• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Woman sues Apple over iPhone "Defect"

IOWA

Mr. Logic Pants
Dec 2, 2009
8,898
2,484
Chicago
A consistent source of angst from mobile phone users are the costs they often must incur to replace devices that get broken or damaged. Thanks to the subsidies mobile operators pay on handsets, they typically don't like to replace phones for free, asking users to pay up or renew their contracts. One key part of operators' arsenal in determining if damage has been caused by the user are liquid sensors. These little round stickers often reside under a phone's battery, and typically turn from white to some shade of red when they've been exposed to liquid. So if you've dropped your phone in a puddle and it stops working, the liquid sensor probably won't back up your story that your phone just all of a sudden stopped working. The iPhone is no different in this regard, but a San Francisco woman has sued Apple, alleging that the iPhone's sensors generate false positives, letting Apple skip out on warranty obligations. The woman alleges she's had to replace her iPhone at her own expense twice, after the sensors showed her device had been exposed to water, even though it had not. For what it's worth, Apple says the sensors work just fine. This case may seem pretty pointless, but should the woman prevail, it could set a powerful precedent for all types of phones sold by carriers here in the US, and impact how they carry out their warranty replacement and service plans.

iPhone Hits Just Keep On Coming For Apple: Sued Over Liquid Damage Sensors | Techdirt
 
cool_story_bro.jpg
 
Upvote 0
I can definitely attest to those stickers giving false positives. I owned a phone a couple of years ago that had one of those stickers in it, and the state where I live is so humid that the sticker was red in less than a week. I brought the phone back to the store in pristine condition and showed him that the sticker had already turned red. He told me that about 80% of the stickers they use will turn red in one to two weeks after the sale.

I bet she'll win.
 
Upvote 0
I can definitely attest to those stickers giving false positives. I owned a phone a couple of years ago that had one of those stickers in it, and the state where I live is so humid that the sticker was red in less than a week. I brought the phone back to the store in pristine condition and showed him that the sticker had already turned red. He told me that about 80% of the stickers they use will turn red in one to two weeks after the sale.

I bet she'll win.

Interesting. Imagine the repercussions of this... hundreds of millions if not billions paid back to the people... hehe. What we need to do, to possibly help her out, is set up an experiment, which would prove this, and possibly help all mobile device owners in the world out. Anyone know how we can get mass quantities of these "stickers"
 
Upvote 0
The trouble I have readings some of these rather juvenile replies is that the posters believe that all organisations are bad and that they (the poster) and others have the right to cheat companies with false claims.

So many people miss use the items they buy and then try and get "their" money back when of course it is not their money at all.

Why can't we look at all claims clearly and come to some unbiased decision.

The water sensing devices are there to stop fraudulent claims but unfortunately clobber the innocent as well. The fault lies with the fraud, not the use of the sensors.
 
Upvote 0
The trouble I have readings some of these rather juvenile replies is that the posters believe that all organisations are bad and that they (the poster) and others have the right to cheat companies with false claims.

So many people miss use the items they buy and then try and get "their" money back when of course it is not their money at all.

Why can't we look at all claims clearly and come to some unbiased decision.

The water sensing devices are there to stop fraudulent claims but unfortunately clobber the innocent as well. The fault lies with the fraud, not the use of the sensors.

If the sensors are defective, how is that fraud?
 
Upvote 0
The trouble I have readings some of these rather juvenile replies is that the posters believe that all organisations are bad and that they (the poster) and others have the right to cheat companies with false claims.

So many people miss use the items they buy and then try and get "their" money back when of course it is not their money at all.

Why can't we look at all claims clearly and come to some unbiased decision.

The water sensing devices are there to stop fraudulent claims but unfortunately clobber the innocent as well. The fault lies with the fraud, not the use of the sensors.

I know what you're saying, but if you put sensors there to prevent fraud, then you should be sure that your sensors work 100% to protect honest people who are really having problems with the product.

Whether she will win or lose, I don't have a clue. It's up for the courts to decide. It will be an uphill battle especially against Apple's mighty legal department.
 
Upvote 0
If the sensors are defective, how is that fraud?

I.m not saying the sensors are or are not defective what I tried to say is that if a huge number o9f people didn't spend a great deal of time ripping off everyone and every company they come across then there would be no need for the phone manufacturers to go to such great length so try and protect themselves.

We often here the phrase "rip-off Britain". well is quite often the punters ripping off the companies.
 
Upvote 0
...We often here the phrase "rip-off Britain". well is quite often the punters ripping off the companies.
...and or, just not understanding the economics of what they're railing against.

As for this individuals case, and the example given above regarding humid atmospheres, it'll interesting to see what Apple do if they lose (although any sign of that and I expect they'll settle quietly first).

FWIW my old Nokia was dropped into a hot bubble bath, salt water puddles, and after being left on the roof of my car turned up a couple of days later having been a night in the gutter working perfectly; that thing was bullet-proof!! They don't making like they used to.
 
Upvote 0

BEST TECH IN 2023

We've been tracking upcoming products and ranking the best tech since 2007. Thanks for trusting our opinion: we get rewarded through affiliate links that earn us a commission and we invite you to learn more about us.

Smartphones