Yes, this story of iPhones without a charger in the box, which started there at the launch of the iPhone 12 (in 2020), is still paying off. time ball? a Procon-RJ.
as such inform Economic valueApple has been fined 12.27 million Brazilian Real From PROCON-RJ for selling smartphones (more specifically iPhone 12) without a charger. In the Consumer Protection Agency’s assessment, this practice is considered offensive because it constitutes the binding process, especially because it is an essential component for the product to function.
In addition, Apple was notified twice by Procon-RJ on Tuesday (23/8), in order to clarify information about the supply of the charger on the iPhone 13 and … released! If the agency finds that there is a violation in these other two cases (and there will be, for obvious reasons), Apple may receive two more fines in the range of R$12 million, bringing the total 36 million Brazilian riyals.
But how can PROCON-RJ notify Apple of a product that has not yet been released? Well, in the case of the iPhone 13, the notification is part of the sanctioning process, where Apple has 20 days to respond. Already from this model It will hit stores in about a monthto me Economic valueThis is an initial inquiry with a response time of 5 days.
It is not new, under the argument of sustainability, that the largest companies in the phone sector sell cell phones in Brazil by splitting their products, forcing consumers to buy separately, an essential component of the regular operation of the charger. It is estimated that this practice generated an increase in Apple revenue of more than $6 billion.
–Igor CostaCEO of PROCON-RJ
This is clearly not the first time that consumer protection agencies have notified or fined Apple — recently, including, The same government encouraged Procons to fine both Apple and Samsung Precisely because they do not provide chargers with their devices. Prior to that, however, the Procons from FlorianopolisAnd the from FortalezaAnd the from Sao PauloAnd the from Santa Catarina It has previously questioned (or fined) Apple over the controversial decision.
It still seems…
