iPhone 15 Pro Max Returned my iPhone 15 pro max

[MagicBird]

it’s funny how this very inhuman clinging to often not legally enforceable terms and conditions.

Inhuman… trade in T&C’s are inhuman? That’s a bit of a first world gen Z thing to say Have you been watching the news lately to see what is going on in other places across the globe?

 

[blkjedi954]

I kept my 13 pro max and happy with my decision will upgrade when the 16 comes.

Still have my 11 Pro Max, 512gb variant. Still does the job. All day battery life 4 years later too.

 

[blkjedi954]

The Terms and Conditions are clear ahead of time and are set by the company, not some individual rep who is likely ill informed or does not care.

Read the T&C’s, don’t blame others.

Wow! Cynical take on being misinformed by an employee. Terms & Conditions have been easily defeated in court cases but by all means, it’s the OPs fault for trusting an employees word. Just wow.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

You do realize that a trade in in the Apple Store is likely different from one in a carrier store, right?

Both companies will likely have different quality measures and recycling/refurb partners…

Oh totally. And one more way in which you are even more accurate is that Verizon lowered their standards even more and was pretty much accepting anything at full value for that device as long is it was all disclosed.

 

[macfacts]

Wow! Cynical take on being misinformed by an employee. Terms & Conditions have been easily defeated in court cases but by all means, it’s the OPs fault for trusting an employees word. Just wow.

It's Apple's fault for not properly training their employees. But why spend the money to train when there's a small chance for a sale.

 

[profdraper]

But disappointed really, spoke to an apple sales agent online to confirm my trade in value for my 11 pro max and made it clear to the sales team it was not an apple battery, but a 3rd party, they explained that was not an issue.

Anyhow my iPhone 15 pro max turns up, start getting comfortable with and then my trade in value email gets confirmed for £0 for having a non apple battery.

And so then they would have returned it to you, right? apple - who knows, smarter then everybody esle. If not take action with ombudsman or similar.

So then sell it privately, surely?

 

[kp98077]

just try it in the store now..

 

[MagicBird]

Wow! Cynical take on being misinformed by an employee. Terms & Conditions have been easily defeated in court cases but by all means, it’s the OPs fault for trusting an employees word. Just wow.

Well … you and OP likely live in a free country so if one feels confident about T&C’s being unreasonable, unenforceable or even unlawful, it can be taken to court.

In the interim, and without challenge, the T&C’s stand, should be respected and thus the conclusion stays the same: Get informed about T&C’s _before_ you hand back your property to a third party, otherwise don’t blame misinformed employees: people make mistakes, it’s a fact of life.

The best remedy against mistakes of otheres is to try and be informed, make only conscious, facts based decisions.

Choice is yours.

 

[blkjedi954]

Well … you and OP likely live in a free country so if one feels confident about T&C’s being unreasonable, unenforceable or even unlawful, it can be taken to court.

In the interim, and without challenge, the T&C’s stand, should be respected and thus the conclusion stays the same: Get informed about T&C’s _before_ you hand back your property to a third party, otherwise don’t blame misinformed employees: people make mistakes, it’s a fact of life.

The best remedy against mistakes of otheres is to try and be informed, make only conscious, facts based decisions.

Choice is yours.

The problem with your assertion is that it ignores deliberate obfuscation by TCs of meaning and intent and sometimes is filled with legalese. A solicitor/lawyer would be needed to sift through such jargon. The larger companies know this and factor that in when creating TCs, not all but too many. Courts recognize the deliberate nature of many T&Cs and void many of them when they’re challenged. So just “be informed” is not a solution or any real course of action to be taken when multibillion dollar companies pay good money to make it nebulous to the average consumer. Actuarial scientist run the numbers and the decisions are made. And in this current world of electronics (TVs, phones, PCs, tablets, microwave ovens, washers & dryers..etc) the time it would take to decipher all these TCs is highly implausible.

 

[MagicBird]

The problem with your assertion is that it ignores deliberate obfuscation by TCs of meaning and intent and sometimes is filled with legalese. A solicitor/lawyer would be needed to sift through such jargon. The larger companies know this and factor that in when creating TCs, not all but too many. Courts recognize the deliberate nature of many T&Cs and void many of them when they’re challenged. So just “be informed” is not a solution or any real course of action to be taken when multibillion dollar companies pay good money to make it nebulous to the average consumer. Actuarial scientist run the numbers and the decisions are made. And in this current world of electronics (TVs, phones, PCs, tablets, microwave ovens, washers & dryers..etc) the time it would take to decipher all these TCs is highly implausible.

Again, no change: if this is your opinion, take it further. Until then, the T&C’s stand and the fact that some store employee was apparently misinformed will not change anything.