Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Found a loophole allowing for free Apple Watch. How do I let Apple know?
- Thread starter rfbandit
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Now that Apple has been made aware and had time to fix it, I can explain how the loophole works. I had a small defect in my watch and set up an Express Replacement. There was a hold placed on my card for $550, and my replacement watch was shipped. The hold fell off my card when I received the replacement watch, as opposed to when they get my defective watch. Since the hold was removed, I could've had my bank issue me a new debit card. This would prevent Apple from charging the full amount to my card if I didn't return the watch. The person I spoke with at Apple said their system was apparently marking the defective watch as received and removing the hold once it got delivery confirmation of the replacement watch. They are fixing the issue.
That's not so much of a loophole, more like you were committing fraud, had you been issued a new card that is.
What would be the difference between doing that and say, just not paying your bill. They would have caught you in the end and would have made you pay and/or be charged for fraud.
What would be the difference between doing that and say, just not paying your bill. They would have caught you in the end and would have made you pay and/or be charged for fraud.
Depending on the merchant account, typically its possible for the merchant to claim the funds anyways, if the pre-auth went through.
Now lots of banks are really good at raising red flags when authorizations come through for cards that have been cancelled.
But the way its designed is exactly to prevent fraud for both parties. So considering apple probably has a really good merchant account, I highly doubt they would not be able to collect the funds.
How it would work is the money would come out of your account, and you would have to enter a charge back. If you had cancelled your card, your bank would want to know why, and this would go down into the data collected during a charge back. Lots of banks would let you keep the money until the charge back goes through, but in this case you had no clear way of proving apple was trying to screw you. So you would lose the money, guaranteed.
Last edited:
I also agree, it's more like you are trading with someone, the other person gives you the thing and you promise that you will give your thing later. But you go to Mars so you end up having both things without giving him your thing.
The crux of it is that the authorization was fully removed when I got my replacement watch. So there's very little recourse at that point. What's stopping an unscrupulous person from calling up their bank after the pre-auth is fully dropped from their account and saying they lost their card? The point is: their system was marking the file incorrectly, and they're addressing it. I'm not out to commit fraud, and I'm not a thief. I just noticed a flaw in their process that could be exploited, and I wanted to make them aware of it.
I believe merchants can still capture pre-auth for up to 30 or 90 days depending on merchant account.
If this was possible to just cancel cards immediately after a pre-auth and not have charges go through, imagine rampant fraud everywhere.
For example, go out to a nice dinner, then immediately cancel your card. Sometimes busy restaurants don't settle till the next day.
There is a lot of recourse, for both merchants and consumers. This is how its designed, and one of the reasons cards are safer to use than cash.
So "pre-auth fully dropped" is not really a thing until (in apples case) 90 days goes through. Just because your bank doesn't show it pending doesn't really mean anything.
----------
Furthermore, think about all the apple watches that got pre-authed on April 10th, but aren't being billed till now.
Apple isn't making a new charge. They are capturing/settling the pre-auth from > 30 days ago.
bs answer, merchants can charge so * so called new card * also since they has your info like bank account and stuff which contents your ss and personal stuff. now if they do try to charge and it fails to go thru , they will contact your bank to see whats going on and when bank tells them you cancelled that card and issued yourself a new one they will charge that card without your permission since you pretty much did it on purpose in intending to scam them and possibily be held under laws of scamming and fraud which you could face in fines and i beilive it would be a chargeable offense that would stick with you for rest of your life lmao
Most of you are missing the point. The pre-auth was removed, and he had two watches in hand. It wasn't pending (which negates the restaurant example above).
Explain to me how the merchant can collect funds if the account is closed, rather than a new card being issued? I get that its fun to flame, but the reality is, it was a loophole and he did the right thing. Bravo for that.
Explain to me how the merchant can collect funds if the account is closed, rather than a new card being issued? I get that its fun to flame, but the reality is, it was a loophole and he did the right thing. Bravo for that.
I think the difference is, since the whole thing was automated, it wouldn't matter because most likely nobody would have noticed it. I'm not condoning it, and I think the 2nd watch should have been payment for catching the issue, but 'eh...
Why not? I just cancelled the Space gray sport order I placed a month ago, as the SS one I ordered YESTERDAY AFTERNOON has shipped and will deliver tomorrow.
Why not? I just cancelled the Space gray sport order I placed a month ago, as the SS one I ordered YESTERDAY AFTERNOON has shipped and will deliver tomorrow.
You can still be charged after an account is closed. I did that one time. I had a recurring monthly charge on my card. I tried to cancel, but the automated phone lines wouldn't let me. So I thought that I'd simply cancel my card. I did that. The next month, I received a statement/bill on a CLOSED ACCOUNT about a new charge that I was required to pay.
I've talked to banks since, and they said for 'recurring payments' you have authorized them previously and they'll continue to be charged even though accounts are closed.
This is different from what the original poster said, but they might be able to charge anyways, I don't know.
I agree. Bravo for him talking to Apple about this.
Well, yeah. It's really more of a "process deficiency" than a loophole.
Loopholes are legal: You can exploit them to your heart's delight and nobody can touch you. It may be unethical, but that's a different matter.
OTOH, exploiting a process deficiency to avoid paying would likely land you in court.
I think the only real loophole is if I want a second watch and I'm okay paying for it but I don't want to wait until July.
What's stopping them are laws which make this behavior a crime, usually a class III felony. You have committed fraud. Nothing more. Just because you say "I'm not out to commit fraud" doesn't mean you haven't. You have. And posted it to a public forum. There's nothing to exploit. If you don't believe me, just try to execute your "flaw" and we'll see how that works out for you.
To take a relevant example, I too noticed a "flaw" in most retail stores. You can personally pickup merchandise, and walk out the door without paying. (Or maybe you're clever, and conceal the merchandise before you walk out the door.) That's not a "flaw", that's shoplifting, aka theft. No different here.
Apple has always done express replacements that way.
I wonder how they'd close that "loophole?"
I guess by charging everyone the full amount, then refunding it later.
Good grief.
This is why we cannot have nice things.
----------
Yup. That's the real loophole. And, in my mind, not theft if you're paying for it.
It's questionable, mind you, but definitely not theft.
More like impatience.
The Executive Relations Team at Apple sounds like a really prestigious title, but this forum makes me think those people spend their entire time either placating or validating people crazy enough to think Tim will read their message and say "Holy ****, get this man on a private jet to Cupertino ASAP!"
Forget the argument about the loophole, how did you get Apple to do an express replacement?
I had an issue and needed my watch replaced and they wouldn't allow me to do express. They told me to send my watch in and wait 3-4 weeks for a replacement....I even escalated the issue to advanced customer care (or whatever that department is called at apple) and they still wouldn't allow it.
I had an issue and needed my watch replaced and they wouldn't allow me to do express. They told me to send my watch in and wait 3-4 weeks for a replacement....I even escalated the issue to advanced customer care (or whatever that department is called at apple) and they still wouldn't allow it.
Apple could remotely brick and disable your stolen Apple Watch. Or send collections against you. This is a none issue.
