According to reports, Apple rejected an AppleCare+ claim for accidental damages after a MacBook Pro was severely damaged in a car accident.
A Reddit user shared their experience of their MacBook Pro being irreparably harmed, leading to Apple denying their request for a replacement.
The user’s description of the denial (mentioned by Macworld) is oddly phrased. They indicate that Apple declined their claim because the laptop was too significantly damaged, a rationale that seems invalid.
It’s unfortunate: my cherished MacBook Pro was involved in a car accident. I have the Apple Care + plan for accidental damages. They refuse to replace it as it’s considered ‘too damaged’. I’ve wasted my money…
Apple’s policy documentation states it covers claims for accidental damage.
If during the Plan Term you submit a valid claim notifying Apple that the Covered Device has failed due to accidental damage from handling resulting from an unexpected and unintentional external event (e.g., drops and damages caused by liquid contact from spills) (“ADH”), Apple will, at its discretion and subject to the service fee described below, either (i) repair the defect using new or previously used genuine Apple parts that have been tested and passed Apple functional requirements, or (ii) exchange the Covered Device with a replacement product that is new or comprised of new and/or previously used genuine Apple parts and has been tested and passed Apple functional requirements.
The policy also lists several exclusions, but most appear irrelevant in this case. There are two stipulations that might be pertinent. First is an exclusion for specific incidents:
To repair damages caused by fire, earthquake, flood, or other similar external causes
While the intent seems clear – to exclude natural disasters – the term “similar external causes” is quite vague and could potentially allow Apple to assert that a car crash falls under this category.
Secondly, there’s a clause referencing damage from “reckless” behavior:
To repair damage, including excessive physical damage (e.g., products that have been crushed, bent or submerged in liquid), caused by reckless, abusive, willful or intentional conduct
Since the user admits fault in the crash, Apple could argue that their driving constituted reckless behavior and deny the claim on that basis.
DMN’s Take
Unless there are undisclosed details, which is often the case, it seems surprising that the coverage was declined. Accidental damage coverage is precisely designed to address damage arising from, well, accidents.
The “reckless conduct” exclusion in insurance terms typically refers to behavior that is decidedly imprudent and poses an obvious risk of damage, such as irresponsibly tossing it to someone who might not catch it.
We have reached out to Apple for a statement and will provide updates if we receive a response.
Photo: Redditor frk1974
FTC: We utilize income-generating auto affiliate links. More.
