Russian Dmitry Petrov has submitted to Basmanny court of Moscow the claim to the Russian division of Apple “Apple Rus”, the Irish Apple Distribution International, the retailer re:Store (part of Inventive Retail Group) and Adjusters about”. The statement said that the American company discriminare Russian consumers by refusing to supply components for iPhone repair.
According to the materials of the case, in 2015 Petrov bought at the store re:Store smartphone iPhone 6 Plus a price of 62 990 rubles, paying the 10% cost of the device over a one-year subscription for free out of warranty repairs, Adjusters about”.
Damaging the display, Petrov turned to “Adjusters about” where he was asked to replace the screen. However, the Apple support said that the displays for iPhone repair in Russia are not supplied. Use the Petrov afraid, because Apple can lock the device. In other service centers, he confirmed that the displays for the iPhone in Russia is not supplied, and proposed to replace the smartphone with a surcharge of 25 990-29 300 rubles, “Vedomosti”.
The lawsuit States that Apple violates Russian law on protection of consumer rights. According to Petrov, the smartphone manufacturer has to provide spare parts for repair during the service life of the products, the service life of the iPhone is five years.
Petrov asked the court to compel Apple to supply the displays in the Russian services separately to provide a screen for its smartphone and replace it with joint efforts “, Adjusters about” and re:Store, and also to compensate for the losses incurred and to pay a penalty. He hopes his lawsuit will push Apple to the respect of consumer rights in Russia.
Managing partner of law firm “Losev and partners” Vyacheslav Losev said that claims for Apple Petrova can be satisfied as they are backed by quite strong evidence. Claims to “Adjusters about” and re:Store, regarding improper service, the court probably will reject, the expert believes.
An Apple representative did not respond to a request for comment. In Adjusters about” have refused comments, in re:Store believe that the responsibility lies with the manufacturer.
