Other Warning! For theft and loss claims Find My must be enabled!

[jaytv111]

If you send it to Apple for repair you are told to turn off "find my".

You have to get the repair approved first. OP seems to have chosen the total loss option, which means you have nothing to send in. Loss means they check the location with Find My and ask that you turn on Lost mode. Even if it is just dust and ashes they still want to see if they can get a location.

When you ask for a repair, they will ask for you to do some diagnostics, they might disregard that you had Find My on at the time, I don't know, but you need to send it in with Find My off, because otherwise your phone is activation locked and they won't be able to get all the components to work together until you've turned off Find My.

 

[onenorth]

It is pretty clear in the current version of the disclosure. We don't know what the OP's disclosure said but it was probably similar to this:

"FOR YOUR LOST OR STOLEN CLAIM TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR COVERAGE, FIND MY IPHONE MUST BE SWITCHED ON AT THE TIME THE DEVICE IS LOST OR STOLEN AND MUST REMAIN ENABLED AND ASSOCIATED WITH YOUR APPLE ID THROUGHOUT THE THEFT OR LOSS CLAIM PROCESS"

This is the N.H. version for reference.

https://www.aigtheftandloss.com/static/media/NH.faff9630.pdf

 

[coolbreeze2]

It is pretty clear in the current version of the disclosure. We don't know what the OP's disclosure said but it was probably similar to this:

"FOR YOUR LOST OR STOLEN CLAIM TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR COVERAGE, FIND MY IPHONE MUST BE SWITCHED ON AT THE TIME THE DEVICE IS LOST OR STOLEN AND MUST REMAIN ENABLED AND ASSOCIATED WITH YOUR APPLE ID THROUGHOUT THE THEFT OR LOSS CLAIM PROCESS"

This is the N.H. version for reference.

https://www.aigtheftandloss.com/static/media/NH.faff9630.pdf

As I have stated, I overlooked it and didn't read it. I have learned my lesson. The point of my post is to WARN OTHERS. I know I am not the only one who hasn't read and understood the requirements. In life, if you warn others to prevent them from suffering as you have, you can receive blessings. However, if you take the attitude "let them suffer as I did", you will suffer even more.

 

[onenorth]

Just looked at the Applecare loss and theft policy and saw this:



So yep, AIG are sticking to their guns in denying you your claim. What disturbs me is that Apple will happily refuse to help law enforcement when it comes to criminals iphones but yet they will gladly help an insurance company to determine if a customers iphone had Find My enabled at a certain time in the day so they can deny the customers insurance claim.

The insured is explicitly consenting to this as a condition of insurance. It is not a privacy issue as it relates to the policy and if Apple is disclosing this information only as a condition of the policy that the insured agreed to.

 

[onenorth]

As I have stated, I overlooked it and didn't read it. I have learned my lesson. The point of my post is to WARN OTHERS. I know I am not the only one who hasn't read and understood the requirements. In life, if you warn others to prevent them from suffering as you have, you can receive blessings. However, if you take the attitude "let them suffer as I did", you will suffer even more.

Yes certainly it is worth a warning for this particular situation but everyone is responsible for understanding the terms of an insurance policy regardless of its complexity. I suspect there are many other traps for the unwary in these theft and loss policies. In the linked policy there are a slew of exclusions that are very difficult to parse through. And different states have different laws regarding insurance so things could be different for other people depending on where they live.

Often I think it is better to self-insure for certain things because then I can decide whether to deny my own claims and I can pool the reserves for insuring multiple items and roll over unused funds to insure the next thing I buy. It is a cost-benefit decision. For instance, replacing a phone is not as financially catastrophic as being airlifted off of a cruise ship for a medical emergency, so trip insurance might make more sense than self-insurance. Just food for thought.

 

[coolbreeze2]

Yes certainly it is worth a warning for this particular situation but everyone is responsible for understanding the terms of an insurance policy regardless of its complexity. I suspect there are many other traps for the unwary in these theft and loss policies. In the linked policy there are a slew of exclusions that are very difficult to parse through. And different states have different laws regarding insurance so things could be different for other people depending on where they live.

Often I think it is better to self-insure for certain things because then I can decide whether to deny my own claims and I can pool the reserves for insuring multiple items and roll over unused funds to insure the next thing I buy. It is a cost-benefit decision. For instance, replacing a phone is not as financially catastrophic as being airlifted off of a cruise ship for a medical emergency, so trip insurance might make more sense than self-insurance. Just food for thought.

What do you mean when you say "self-ensure"?

 

[stocklen]

Yes I was accused of lying. Read what stocklen wrote.

excuse me? I didn't nothing of the sort.

The word suspicious was talking about the insurers.... not you.

 

[onenorth]

What do you mean when you say "self-ensure"?

Instead of buying an insurance policy from an insurer and subjecting yourself to all of the conditions of the policy (and fighting with them when they deny the claim), set aside the money in your bank account. That way the money is yours to use as you wish and not forever lost to the insurance company. Unless you have a lot of claims, or very large claims, over time your account will have enough to cover you should the need arise if you are disciplined about funding it. Insurance companies are in business to make money not pay out claims. I choose policies only after carefully considering the cost-benefit analysis. I've wasted way too much money on policies that either I didn't make claims on or didn't cover me when I needed coverage.

 

[coolbreeze2]

excuse me? I didn't nothing of the sort.

The word suspicious was talking about the insurers.... not you.

I am so very sorry for the misunderstanding and for stating you accused me of lying. I apologize.

 

[coolbreeze2]

Instead of buying an insurance policy from an insurer and subjecting yourself to all of the conditions of the policy (and fighting with them when they deny the claim), set aside the money in your bank account. That way the money is yours to use as you wish and not forever lost to the insurance company. Unless you have a lot of claims, or very large claims, over time your account will have enough to cover you should the need arise if you are disciplined about funding it. Insurance companies are in business to make money not pay out claims. I choose policies only after carefully considering the cost-benefit analysis. I've wasted way too much money on policies that either I didn't make claims on or didn't cover me when I needed coverage.

Well said.

 

[johnmacward]

Lay people who are far from being experts in law and most certainly won’t read the 20 to 50 pages of legalese of an AppleCare contract - right or wrong, they won’t. Our business society realises this and hides all sorts of get out of jail clauses to get your money but ultimately deny your claims even in very reasonable cases.

Why was my post edited by someone and cut in half ?

 

[JPack]

This sounds suspicious.

Apple pride themselves on their privacy and theres simply no way that a 3rd party could approach apple to find out whether or not find my was enabled on your phone.
Apple simply couldnt and shouldnt release ANY information pertaining to your phone in this way.

As someone else said, if the phone was destroyed then find my would not work and its not as if you were claiming for theft at all - where find my would be of use - but total destruction find my is somewhat irrelevant and if you can provide the remains of the phone then surely thats sufficient regardless.

But, to say they 'know' whether find my was activated or not is blatantly a lie as that information pertains to the appleID to which the phone is registered and thats not something that privy to others to know or be told about.

It's not suspicious at all.

Anybody can determine if a device has Activation Lock enabled. This can be done simply through the Apple Support page.

 

[MallardDuck]

I would have thought it was common sense to have Find My turned on anyway, it’s there for a reason, and there’s no real reason not to have it turned on.

As I recall, it's on by default unless you choose to turn it off during setup.

 

[antiprotest]

Why even talk about this? You should have Find My enabled anyway.

 

[Fruit Stand]

This sounds suspicious.

Apple pride themselves on their privacy and theres simply no way that a 3rd party could approach apple to find out whether or not find my was enabled on your phone.
Apple simply couldnt and shouldnt release ANY information pertaining to your phone in this way.

As someone else said, if the phone was destroyed then find my would not work and its not as if you were claiming for theft at all - where find my would be of use - but total destruction find my is somewhat irrelevant and if you can provide the remains of the phone then surely thats sufficient regardless.

But, to say they 'know' whether find my was activated or not is blatantly a lie as that information pertains to the appleID to which the phone is registered and thats not something that privy to others to know or be told about.

There is nothing suspicious about this. Apple's partners (including insurance providers) and carriers have internal tools to validate FMI activation lock which then tells them whether the device is yay or nay in terms of having Find My iPhone enabled or not.

It's the same way carriers check whether a phone is removed from Find My iPhone or not when performing a trade in.

Apple's privacy promise is in relation to YOUR personal information not information that's pertaining to their mechanisms and protocols.

 

[Devyn89]

Yes that's true. However, I didn't know this and therefore I am warning others. This requirement is not emphasized although it's in the contract. It should be brought forward to customers when they purchase the coverage. People are not going to naturally think of this. It would be great customer service and prevent disappointment if this requirement is emphasized. Instead, it was used as a legal loophole to deny the claim. Lesson was learned on my part.

I was fortunate that I had another avenue to pursue to replace the phone. This is the latest model and I only made a few payments toward the contract. Imagine if I didn't have double coverage! I would have had to honor Verizon's 36-month contract, paying for a phone I didn't have and paying for another to use. I thank God that didn't happen.

That is totally fair. I used to work at Apple in Canada. We never had the theft and loss but management emphasized that we make sure customers know the details on what is expected of them in order for AppleCare to be applicable and I assumed American Apple would be the same, apologies for my tone. That is something a specialist should be explicit about during the sale.

 

[coolbreeze2]

That is totally fair. I used to work at Apple in Canada. We never had the theft and loss but management emphasized that we make sure customers know the details on what is expected of them in order for AppleCare to be applicable and I assumed American Apple would be the same, apologies for my tone. That is something a specialist should be explicit about during the sale.

I hope everyone iPhone user reads this thread and becomes aware that Find My is a requirement to file a claim for Apple Theft and Loss coverage. That is my goal. In fact, I would like to see this requirement, along with other crucial information for iPhone users, as a permanent sticky in the iPhone Tips and Tricks section.

 

[mk313]

Warning! For theft and loss claims Find My must be enabled! I learned the hard way. I erased and reset my iPhone and overlooked turning on Find My on. A few days later, my iPhone was destroyed in a car accident I barely escaped from. When I filed my claim with Apple theft and loss vendor AIG, they denied it because Find My was not enabled. I appealed it and this was their response:

"Per Apple’s research team the device on the policy was not enabled to find my iPhone on the reported lost date. AIG is unable to overturn the denial of the claim. As licensed adjusters we must follow all terms and conditions set forth and required in the policy you purchased from Apple to provide a replacement. The contract is a legal binding agreement. I have attached a copy of your policy for you. Unfortunately, we are not able to approve your claim because you did not have find my iPhone enabled."

Fortunately for me, the iPhone was being used as a line in my small business account with Verizon in which all devices are covered by the business protection plan. Verizon's vendor Asurion charges a deductible that is $100 more than AIG but at least they replaced the iPhone. However, even they appeared to question Find My not being enabled and ask me to sign an Affidavit. This was my first time filing a claim with both AIG and Asurion.

So keep Find My on if you have bought Theft and Loss coverage. When buying the coverage, you are agreeing to do so. I did not know this.

I see that a lot of the discussion on this relates to the legality of apple/AIG doing what they did. Not going to weigh in there, but just wanted to say Thanks for posting this. I don't really use AppleCare on most of my devices, and I do enable Find My, but wanted to say thanks for the heads up anyways. There are times when I need to turn it off (like sending in for a replacement, etc. It's good to know that turning it back on when I get the new one, is a requirement for coverage.

Glad you were not hurt in the fire, glad you were able to get your phone replaced under another policy, and glad that you shared your experience with others who might not even think about such a thing until it's too late.

 

[Fred Zed]

It's not suspicious at all.

Anybody can determine if a device has Activation Lock enabled. This can be done simply through the Apple Support page.

I thought that page wasn’t available anymore ? I used to use the other thing called GX or
Something or another.

 

[I7guy]

This sounds suspicious.

Apple pride themselves on their privacy and theres simply no way that a 3rd party could approach apple to find out whether or not find my was enabled on your phone.
Apple simply couldnt and shouldnt release ANY information pertaining to your phone in this way.

As someone else said, if the phone was destroyed then find my would not work and its not as if you were claiming for theft at all - where find my would be of use - but total destruction find my is somewhat irrelevant and if you can provide the remains of the phone then surely thats sufficient regardless.

But, to say they 'know' whether find my was activated or not is blatantly a lie as that information pertains to the appleID to which the phone is registered and thats not something that privy to others to know or be told about.

Think you are making a bunch of assumptions. There might(probably is) be some contractual arrangement when dealing with loss or theft. Do you believe a multibillion dollar company is not going to protect itself.

 

[raythompsontn]

If you send it to Apple for repair you are told to turn off "find my" first thing. Does carrier's insurer take the hit?

Yes, provided you insured the shipment for the proper amount. Apple does not provide the insurance. You may be lucky to get $50.00 if the carrier lost the package. Always insure for the amount of the product even if that means you pay extra.

As for the insurance company, AIG is following the letter of their contract with Apple and with the device owner. Insurance companies are not in the business of losing money. Insurance companies will find any way possible to deny a claim or significantly reduce the claim. Had you still had the remains of the phone, AIG probably would have found scratches on the screen and reduced the loss payout. Insurance companies are scum.

I was in an auto accident. The other driver was ruled 100% at fault by the police. Yet his insurance company said I was 15% at fault and would only pay 85% of the claim. The insurance company knew fully that for me to get 100% I would need a lawyer, which would cost me more than the 15% they insurance company was not paying.

The adjuster totaled my vehicle. But nitpicked on several items. Reduced amount due to wear on the seats, no tears, just some shiny spots that showed use. Reduced amount to due to scratch on the bumper caused by the towing company. The tires had 75% tread life left so another reduction. The scum bag adjuster knew that I would have to sue to get proper payment for the totaled vehicle. Sleazeballs!

 

[canuckRus]

Yes, provided you insured the shipment for the proper amount. Apple does not provide the insurance. You may be lucky to get $50.00 if the carrier lost the package. Always insure for the amount of the product even if that means you pay extra.

As for the insurance company, AIG is following the letter of their contract with Apple and with the device owner. Insurance companies are not in the business of losing money. Insurance companies will find any way possible to deny a claim or significantly reduce the claim. Had you still had the remains of the phone, AIG probably would have found scratches on the screen and reduced the loss payout. Insurance companies are scum.

I was in an auto accident. The other driver was ruled 100% at fault by the police. Yet his insurance company said I was 15% at fault and would only pay 85% of the claim. The insurance company knew fully that for me to get 100% I would need a lawyer, which would cost me more than the 15% they insurance company was not paying.

The adjuster totaled my vehicle. But nitpicked on several items. Reduced amount due to wear on the seats, no tears, just some shiny spots that showed use. Reduced amount to due to scratch on the bumper caused by the towing company. The tires had 75% tread life left so another reduction. The scum bag adjuster knew that I would have to sue to get proper payment for the totaled vehicle. Sleazeballs!

Apple provides the return box and pays FedEx to send it to them, not me. They or FedEx are responsible if then lost.

 

[I7guy]

Yes, provided you insured the shipment for the proper amount. Apple does not provide the insurance. You may be lucky to get $50.00 if the carrier lost the package. Always insure for the amount of the product even if that means you pay extra.

As for the insurance company, AIG is following the letter of their contract with Apple and with the device owner. Insurance companies are not in the business of losing money. Insurance companies will find any way possible to deny a claim or significantly reduce the claim. Had you still had the remains of the phone, AIG probably would have found scratches on the screen and reduced the loss payout. Insurance companies are scum.

I was in an auto accident. The other driver was ruled 100% at fault by the police. Yet his insurance company said I was 15% at fault and would only pay 85% of the claim. The insurance company knew fully that for me to get 100% I would need a lawyer, which would cost me more than the 15% they insurance company was not paying.

The adjuster totaled my vehicle. But nitpicked on several items. Reduced amount due to wear on the seats, no tears, just some shiny spots that showed use. Reduced amount to due to scratch on the bumper caused by the towing company. The tires had 75% tread life left so another reduction. The scum bag adjuster knew that I would have to sue to get proper payment for the totaled vehicle. Sleazeballs!

It’s a pita to work through insurance claims. Having said that you were within your right la to get a lawyer and fight that. I’m surprised your insurance didn’t fight for you.

With respect to totaling the vehicle the insurance company will not pay for wear and tear items - most likely even a lawyer wouldn’t be able to get around that (buts it’s a guess) so it’s seems fair that when you got the settlement wear and tear items were taken off the total value.

It’s too bad for the op failing to reactivate find my and the crap that accrued after.

 

[Zest28]

I mean the terms and conditions of Applecare with theft and loss are very clear that you need to have Find My enabled.

Why are you simping for Apple and AIG?

Whether not it was turned on or not, it doesn’t impact if it got destroyed in a car crash.

The probability of iPhone getting destroyed is totally independent of it turned on or not.

 

[floral]

Why are you simping for Apple and AIG?

Whether not it was turned on or not, it doesn’t impact if it got destroyed in a car crash.

The probability of iPhone getting destroyed is totally independent of it turned on or not.

"Simping"? I would think having Find My iPhone, which is a service with no cons and all benefits, and which is turned on by default, would be common knowledge to keep on and not part of being a "simp"...