental drop causes functional damage, BUT if the functional damage is actually going to require them to replace anything then its catastrophic damage and won't be covered. Total and complete BS

 

[junkw]

Also cited post is in Japan. AppleCare+ might be different there. It's heavily regulated as insurance in the US.

I actually translated the Japan Version and it seems about the same for the liquid clauses.
[automerge]1576036811[/automerge]

Which is total and absolute crap, as far as I'm concerned. These laptops are composed of 3 primary components - the motherboard, the battery/case/keyboard assembly and the topcase/screen. A thimble of water dropped onto the keyboard that shorts out even a single capacitor in the motherboard would be an unrepairable catastrophic failure requiring the replacement of the entire motherboard, including CPU, memory and SSD. So basically Apple is saying "we cover liquid damage as long as the liquid doesn't do any damage". If this is the case, then AppleCare+ is a total con-job and isn't worth the paper it's printed on. They'll cover accidental drops, as long as the accidental drop causes functional damage, BUT if the functional damage is actually going to require them to replace anything then its catastrophic damage and won't be covered. Total and complete BS

Maybe they take into account how many indicators are triggered

 

[junkw]

Spill your coffee where there is no Liquid Contact Indicators ;-)

 

[Pepe4life]

So Apple basically put out an AppleCare+ plan to replace the original AppleCare product, jacked up the price, while denying coverage for most accidental damages. Tim Cook is truly a crooked person.

 

[Lobwedgephil]

If I was OP I would really try again with another genius, while technically this may not be covered, most of the time they actually will cover this or something similar.

 

[matram]

Could we get a picture of the OP’s ”severe scratches and dents” to understand what cosmetic damages we are discussing?

 

[Falcon80]

If I was OP I would really try again with another genius, while technically this may not be covered, most of the time they actually will cover this or something similar.

I believe it is not going to help because they will check the history log and if it has been previously rejected, they will just follow that decision to save the trouble.

 

[mikethebigo]

Which is total and absolute crap, as far as I'm concerned. These laptops are composed of 3 primary components - the motherboard, the battery/case/keyboard assembly and the topcase/screen. A thimble of water dropped onto the keyboard that shorts out even a single capacitor in the motherboard would be an unrepairable catastrophic failure requiring the replacement of the entire motherboard, including CPU, memory and SSD. So basically Apple is saying "we cover liquid damage as long as the liquid doesn't do any damage". If this is the case, then AppleCare+ is a total con-job and isn't worth the paper it's printed on. They'll cover accidental drops, as long as the accidental drop causes functional damage, BUT if the functional damage is actually going to require them to replace anything then its catastrophic damage and won't be covered. Total and complete BS

To be fair to Apple, if these stipulations were not in the agreement, I could see far more 1-2 year old MacBooks having "accidental" coffee spills on them if it meant it was a cheap way to get an essentially brand new machine out of it.