Quote:
Originally Posted by Waspune Would you like to narrate the whole incident please. I haven't heard such case before. Normally apple is great with its after sales service. Did you get your iPhone opened even once from outside? And what made them say that you changed the internals? |
I have just prepared my complaint letter and pasting the relevant contents below for understanding:
3. The complainant is the resident of the above said address and the complainant had purchased the Apple iPhone X model MQA62HN/A Silver 64 GB, IMEI No. ___________, Serial No. __________ from Opposite Party’s Authorised Reseller - ARJAY Retail iAstra, No. 97/2A, Varthur Main Road, Marathahalli, Bangalore 560037 for Rs 84,000/- on 12/04/2018. Copy of the invoice has been attached in Annexure A
4. The said device was covered under Opposite Party’s limited warranty coverage as detailed on
https://support.apple.com
5. The Complainant updated the said device to Public Beta Version iOS 12 via OTA, released by Opposite Party in India on June 27, 2018. The Complainant followed due process of enrolling his apple ID _______________ for iOS Public Beta installation which was done after downloading the configuration profile and installing the OTA update. The process has been detailed by Opposite Party on
https://beta.apple.com/sp/betaprogram/
6. After the above update, the Complainant was unable to optimally use the said device due to the inherent software bugs in Public Beta iOS 12 and decided to visit the Opposite Party’s Authorised Service Centre situated at Aptronix, #87, Ground Floor, Almas Centre, MG Road, Bangalore 560001 on July 17, 2018 around 4.00 PM to have the iOS downgraded to iOS 11. Important point to note is that the device was in working condition at the time and also covered under warranty. The device did not have any physical damage to it either.
7. The said device was accepted by the service centre in working condition without any physical damage. It was communicated by the service centre to the Complainant that the iOS downgrade would be performed within 20 minutes
8. After 20 minutes, the service centre stated to the Complainant that the device could not be restored and was stuck in iTunes. The Complainant was offered a resolution by the service centre of submitting the device for inspection by Opposite Party’s office, which was accepted by the Complainant. Since the device was covered under warranty, the expected charges mentioned on the service report were NIL. The service report receipt generated is attached in Annexure B.
9. The Complainant tried calling the opposite party’s service centre multiple times on the number (9182562146) provided on the service report receipt which was not answered between July 18, 2018 to July 22, 2018.
10. Unable to get a response on the phone, the Complainant personally visited the service centre to enquire about the status on 23 July 2018. The service centre was unable to provide a satisfactory status update to the Complainant and mentioned that the case is being diagnosed by Apple India engineers. The service centre asked the Complainant to revisit the service centre on July 26, 2018
11. On July 26, 2018, the Complainant revisited the service centre but was not provided with a satisfactory update on the repair status. The Complainant left on an assurance of the service centre to communicate the update by July 27, 2018
12. On July 27, 2018, the service centre called the Complainant and reassured that Opposite Party was still working on the case and final status would be made available on or before July 30, 2018
13. On July 30, 2018, the service centre called the Complainant to communicate that Opposite Party had refused servicing the said device claiming the internals were damaged beyond economic repair and the Complainant was asked to contact Apple Toll Free Number 080010 09009 for further assistance in the case
14. On July 30, 2018, the Complainant called the Opposite Party’s Toll Free Number 080010 09009 for obtaining more clarity on the case. The call was attended by a junior service advisor and then redirected to a senior service advisor by the name of Ms Seyda. Ms Syeda informed the Complainant that necessary enquiry would be made into the case and the Complainant will be called back the same day i.e. July 30, 2018 with an update by 8.30 PM. The Case ID registered was 100599825063, the email from Apple India confirming the same is attached in Annexure C
15. The Complainant waited for a call from Opposite Party’s representative, Ms Syeda between July 30, 2018 and August 1, 2018. During this period, the Complainant also called the provided direct extension of Opposite Part’s representative Ms Syeda, three (3) times and recorded a message on the answering machine with the case ID and call back number. These calls remained unanswered and unattended by the Opposite Party.
16. The Complainant wrote an email to Opposite Party at
bangalore_admin@apple.com on August 2, 2018 requesting for a revert. Opposite Party’s system automatically responded this email, requesting the Complainant to contact its Toll Free Number only. A copy of this email communication is attached in Annexure D.
17. The Complainant decided to call the Opposite Party’s Toll Free Number 080010 09009 again on August 3, 2018. This time the call was
attended to by Opposite Party’s senior advisor, Mr Hanish (0008000401217 extn. 8935010), who assured the Complainant that necessary action shall be taken and a response shall be provided by August 7, 2018. A copy of the email communication received by the Complainant is attached in Annexure E
18. As expected, Opposite Party failed again to provide any concrete response to the Complainant within the promised period and that is when the Complainant decided to contact its Toll Free Number 080010 09009 again on August 08, 2018. This time the call was attended by the Opposite Party’s representative Ms Aisha, who communicated to the Complainant that as per the investigations conducted by the Opposite Party, the said device is beyond economic repair and Opposite Party shall not be able to repair or replace the device under warranty
19. On August 08, 2018, the Complainant collected the device from Opposite Party’s service centre in non-working condition. Even after requesting, the Complainant was not provided any acknowledgment or detailed report confirming the scrutiny done by Opposite Party and confirming the condition of device being returned