per Guilherme Fernandes
very common that Apple offers one year warranty for your products. However, in many cases, the problem with the product happens at the very end of this period, and the consumer, as it takes some time to go to an official store or Apple Authorized Service Center, is informed that the deadline for A year has passed, that is, that the product is no longer covered by the warranty.
It turns out that the Consumer Protection Code Brazilian probe abusive practices like this. Seeing myself in this situation, therefore, I resorted to Judiciary Power to have my rights granted and I share my experience here so that you can benefit from this information if you are in a similar situation.
In July 2017, I bought a Beats Solo3 Wireless But after nearly a year of use, the leather earbud began to peel off. For this reason, in August 2018, I sought assistance in Braslia, but was informed that the product was out of warranty and that I would have to pay for the repair.
To better understand why Apple was not right in this case, we need to distinguish between legal guarantee and contractual guarantee.
Legal warranty and contractual warranty
When we buy any product or contract any service, the Law guarantees us a minimum warranty time, which need not be expressed in any contract and does not allow to be reduced. This is why this warranty is called the legal warranty. For non-durable products and services, the 30-day legal warranty; In the case of durable products and services, the 90-day legal warranty.
In addition to the legal guarantee, it is possible for companies to offer a larger guarantee, which does not follow from the law, but from the contract signed between the parties. Therefore, this guarantee called contractual guarantee.
What the law says
To protect the consumer, Article 50 of the CDC provides that the contractual warranty complementary cool. In less technical words, it is equivalent to saying that the warranties add up, so that after the term of the contractual warranty, the consumer still has the legal warranty term to ask for repair of the product or service.
The reason that the CDC envisaged this would prevent the consumer from making the legal guarantee expiry before the contractual warranty period, which would certainly undermine the consumer's rights. Nevertheless, Apple puts clauses in its contracts stating that under no circumstances does the statutory warranty add to the contractual warranty, and that within one year of the contractual warranty, the legal warranty period is already in place.
Such clauses, however, are considered abusive and can have no effect, since they contradict what is provided by a Federal Law (the CDC). In my case, as I bought the headphones in July 2017, the deadline for repairing the product would only expire in October 2018, that is, three months after the expiration of the contractual warranty, which took place in July 2018.
Based on these arguments, I proposed an action to the detriment of Apple requiring that the headphones be repaired. At the first hearing, I accepted Apple's agreement that she would give me back the money paid for the phone so I could choose between buying a new one or not, and the process ended up.
Unfortunately, companies fail to comply with the CDC because they know that in the end the number of people who will enforce their rights will be much smaller than the number of people who, through ignorance or even other difficulties, will pass up.
If you experience such a situation, not only with Apple products but also with those of other companies, it is important to point this out, seek further professional guidance and avoid being a victim of such abusive practice.