iPhone restriction claim filed in UK

A US iPhone limitation claim for compensation was settled in 2020, when Apple agreed to pay up to $500 million in front of intentionally slowing down older iPhones with damaged batteries to prevent them from being turned off. Now a UK claim has been filed, seeking a total of $750 million ($910 million) in damages for UK owners of affected iPhones.

The complaint was filed by Justin Gumann, a retired market researcher turned consumer advocate…

Background

The controversy dates back to 2016, when: a significant number of iPhone 6s models were affected by: random shutdowns

Apple subsequently determined that this was due to degraded batteries failing to meet peak power requirements, so decided to quietly resolve the issue by detecting this battery degradation and throttle performance to match available power. . It did this in an iOS update, which was also applied to other iPhone models.

The company has chosen not to disclose this promotion, but it was discovered later by Geekbench founder John Poole in 2017 – after which Apple went public over the restriction, explaining the reasons. It later offered a subsidized battery replacement service for affected phones.

In 2018, the company added a battery status feature which allowed users to check the capacity of their battery and disable the throttling if desired.

Apple is hit with dozens of class action lawsuits on the matter, and the largest of these was settled in 2020, when Apple agreed pay a total of $500 million in damages to American owners of exported models.

British iPhone limits compensation claim

the guard reports that a similar complaint has now been lodged in the UK.

Apple faces multimillion-pound legal claim that could reimburse millions of iPhone owners for secret decision to slow down older phones in 2017 […]

Justin Gutmann, a consumer rights advocate, has filed a claim against Apple over the decision in the Competition Appeals Tribunal. If he wins, the company could be forced to pay damages of more than £750 million, split among the roughly 25 million people who bought one of the affected phones. The claim concerns the iPhone 6, 6 Plus, 6S, 6S Plus, SE, 7, 7 Plus, 8, 8 Plus and iPhone X models […]

“Instead of doing the honorable and legal thing by offering their customers a free replacement, repair service or compensation, Apple has misled people by hiding a tool in software updates that slowed down their devices by up to 58%,” Gutmann said.

“I am launching this case so that millions of iPhone users in the UK can be compensated for the damages suffered by Apple.

There are two main differences between the US class action lawsuit and the UK complaint. First, the UK case is not actually a lawsuit, but rather a complaint to a competition regulator. It is up to the regulator to make a decision, and both parties can then challenge it.

Second, if damages are awarded, there will be no attorney discount to deduct. Still, from the total amount claimed, owners would get just £30 ($36), so no one should start planning M2 MacBook Air purchases with the proceeds.

If the decision is against Apple, details will be provided on how to file a claim. In general, this means that you have to prove that you had an affected model during the relevant dates.

Apple said its motives were to make older iPhones last as long as possible.

“We have never — and would never — do anything to intentionally shorten the life of an Apple product or degrade the user experience to incentivize customer upgrades,” Apple said in a statement Thursday. “Our goal has always been to create products that our customers love, and making sure iPhones last as long as possible is a big part of that.” iPhones now have a report in the settings menu, under “battery health”, that reveals whether the restriction is in effect.

9to5Mac’s Take

With all that is now known, it seems pretty clear that Apple’s actions were well-intentioned, favoring performance throttling over random shutdowns. The decision did not disclose where the company ran into problems.

Given the US precedent, it seems likely that the tribunal will award damages, although it may disagree with the amount demanded. If this is indeed the case, Apple will probably accept that decision without objection.

FTC: We use auto affiliate links that generate revenue. More.


Watch 9to5Mac on YouTube for more Apple news:

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.