Apple continues to suffer the consequences of the slowdown iPhone case. This time around, it’s Euroconsumers, a European consumer advocacy group, to take Apple to court for “misleading business practice by omission”. The plaintiffs claim 180 million in damages from the Cupertino company.
The slowdown iPhone case may go back to 2017, Apple is still paying the consequences. Indeed, a European group of consumer protection has decided to attack in turn the Cupertino company for “misleading commercial practice by omission”. Three years ago now, the manufacturer confessed to having restricted the performance of certain iPhones to preserve the battery.
“We do not slow down the iPhones so that you can change them, we lower their performance to preserve their autonomy ”, Apple said after the case was brought to light. As a reminder, the IOS 10.2.1 update had effectively slowed down the performance of many iPhones with defective batteries. However, the manufacturer was careful not to warn users.
180 million euros for European consumers
In fact, some were convinced that their smartphone was about to give up the ghost, due to the weight of the years. Result, most chose to buy a new model, while a simple battery change was enough to give a second youth to their iPhone. “Apple released updates to hide battery issues, knowing it would slow phones down“Says Els Bruggeman, Policy and Law Enforcement Manager at Euroconsumers.
He pursues : “European consumers just want to be treated with the same respect that has been given to American consumers ”. As a reminder, Apple has agreed to pay $ 113 million after about thirty American states attacked the manufacturer for planned obsolescence.
Determined to obtain redress for European consumers, Euroconsumers intends to file complaints in Belgium, Spain, Italy and Portugal. The organization claims 180 million euros in damages, which will then be distributed among the aggrieved customers. As a reminder, France has already imposed a fine of 25 million euros on Apple in this case of slowed iPhone. The payment of this sum saved the Apple brand from a much more costly public lawsuit for planned obsolescence.
Source: Financial Times