If you're referencing consumer law here, don't get confused and think that this is the same as a warranty.

As a consumer you have the right to go back to the shop you bought the goods from if they break because of a fault that was likely there from the start, or the goods didn't last the time that someone would have reasonably expected them to.

A 3 year apple care warranty (or any warranty for any product) clearly states what they will and wont do in a legal and binding contract that will give you repairs or replacements even 2 years and 11 months into the contract.

As an example:

1. You buy a laptop, after 2 years and 10 months the screen inverter burns out, but it's found that this was a wide spread problem among the laptops, and a known fault. You could argue that the fault was present at the time of sale and get a replacement or repair.

With a warranty, they'd be obligated by contract to repair it anyway, but consumer law would have had your back.

2. You buy a laptop (without a warranty), and after 2 years the hard drive fails, but there are no known issues with the batch, you're just unlucky, or maybe you're a heavier user. You could try to argue that you would reasonably expect the hard drive to last longer than that, they may agree, but instead of repairing the laptop, they may give you a monetary amount equivalent to what you could buy a functioning second hand hard drive of same size and age at that point. They may also refuse (if they're stubborn) and try to argue that it's a laptop, as such it gets moved around, and that could have resulted in the failure. They'd not be breaking the law doing this, and you'd likely have to fight them, possibly by getting an engineers report stating the reason for the drive failure (very difficult to do) and still might just end up with money for a second hand hard drive (plus the engineers report).

With a warranty, you have a guarantee of action, in writing, that says they will replace it or repair it. Consumer law would have helped, but the company could still make it difficult, and make it hard to prove your case.

3. The laptop is 5 years old, and the motherboard just stops working, through years of heat drying out solder joints, flexing and eventual breaking of joints. It would be very hard to argue at this point that the laptop was reasonably expected to last longer than that, but you might get a token sum of £100-£120 to buy an equivalent 5 year old laptop.

With a warranty (presuming there was one available that long), you'd get a replacement or repair under the contract.

So please don't think that just because consumer law states you have 6 years to complain, that it is the same thing as having a warranty.

A more personal example for me a few years ago, I bought a 40 inch TV from Tesco. It came with a 12 month warranty, with a free extra 6 months if you registered. After about 20 months very light use (I actually don't even watch TV at all now), the TV started turning itself on and off.

I called Tesco, and didn't even need to argue about the consumer law, the rep said "OK, even though the warranty is up, you still have a claim against us, I'll need to pass it to claims, they'll work out whether we can do a replacement, repair or compensation."

A few days later I got a letter through the door offering me £90 to get a repair, for my £300, 2 months outside of warranty, malfunctioning TV. I'd already looked up the manufacturer and they seemed to have a little system set up for themselves. They charged a flat fee of £100 to repair any TV that developed a fault.

I could have argued for the full £100, they probably could have argued that it was fair for the age of the TV and that someone would repair it for that price. I could have argued I reasonably expected it to last longer, but that's what the £90 was for, to get it fixed.

So I took the £90, opened it up and disconnected the PCB that controls the buttons on the side of the TV. My hunch was right and it stopped turning on and off, the remote still worked fine, £90 in my pocket.

The point is, this was not the same as a warranty. If the TV had been older (say 25 months), they may have offered me even less, and consumer rights would have found in their favour.

Warranties are contracts, with stipulations and obligations. Consumer rights law is more flexible, and will not always result in you getting a working product or even full compensation.

(Boy this was a long post for something that probably wont get read).

Edit: voted hot btw, /edit

Not available to some but much better option to go through apple with an education discount and get the 3 years for a small fee. £1000 macbook with 3 years from john lewis would be just short of £900 from apple with applecare 3 years with the discount.

Don't know a student to get the discount.

Is it not only free for actual institutions. The likes of these courses gets it a bit cheaper but not with the cheaper Applecare.

You need an ac.uk email address for the above.

Otherwise I think Applecare is about 30% cheaper.

If you're referencing consumer law here, don't get confused and think that this is the same as a warranty.

As a consumer you have the right to go back to the shop you bought the goods from if they break because of a fault that was likely there from the start, or the goods didn't last the time that someone would have reasonably expected them to.

A 3 year apple care warranty (or any warranty for any product) clearly states what they will and wont do in a legal and binding contract that will give you repairs or replacements even 2 years and 11 months into the contract.

As an example:

1. You buy a laptop, after 2 years and 10 months the screen inverter burns out, but it's found that this was a wide spread problem among the laptops, and a known fault. You could argue that the fault was present at the time of sale and get a replacement or repair.

With a warranty, they'd be obligated by contract to repair it anyway, but consumer law would have had your back.

2. You buy a laptop (without a warranty), and after 2 years the hard drive fails, but there are no known issues with the batch, you're just unlucky, or maybe you're a heavier user. You could try to argue that you would reasonably expect the hard drive to last longer than that, they may agree, but instead of repairing the laptop, they may give you a monetary amount equivalent to what you could buy a functioning second hand hard drive of same size and age at that point. They may also refuse (if they're stubborn) and try to argue that it's a laptop, as such it gets moved around, and that could have resulted in the failure. They'd not be breaking the law doing this, and you'd likely have to fight them, possibly by getting an engineers report stating the reason for the drive failure (very difficult to do) and still might just end up with money for a second hand hard drive (plus the engineers report).

With a warranty, you have a guarantee of action, in writing, that says they will replace it or repair it. Consumer law would have helped, but the company could still make it difficult, and make it hard to prove your case.

3. The laptop is 5 years old, and the motherboard just stops working, through years of heat drying out solder joints, flexing and eventual breaking of joints. It would be very hard to argue at this point that the laptop was reasonably expected to last longer than that, but you might get a token sum of £100-£120 to buy an equivalent 5 year old laptop.

With a warranty (presuming there was one available that long), you'd get a replacement or repair under the contract.

So please don't think that just because consumer law states you have 6 years to complain, that it is the same thing as having a warranty.

A more personal example for me a few years ago, I bought a 40 inch TV from Tesco. It came with a 12 month warranty, with a free extra 6 months if you registered. After about 20 months very light use (I actually don't even watch TV at all now), the TV started turning itself on and off.

I called Tesco, and didn't even need to argue about the consumer law, the rep said "OK, even though the warranty is up, you still have a claim against us, I'll need to pass it to claims, they'll work out whether we can do a replacement, repair or compensation."

A few days later I got a letter through the door offering me £90 to get a repair, for my £300, 2 months outside of warranty, malfunctioning TV. I'd already looked up the manufacturer and they seemed to have a little system set up for themselves. They charged a flat fee of £100 to repair any TV that developed a fault.

I could have argued for the full £100, they probably could have argued that it was fair for the age of the TV and that someone would repair it for that price. I could have argued I reasonably expected it to last longer, but that's what the £90 was for, to get it fixed.

So I took the £90, opened it up and disconnected the PCB that controls the buttons on the side of the TV. My hunch was right and it stopped turning on and off, the remote still worked fine, £90 in my pocket.

The point is, this was not the same as a warranty. If the TV had been older (say 25 months), they may have offered me even less, and consumer rights would have found in their favour.

Warranties are contracts, with stipulations and obligations. Consumer rights law is more flexible, and will not always result in you getting a working product or even full compensation.

(Boy this was a long post for something that probably wont get read).

Edit: voted hot btw, /edit

Thank you :smiley: I made that comment simply because somebody always brings it up as a reason to vote guarantees cold :wink:

changed for the better since I got my last one then :stuck_out_tongue:

Longest
hukd
comment
ever.

If you want a cheaper alternative: (£835)

Ultrabook
OS: Windows 10
CPU: i7 Dual Core 2.5 GHz, 3.1GHz Turbo
Screen: IPS Full HD
RAM: 8Gb 1600MHz
Storage: Samsung Evo 850 SSD 500Gb
Warranty: 3 years (2 years collect & return, 2 year part, 3 year labour)
http://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/notebooks/lafiteII/