Class Action Suit Filed Against Apple Over iPhone Battery

A class-action law suit has been brought against Apple and AT&T accusing the company of unfairly steering its user base towards buying frequent and expensive iPhone battery replacements via a non-replaceable battery.
The suit, represented by lead plaintiff, Illinois-based Jose Trujillo, alleges that the lithium-ion battery found in the current version of the iPhone will exhaust itself in approximately 300 charges – roughly a year of consistent use. The situation thereby guarantees that users will need to have the battery replaced on a yearly basis, a situation that could have been avoided via an easily accessible battery compartment.
According to Gizmodo, Trujillo has stated that the customer is essentially tricked into buying a unit wherein users can’t easily replace the battery by on their own:
“Unknown to the Plaintiff, and undisclosed to the public prior to purchase, the iPhone is a sealed unit with it’s [sic] battery soldered on the inside of the device so that it cannot be changed by the owner,” the suit notes.
Click the jump for the full story…

A class-action law suit has been brought against Apple and AT&T accusing the company of unfairly steering its user base towards buying frequent and expensive iPhone battery replacements via a non-replaceable battery.
The suit, represented by lead plaintiff, Illinois-based Jose Trujillo, alleges that the lithium-ion battery found in the current version of the iPhone will exhaust itself in approximately 300 charges – roughly a year of consistent use. The situation thereby guarantees that users will need to have the battery replaced on a yearly basis, a situation that could have been avoided via an easily accessible battery compartment.
According to Gizmodo, Trujillo has stated that the customer is essentially tricked into buying a unit wherein users can’t easily replace the battery by on their own:
“Unknown to the Plaintiff, and undisclosed to the public prior to purchase, the iPhone is a sealed unit with it’s [sic] battery soldered on the inside of the device so that it cannot be changed by the owner,” the suit notes.
The suit then moves on to illustrate that users are then locked into purchasing an US$86 replacement iPhone from Apple, which functions as the exclusive provider. Customers are also placed in a situation wherein they face a US$29 surcharge for a temporary iPhone handset while their unit is under repair. AT&T is also mentioned as being at fault in this case and is jointly accused of hiding its battery replacement terms for the iPhone until after the handset had been listed for sale.
If Trujillo and company were to emerge victorious in the suit, Apple and AT&T would be forced to pay actual losses as well as pay punitive damages to customers who weren’t properly warned in advance as to the long-term costs of maintaining the iPhone’s battery.
Apple has yet to comment on the suit but has stated that the iPhone’s battery can deliver up to 400 charges at peak efficiency before gradually losing power as opposed to dying altogether.
If you’ve seen this on your end or have comments on the suit, let us know in the forums.