benjamin567 I know that Apple say that anything above 80% is enough, but that simply isn’t true.
If that’s what Apple says, then it’s going to be difficult to persuade giffgaff (or the third party company that’s supplying the refurbished phones that giffgaff sells) any differently.
However, the point that needs to be got across is that the battery must be expected to still be above 80% at the end of the one year warranty period. And that’s further complicated because the warranty doesn’t begin until somebody buys the phone – but in some cases an individual phone might have been in stock for 6 months before being sold. So, in reality we should be requiiring that we expect that the phone should still have an “80%” battery after 6 months on the shelf and one year in actual use.
I don’t suppose Apple actually gives guidance on what test result is necessary to ensure a battery will still have an 80% capacity after 6 months on the shelf and 12 months of normal usage, but let’s guess for the moment that figure might be 92%. As time goes by, that figure could be increased or reduced according to the number of returns and repairs that seem to be due to failing batteries.
So, it should be written into giffgaff’s contract with the company that refurbishes the phones that on the day of test the phone will have a battery of 92%* or greater, and that the battery should be rechecked if it remains on the shelf longer than 6 months.
This should in turn be backed up by two statements:
that the giffgaff member should expect the phone to have a battery result in excess of 87%* on the day of delivery to the member, and
that the battery will be deemed to have failed if the test result drops below 80% at any time during the one year warranty period, and the phone be returned for free replacement
these figures are initially estimates, but are subject to periodic adjustment according to monitored battery related repair statistics
benjamin567 it is also wasting giffgaff’s money in postage return costs to the warehouse.
A properly negotiated contract would ensure that all those costs are passed back to the third party company that’s supplying the refurbished phones, ensuring that they have the best incentive to ship only batteries that can reasonably be expected to remain “in spec” throughout the warranty period.
But … there’s always a downside and there are two other considerations:
- as far as I’m aware, only Apple phones come with a simple battery test that would allow a pass level to be so easily quoted as a “requirement” so a different consideration would apply to other phones
- replacing batteries is expensive, so if a larger proportion of batteries are replaced before sale, and the cost of replacing those batteries exceeds the cost of bothways postage, that will in turn cause an eventual rise in the selling price of refurbished phones. Overall it’s better if buyers are willing to pay slightly more to reduce the probability of having a battery that fails during warranty, but buyers often don’t understand the ramifications and will go instead to another seller that’s offering the phone for £5 less.
So we need a way to get across to the buyer that we’re adopting a superior product, and having a well-researched and clearly documented battery policy (and probably a “no stuck pixels” policy too) will go some way towards this.