Apple facing extreme customer dissatisfaction issues.
Forza Ferrari
Posts: 7,433 Forum Member
✭
Oh dear there customer appears to not be very happy with them.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/angry-customer-casually-smashes-iphones-macs-apple-store-france-1584282
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/angry-customer-casually-smashes-iphones-macs-apple-store-france-1584282
0
Comments
One nutter who is too stupid to use the simple small claims legal system if he believes Apple have broken consumer law, and instead resorts to criminal activity and has now been arrested.
I fail to see how this isolated incident relates to the claim made in the thread title.
I would agree, stupid headline that bears no resemblance to "single customer commits criminal damage after being refused a refund".
You posted the the story, why don't you tell us?
If you'd ever worked in retail you'd know the million and one stupid reasons customers will use to demand a refund "cos they know their rights!"
Well I don't know what consumer law in France consists of, do you?
That's a possibility, or he drove over it with his car and then wanted a refund.
Plenty of loons expecting refunds for bizarre reasons every day in every shop...
I noticed apple didn't seem to keen to go through the small claims process regarding their broken phones.
The poor guy was getting pushed around and squashed up against barriers just for trying to go home. Looked like one of multiple security people went for a bit of a strangle at one point.
Really not sure why they are so keen to intervene on apples dispute. The broken phones are clearly an issue between apple and the man. Apples employees and representatives didn't appear bothered at all.
I found the security staff to treat him rather well. If this happened in the US he would have inevitably been tasered or even shot. If it even happened over here he would have been tackled to the ground and restrained until the police arrived.
He was totally out of order and I can't believe you're trying to defend his actions. What he did was clearly a series of intentional criminal offences, and he deserves to be prosecuted for it.
Well he clearly thinks the same about apple taking his money and not respecting his rights.
The guy is angry and should not have to resort to these sort of actions.
He has taken his issue out by damaging apples property but was clearly not hurting anybody.
So i think it's fair to let him go home and if apple feel aggrieved they can raise and dispute with the man wither this is writing a letter or lawyers etc. There is no need to push people in to fire escapes.
The problem is the law is always write to protect money. There is no offense of criminal consumer rights abuse.
I wonder if some of the more assaulting behaviour you describe would have happened had the security people not been being recorded.
That isn't in the video linked at the start, where did you see that?
Mind you, if he'd previously been an Android user and got home only to discover no headphone socket and no micro SD card slot, who knows what it could do to someone's self control?
What country do you live in where criminal damage isn't a criminal matter that can get you arrested?
Any chance you could link to the article where all those points are made? You seem to be making up a story to suit your viewpoint that doesn't appear to have any basis in the known facts.
Are you an aspiring fiction writer?
You seem to fail to understand the difference between a criminal offense and a civil consumer claim. When you smash up tens of thousands of Euros worth of property in public you're going to get held by security until the police arrive and you'll be arrested. If you bought something and claim it's faulty but the company disagrees or there's some dispute, then you go to the civil court for a judge to decide who is right on the balance of probability and then that person is awarded money.
In the UK a consumer claim can be made relatively easily, you just advise the company of your intent and give them time to put things right, and if they don't you fill in the form on the MCOL government website and then if not defended you win, if defended then you go to court in typically 8-12 weeks and a judge decides, I'm sure France has a similar small claims system.
The fool will likely have spent time in police custody and will probably now end up with a criminal record, which makes it harder to get employment, he will likely be fined and have to pay some or all of the cost of the items damaged, without getting them AND Apple will likely refuse to talk to him regarding his original issue, what a muppet!
So let's imagine you got into a dispute with a plumber who you felt hadn't fixed a leak.. so you refuse to pay him. Is he entitled to come along and smash up your car outside? He's not harming anyone right? I suspect you'd feel very differently.
As you appear to be so sure that his rights were violated and this action was appropriate... perhaps you can point us in the direction of the source of this being confirmed and proven. As in what his issue was, how Apple failed to respond correctly and preferably Apple's response to this claim so we have some balance. All I see is "failed to give a refund" but so far I've not seen any indication of what he wanted a refund for or Apple's justification for refusing to give one.. assuming that's what happened.
Otherwise I will continue to treat this incident as it appears.. some attention seeker who decided to smash up an Apple store and try to use the cover of "consumer law" to do it. Most punters who are unhappy with customer service just take their business elsewhere. They don't cause tens of thousands of pounds damage to other peoples property.
As it happens Apple tops customer service surveys on a regular basis. In fact you can often just walk into any Apple store with a fault and they will try their best to fix it. One time I walked in to show them a key had fallen off my keyboard and they replaced it free of charge. Couldn't have faulted their customer service.
So you expect someone to be able to go and destroy thousands of euros of someone else's property and then just go home?! He was evidently refusing to wait until police arrived so the security guards used reasonable force as a method of restraint. The security guards then went for a strangle when he tried to strangle one of them, so again, reasonable force as a method of self defence and restraint.
Apple's employees would have done nothing because it's the safest thing for them to do, for themselves, the members of the public, and the criminal. If someone went over to try to stop him, he could have easily bollocked them with the pétanque ball.
Actually try not paying a plumber for something they think they have done and see what happens.
I knew somebody who once had some landscape gardeners in and they were the contractors from hell. Destroyed the place and then stopped turning up. When they got told they were off the job the whole thing got very serious.
There is a definite inequality in the law. A company can take an individuals money and not provide the service or goods paid for. Then it's a civil matter. If the company stops responding there is very little the individual can do. But if the individual does something to the company seizes or destroyes goods then its a criminal issue. Some of the treatment people receive from large companies should be criminal.
As for the accounting of the damage that is really very creative. Products such as iphones cost the companies that make them buttons compared to the shelf prices.
The true cost to apple would be the disruption to the stores operations. Goodness knows how they will value that when it comes to persecuting this poor guy through the courts. If mitigating circumstances are taken in to account they would be heavily discounted against the fact that you can't buy publicity like this. But thats only if you forget that they must have really stiffed the guy in the first place to get him that annoyed.
"This poor guy" - we don't even know if he had a reasonable case or was really treated badly by Apple yet, even if so that's no excuse for vigilante justice and criminal behaviour.
If enough consumers are angry with a company word gets around and they lose sales, if a company is really bad then trading standards step in and they do have the power to prosecute companies.
You know your posting is becoming very troll like, it's also becoming quite Off Topic. What's next? Some Freeman of the Land posts?
Any chance you could stop?
I'm not an Apple fan and everytime he smashes one of those phones I thing aboot how bad i-Tunes now is since they started ****ing with it
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the criminal acts of the guy in the video...
Violent vigilante actions are usually the preserve of poorer and poorly educated people in less developed counties where there is frequent violence, this isn't how most people want to live in a civilised society.