B.C.’s Civil Resolution Tribunal has rejected a woman’s claims that problems with her iPhone caused her psychological problems.
Janet Symmonds claimed Apple Canada Inc. had to replace her iPhone 7 and iPhone 11 numerous times due to hardware problems, according to tribunal member David Jiang's .
“She claims $5,000 as compensation for psychological injury,” Jiang said.
Apple denied liability saying Symmonds’ claim lacked any compensable cause of action, was out of time for a case to be brought under the Limitation Act and was for an excessive amount.
Symmonds claimed $1,069.60 for an iPhone 11; unspecified amounts for expenses in connection with health, stress, privacy issues; ‘repair chain’ issues, and inconvenience; and $534.99 for a full or partial refund for monthly AppleCare fees.
Apple objected to the claims and said they were not disputed-related expenses. It also said the claims pushed Symmonds’ total claims about the tribunal’s small claims limit of $5,000.
“I agree with Apple that these are substantive claims and not dispute-related expenses,” Jiang said, saying he could not rule on the claims above the limit.
The events
Symmonds bought an iPhone 7 through her mobile phone carrier Sept. 11, 2014. After it developed hardware problems outside the 90-day warranty period, she purchased an iPhone 11 on Oct. 19, 2020 to replace it.
Jiang said it was undisputed that Symmonds also purchased extended warranty — known as AppleCare — for the iPhone 11. Jiang noted the terms were not in evidence so the provisions were not relevant to the dispute.
A witness statement from Apple employee ML said Symmonds came to the Apple store ML worked at on Nov. 20, 2021, May 27, 2022, Aug. 17, 2022, and May 31, 2023.
“On each of those dates Miss Symmonds reported issues with her iPhone 11,” Jiang said. “Apple attempted troubleshooting and replaced her iPhone with a new one. So, in total, Apple replaced her iPhone 11 with a new one four times.”
Symmonds said that Apple employees, including ML, treated her rudely at times, and that the multiple issues with her phones affected her mental and physical health.
For its part, Apple said Symmonds’ claim has no legal basis and that claims for psychological upset are not recoverable at law.
Jiang said Symmonds did not allege any specific breach of a contract term.
“So, I find her claim is about alleged rude and unpleasant treatment by Apple staff and the general inconvenience caused by replacing her iPhone multiple times,” Jiang said.
Symmonds provided a doctor’s note about her stress and mental health issues arising from the situation.
The tribunal noted the law distinguishes between psychological disturbance that rises to the level of personal injury and psychological upset that does not amount to injury and therefore not eligible for compensation.
“I find it does not show that Miss Symmonds’ psychological disturbance rises to the level of personal injury,” Jiang said. “In particular, I find it unproven that the disturbance was sufficiently serious.”
“I acknowledge that the evidence shows Miss Symmonds reported issues for a prolonged period of time,” Jiang said. “However, I do not find this, by itself, is enough to show a compensable psychological injury.”
Jiang also said it was unnecessary to discuss whether Apple employees such as ML treated Symmonds in a rude or unpleasant manner.
“I dismiss Miss Symmonds’ claim for $5,000 for psychological injury,” Jiang wrote.
