Apple Sued By State Farm Over Alleged iPhone Fire (cnet.com) 166
An anonymous reader quotes CNET:
Insurer State Farm and one of its customers, Wisconsin resident Xai Thao, allege that one of Apple's older iPhones had a defective battery that led to a fire last year. A lawsuit filed on Thursday by both State Farm and Thao claims that her iPhone 4S "failed" and "started a fire at Thao's home." The lawsuit further claims that "preliminary investigations show evidence of a significant and localized heating event in the battery area of the iPhone." It also declares that there were "remnants of internal shorting, indicating that an internal failure of the iPhone's battery caused the fire"... The State Farm lawsuit says that Thao's iPhone was "in a defective and unreasonably dangerous condition" when she bought it in 2014. The suit is claiming in excess of $75,000 in damages.
Discontinued in Sep 2013. (Score:5, Informative)
She bought the phone at least 4 months after it was discontinued (Sept 2013 per Wiki).
Who did she buy the phone from?
Who made the battery in it when it burned?
WTF happened to /.? We all hate Apple and all, but this? Really? Kick the lawyer in the balls until he pukes.
Re: (Score:3)
Be fair - we were all over Samsung long before it was clear what the problem was.
That's not to argue most of your points, though. We're talking about a model which was in millions of people's pockets for several years - whatever happened, it's obvious this is a rare occurrence and not something endemic.
I also tend to be biased against anything State Farm is involved with, based on personal experience with the company. But let's see how the story develops, then decide.
Re: (Score:2)
Kick the CEO of State Farm in the balls until he pukes too.
Re: Discontinued in Sep 2013. (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, it's nothing, except a legal precedent that has an insurance company yet again trying to pass the buck instead of actually paying out against the billions in premiums they collect to never actually pay against a policy.
Fuck that. State Farm can pay, and Apple should fight it even if it was for $20.
Re: (Score:2)
A legal settlement creates ZERO precedent other than the one that already exists for tort suits in general.
Furthermore, it's this "evil stuff" that keeps the likes of Apple from grinding you up into green crackers.
Re: (Score:2)
Be fair - we were all over Samsung long before it was clear what the problem was.
Could that have had anything to do with the fact that there were dozens of cases with brand new devices? No? Compared to one 2 year old phone that actually was bought after it was discontinued 3 years after introduction? One of a model that actually sold more in the first weekend than Note 7s were sold before it was discontinued? Yeah, be fair: Apple should recall the iPhone 4s too, because that's obviously an equivalent problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I use a 10 year old digicam. We also happen to have an iPod2 that's still in working order. Should I expect these devices to start catching fire now that they are OLD. The fact that a product is moderately not-new by durable goods standards is no excuse to excuse any and all UCC (or other) liability over it.
What happened to "Apple longevity"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
would not be surprised if it ends up being discovered that...
the phone had a cheap knockoff battery installed a previous owner of the phone. an iphone that old, used regularly, would have needed a new battery long before the 'incident'; and/or the current owner and co-plaintiff was using a cheap knockoff charger.
Re: (Score:3)
That thing is at most five years old. A Li-ion battery can easily hold out that long if treated right. All your other poitns are still valid however. But it can also just be dumb bad luck.
Re: (Score:2)
an iphone that old, used regularly, would have needed a new battery long before the 'incident';
Not true. I had an iPhone 4 for far longer, and it was still on it's original battery when I retired it less than a year ago. I actually wiped it and let my daughters use it as a camera on our last vacation recently. It didn't hold as much charge as it use to, but was still definitely usable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure there is.. DRM in everything. But then we would all complain about that also. The fact of the matter is we should remove all warning labels and let Mother Nature choose who can populate the earth.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, but no.
When I design electronics I have to take fire hazard into consideration.
I know that despite how many signs I put up some nitwit will connect 230VAC to a device made for 24VDC.
It doesn't have to work then, it is OK if the smoke is let out, but under no circumstance is is acceptable that it causes a fire.
Yes, it is harder to solve the mechanical part and it will cut into profit margins, but the phone should have a PTC-resistor to detect if the battery is overheating and stop charging and shut do
Re: (Score:2)
but under no circumstance is is acceptable that it causes a fire
And if you are dealing with lipo batteries that means encasing it with asbestos. Seems reasonable.
Re: (Score:2)
None of that should matter. Either these devices are built to be safe for people to use (knowing that people do dumb things with electrical appliances), or they are not. If they aren't built with the anticipated 'dumb user factor', then they should never have been released.
It does matter to this case. Apple has attempted to control their own product and has stated long ago that their product (device) should (or must) be used with their own charger/adapter. They knew that there will be those who are described by you, so they wanted to ensure that they are not liable if these people did dumb things with their product.
The law suit did not state what charger the plaintiff used when charging. It just said that the cause of the fire was found to be from the iPhone battery. Also, sh
Re: (Score:2)
None of that should matter.
So all products should be designed that if any, arbitrary aftermarket modification is made those products are still safe? Like installing a hairdryer inside of an oven to get an convection effect?
This can't be anything other than a troll. It's not possible anyone is that stupid.
Re:Discontinued in Sep 2013. (Score:5, Interesting)
No, the iPhone 4s was discontinued in September of 2014 in the United States, and was still sold in some countries as late as 2016.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By the time they discontinued the 16 GB model, it almost certainly wasn't selling very well. The folks who were buying such an old phone in 2014 were buying it because it was extremely inexpensive or free. Buyers who could afford to spend a hundred bucks more for 16 GB tended to instead spend that hundred bucks on upgrading to a 5c.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
WTF happened to /.? We all hate Apple and all, but this? Really? Kick the lawyer in the balls until he pukes.
Why are you picking on Slashdot when it's State Farm who is doing the suing? Slashdot is just reporting on the story by cnet.
Re: (Score:2)
"She bought the phone at least 4 months after it was discontinued (Sept 2013 per Wiki).
Who did she buy the phone from?"
Could've still been brand-new and unopened (TFS ain't mentioning that critical detail.) Plenty of people buy products and keep them in their unopened original packaging for the purpose of resale.
Re: (Score:2)
A reasonable point. It is worth remembering, however, that batteries will go bad over time even without being used. This isn't just ni-cads, it's all of them. If you leave them uncharged it tends to collapse the electrodes, and if they're full charged it tends to over expand them. I'm told this is why batteries are normally at 70% charge when you buy something, but that charge will leak off over the years.
So it seems plausible to me that even if there weren't manufacturing defects, and the device was un
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, I'm not sure that's a valid expectation. It *usually* works that way, but if the electrodes are weak and then overcharged (not sure what that means) it's my understanding that there is an increased chance of a short inside the battery.
OTOH, I don't see why it should catch fire except while being charged.....
Re: (Score:2)
A completely dead Li-on cell also shorts when charging, right? So wouldn't there already be a short detector in the cell?
Re: (Score:2)
After the last sale of /., this site became an even bigger mess. Before the sale, Timothy used to post bullshit stories all the time but now they have Beau and David constantly shitposting the biggest crap they can come across. It's BS leftist ideology 24/7.
I rarely even visit the site anymore. It's become really bad.
Re: (Score:2)
The root cause here is that LiIon batteries are time bombs waiting to go off regardless of brand and manufacturer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Discontinued in Sep 2013. (Score:2)
The lawsuit further claims that "preliminary investigations show evidence of a significant and localized heating event in the battery area of the iPhone."
Yeah, when the battery caught fire sitting on a burning table inside a burning house, it burned hotter than the wooden table, creating a 'hotspot'.
It also declares that there were "remnants of internal shorting, indicating that an internal failure of the iPhone's battery caused the fire"...
And these 'shorts' were found after the fire, after the phone essentially melted, and were determined to be manufacturing defects how, exactly? Because there was no insulation on the wires? Hello! The phone was in a fire...
It was more likely a crappy "Five Below" charger that burst into flames, not the iPhone that worked fine for who knows how long before purport
Re: (Score:2)
Not a surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Any manufacturer of devices with Lithium Ion batteries runs a risk of an occasional failure sparking a fire. Its not negligence, they implement all kinds of quality controls and features to prevent fires, but they are going to happen. Might be best for Apple to just pay up and not make much noise about it, as it is a rare event overall.
And set a precedent? No way.
Re: (Score:2)
I actually design products that use batteries and one absolute requirement is that they fail in a safe manner. Short of ridiculous abuse like throwing the thing in a fire, if they get slammed around or dropped etc. they need to not explode or catch fire.
We mostly use NiMH cells when we need to recharge, because it's easier to ship and safer than LiPo. We do use lithium primary (non-rechargeable) cells though, and the products are designed so that if they do start venting hydrogen or heating up they will fai
Re: Not a surprise (Score:3, Informative)
"There's no reason for a lithium cell to ever fail if it's sized properly for it's chemistry."
Wrong, there is a reason. Time.
Re: (Score:2)
If my damn house is going to burn down because I gave my old phone to my kid to play with, I sure as hell want to know where to draw the line and when to throw it out. If batteries aren't safe after 4 years... somebody needs to be putting huge warning labels on these phones. If this is a one in a billion chance, well OK. But if age increases chances, we need to know what the deal is.
So Apple, where do we draw the line? How old is too old of a battery? How often will this happen if the battery is 5 years old
Obviously, (Score:5, Funny)
She was holding it wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh. Okay. I know you're trying to be funny. (BTW, when I say "you" I'm not talking to just you, AC. I'm talking to all of Slashdot.) But you're referencing something Steve Jobs (By the way, he's dead now. Don't know if you knew that.) said SEVEN YEARS AGO. This has got to be the lamest Apple joke in the universe and it stopped being funny about 6 1/2 years ago. How about coming up with a new joke? Please.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqSLZ1jqhFQ [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The best rebuttal to the "holding it wrong" herp-derp crowd: http://dontholditwrong.tumblr.... [tumblr.com]
Re: Obviously, (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
FTFY. [tumblr.com]
Re: (Score:2)
No. The joke has lasting power by how ludicrous it was.
Yeah, The joke was ludicrous . What he said made total sense. Just look at the forced way you had to hold the phone to get a tiny drop in reception, the people all had white knuckles from the strain of holding it "just right". And the best was when various people showed other phones had similar issues, the defence from manufacturers and Apple haters was that "nobody would hold a phone that way". Which was completely different!
iPhone 4S? (Score:2)
Seriously? Why would anyone still own that piece of garbage?
Says she bought it in 2014? They were on the iPhone 6 as of Sept 2014.
Article doesn't say where she bought it. Not saying it couldn't happen, but hmmm..
Re: (Score:2)
The lawsuit specifically states "Neither Thao nor anyone else ever changed the battery in the iPhone", which is interestingly certain given the vintage and purchase date.
Also, the fire happened in April 2016, and the suit was filed last Thursday. The wheels of justice turn slowly... but I'll be curious to see what additional information comes out. Does the phone still exist in a form Apple can even examine?
Re: (Score:2)
Hubby's 4S still works and is in daily use.
Only needs a charge once every three days. It's only used to text, browse the web (no video) and phone calls. Maybe the occasional picture or video.
Re: (Score:2)
The lawsuit specifically states "Neither Thao nor anyone else ever changed the battery in the iPhone", which is interestingly certain given the vintage and purchase date.
According to the lawsuit the plaintiff bought the phone in 2014. But that brings up a point that the battery was at least 2 years old if it was new. If it was used, it could have been 6 years old. By then the phone was discontinued by Apple; however, it could still have been new if someone was selling out old inventory.
Also, the fire happened in April 2016, and the suit was filed last Thursday. The wheels of justice turn slowly... but I'll be curious to see what additional information comes out. Does the phone still exist in a form Apple can even examine?
It may have taken time to figure out the cause of the fire. Also this is a civil matter so there are different rules for how timely a suit can be brought. A delay of over a year isn't unusual
Re: (Score:2)
Neither Thao nor anyone else ever changed the battery in the iPhone", which is interestingly certain given the vintage and purchase date.
I have an iPhone 4 that my daughters use as a camera that is still on it's original battery. It doesn't hold as much charge as it use to, but still more than enough for casual use.
Re: (Score:2)
It's "interesting" given she purchased the phone well after Apple stopped making them - so how can they confidently state that as a fact?
Re: (Score:2)
Apple doesn't just sell one model of phone at a time. In 2014, Apple was selling the iPhone 6 / 6 Plus, the iPhone 5s, the iPhone 5c (an iPhone 5 with a cheaper, plastic back), and the iPhone 4s.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
So what? If she really bought it in 2014, who cares what other phones were available? Are you really saying that it's ok for devices to self destruct in 3 years? If, somehow, the device was damaged / altered / etc, then fine, it's not Apple's fault, but if it's just 3 years old, no reason it should be catching fire.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I still use it today. I got it for free from someone who didn't want it anymore. Its battery life and speed are slow, but work for basic stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
20+ years old. An old IBM workstation. Haven't turned it on in years but I bet it still works.
Eh. (Score:3)
good luck (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
We don't currently know where this woman got the phone. If it was a refurbished phone off Apple's own store, for instance, that would not be a valid argument.
There's really too much unknown here, at this point in time, for any of us to form intelligent opinions on; but that doesn't seem to be stopping most posters.
Re: (Score:2)
defect? (Score:2)
I happened to me as well. (Score:2, Interesting)
I have owned an iPhone 3GS, 4, 4S, 5, 6, and 6 plus all bought by me brand new at the AT&T store or Apple store. All of them are going strong still (the 3GS and 4/4S are being used as iPods) with the exception of my 5. A few months back, I noticed that the battery in my 5 had swollen to the point that the front screen had bowed out and popped off of the bezzel in places. The phone was still on at that point. I turned it off and took it out back and put it inside my old BBQ, since it could explode or
Re: (Score:3)
I had the battery swell on my 5. It was just on two years old. Screen partially detached from the case, camera signal went funny if you applied pressure to the screen. I was travelling at the time. It lasted the week or so of my trip, and I took it straight in to an Apple store on my return home. It was close to closing time. They messed around with trying to repair it for an hour, by which point the store was supposed to have been closed for half an hour. Then they gave me a new 5, no cost.
Pity the phone d
Re: (Score:2)
Get one of those fire-proof LiPo charging bags off eBay for a few bucks, then put on your oven mitts and carry it into the Apple store, smoking away*, with a pair of tongs. If you can borrow a hazmat suit, even better.
When the "genius" asks what's going on, you can tell them that they told you to bring this bomb in for a battery replacement good luck it's their problem now.
* dry ice works great for this
Re: (Score:2)
Get one of those fire-proof LiPo charging bags off eBay for a few bucks, then put on your oven mitts and carry it into the Apple store, smoking away*, with a pair of tongs. If you can borrow a hazmat suit, even better.
A friend of mine that used to race remote control cars told me that buried in a bucket of sand is the best place to store lithium batteries. Maybe put it in a Ziploc bag first to prevent the sand from damaging any electronics.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, I was not familiar with this product, I will check it out (though I prefer Amazon, since the randos on Ebay would sell you a ziplock bag and call it fire retardant if they thought they could get away with it.)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh my god, these things won't explode and take your head off. Just hit it with a hammer which will make it catch fire and when it's done throw it away.
There's thousands of Youtube videos of people doing just that. In the grand scheme of activities it's relatively safe.
Don't inhale the smoke.
Wear safety glasses.
Re: (Score:2)
I am aware that it is not a grenade, but as you say, I don't want to inhale the smoke, and I would prefer to be more than 16" away from it when it pops. I am not some 14 year old dumbass making a YouTube video who doesn't care if they take years off their life by inhaling diluted lithium ion battery fumes...
Re: (Score:2)
No. It sounds like you're well and truly a distant opposite.
Re: (Score:2)
LiPo fires release a lot of nasty smoke, you'll have to deal with it while driving and a lid on it won't matter. I wouldn't want to have to drag the device to Apple's store, potentially have it go off while driving, and pay $100 on top of all of this for the repair.
For what it's worth, if it has already bubbled out it's not going to explode with any force. It will catch on fire eventually though, as soon as the deformed battery pack shorts out. I wouldn't want it near my face when it does, so it's useless a
So Samsung really does copy Apple! (Score:2)
If the causeFire() method was in the iPhone 4 then Samsung are a full 3 generations behind with the Note 7!
That is truly courageous!
Subrogation (Score:4, Insightful)
A lot of people posting here need to look up Subrogation and learn something about what State Farm is doing.
They paid out and are now looking to recover their payment, this is something they are allowed to do and is normal under the law.
http://www.dmv.org/insurance/s... [dmv.org]
The policy holder is part of the suit because your insurance company requires it. If you have insurance and it pays you on a claim, you are agreeing to help sue anyone they want to go after to recover the money.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. The insurer can't sue directly because it doesn't have a relationship with Apple (the term of art is "privity"); the insured does have a relationship as a customer. Thus, the insured has to be a plaintiff. This is a good policy--it limits who can sue you. Similarly, subrogation moves liability to the party that created the cause of action instead of the insurer, which is a good thing because it provides incentive for parties to not do things that might cause a suit...like creating dangerous pro
That's quite a bit of money (Score:2)
"We can manage to settle this, but we will have to slightly restate our earnings; excuse me a moment (mumble mumble 75 *thousand*? Not *million*?) ..."
"Sorry about this; we'll have one of our permanent food service employees pay this settlement out of the interest on their AAPL ESPP dividends this quarter. We apologize for the false alarm."
Re: (Score:2)
Your first issue isn't an issue - if this *is* a manufacturing or design issue that caused the fire, why should the premium payer pool bear the cost of the payout and not the body which shipped a defective device?
If the premium payer pool bears the cost, then that affects the risk pool, which affects premiums for future coverage.
Retrieving the costs from the manufacturer should *theoretically* leave the risk pool unaffected, meaning there is no additional risk for future premiums to cover.
Re: Two problems with this (Score:2)
The insurance company has already been paid through all of its customer's premiums.
You have a very child-like understanding of the insurance industry.
They are trying to get double their money back here.
Double? That take in premiums, pay out losses, and try to recoup losses when they feel someone else is to blame. This happens with auto insurance all the time - when they feel another driver is at fault, etc.
Premiums are based on value of risk assumed and probabilities of payouts, with the expectation that losses caused by outside forces will attempt to be recovered if possible.
Re: (Score:2)
They try to recoup losses when they 'feel' they can extort any money from anyone with their staff shysters.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, if it was supposed to withstand more than one point of damage. In a battery, the limiting and safety need to be built into the battery and prevent overcharging. Of course you want a smart, working charger as well, but the battery needs protection built in.
No. While Apple might have some fault tolerance built into their phones, it doesn't mean they can design it to withstand all faults. To anticipate every scenario isn't realistic. Also there is no responsibility on Apple's part (or any manufacturer) to insure that their product must exceed operating conditions. From this article [sciencealert.com], some of these chargers fail basic safety tests and were damaged after one use. Are you saying Apple should have taken into account these faulty chargers in their design? That's like
Re: Good luck with that... (Score:2)
the law and the facts favor state farm, what do you think apple's defense will be?
Simple. The report from the fire inspector that points to something other than this silly claim made by State Farm.
State Farm will have to prove whatever the fire inspector claimed was the probable cause of the fire wasn't, and all they have is a forensic analysis done by a scientist on their payroll with no history of anything similar happening.
Re: (Score:2)
"We are going to make this too expensive to pursue "
That can work against an individual, but against an insurance company?
Re: Good luck with that... (Score:2)
Insurance companies are profit motivated. If the thing doesn't settle, they risk spending more in legal fees than the casualty settlement they are attempting to recover, and it's not worth it.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple has the same concerns, if State Farm wins, they can ask for their reasonable legal costs on top of the $75K.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple has enough liquid assets to buy State Farm. If they want to be stubborn, no piddly insurance company is going to stop them.
Re: (Score:2)
Sooner or later a case goes to trial, a judgement is rendered and the appeals process is over, at which point paying is required.
Re: (Score:2)
State Farm isn't as rich as Apple, but they are rich enough to go after this.
Re: (Score:2)
None of those reasons would absolve Apple of all liability...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, it would not. It could be shown that Apple could or should have known that could happen and design the phone to not work with such chargers.
The liability might be split between the maker of the charger and the maker of the phone, or both could be liable.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it would not. It could be shown that Apple could or should have known that could happen and design the phone to not work with such chargers.
So you are putting the responsibility on Apple to design their hardware around the faultiness of other hardware they did not manufacture. Is that what you're stating? Should Ford design their cars around faulty after market car parts? Should Dell design their computers to handle faulty power supplies?
The liability might be split between the maker of the charger and the maker of the phone, or both could be liable.
And if one of them failed basic safety tests and one did not, you would make them both pay?
Re: (Score:2)
You're trying to have a logic debate, I'm trying to explain how courts work in the real world, the two don't always match up.
I don't think I'd have a very hard time finding a jury of 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty who would blame Apple for this.
Re: (Score:2)
You're trying to have a logic debate, I'm trying to explain how courts work in the real world, the two don't always match up.
So you're saying a court would not rule on the side of manufacturer that says a 3rd party part was the cause of a problem and that absolves them of liability? Have you been to court recently? Have you been to a car dealership? If you put in a 3rd party part in your Ford and then try to sue Ford, Ford would quickly (and has done so) have the case dismissed. You used a 3rd party part. They have no liability in that case. The courts would tell you to sue the 3rd party manufacturer.
I don't think I'd have a very hard time finding a jury of 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty who would blame Apple for this.
I would talk to a lawyer befo
Re: (Score:2)
Why wasn't charging shut off/disabled if it noticed a spike in incoming power. There is no reason for the battery to explode from a faulty charger unless the phone did not fail safely.
You are asserting that Apple should design a phone to handle every single condition and fault of a charger they didn't make. Let me ask you a simple question: If lightning struck your home would there be a fire? Why didn't your circuit breakers handle the spike in incoming power? There's no reason for a fire to start in your house unless your wiring did not fail safely.
Re: (Score:2)
That lightning wouldn't have happened if it weren't for static charge between particulates in the air. State Farm should really go after power plants and industrial centers for lightning strikes.
Re: (Score:2)
You absolutely could sue the makers of the circuit breakers. Winning would be up to a court, but you would have standing to sue.
Re: (Score:2)
You absolutely could sue the makers of the circuit breakers. Winning would be up to a court, but you would have standing to sue.
You can file a suit; but that's not the question presented. The question is whether your case has merit. In the case of a lightning strike, it'll get dismissed.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe, maybe not... have you don't the research to see if that has always happened everywhere?
I'd be willing to bet that you'd be surprised...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't sound like a Chinese name at all - even after it has been through the American Language Foreign Name Mangler. To me it sounds more like a Hmong name. Firstly, in Hanyu Pinyin transcription, the letter 'x' is only used before 'i' or 'u', the latter pronounced as a German 'u umlaut'; and 'x' isn't used in any of the other standard transcriptions of Mandarin.
Apart from that - why assume that just because somebody has a name that sounds unfamiliar to you, they must somehow be less than yourself, mo
Re: (Score:2)
State Farm is scum. Their lawyers are sunk costs. You'll find out if you ever have a claim against a State Farm policy holder.
Their corporate policy is to _always_ deny all claims for less than the price of hiring a lawyer to extract the funds out of them. If you want a claim paid, you have to inflate the shit out of it. Grab your neck and start yelling 'whiplash'...'now my pecker don't work'...then, maybe, they will pay to fix your car.