Seattle law firm considers filing a class-action suit against Apple for the "error 53" issue

Seattle law firm considers filing a class-action suit against Apple for the
Last Friday, we told you about the "error 53" message that some Apple iPhone users have been receiving. The error message occurs when repairs are made to the Touch ID fingerprint scanner by non-Apple repair shops using unauthorized parts. Once the error message appears, the phone becomes unusable, the warranty is voided and photos, data and other content are gone forever.

The scary part of the "error 53" story is that it is a problem that lies dormant until you update your Apple iPhone 6 or Apple iPhone 6 Plus to iOS 9. At that point, the software is looking for authorized parts and shuts down the phone when it doesn't find them. In a statement issued on Friday, Apple says that those affected with the problem need to contact Apple support immediately.

On its website, Seattle law firm PCVA writes that it is investigating the possibility of initiating a class-action suit against Apple. The law firm believes that Apple has created the "error 53" issue as a way to force iPhone users to pay the higher prices that Apple charges for repairs.


We should mention that if you think that by winning a class-action suit against Apple you will get enough money to buy a new iPhone, guess again. Most class-action suits pay very little to the members of the class while the lawyers wind up with a decent pay day. In addition, most class-action suits make you give up your right to sue individually.

If you're confident that you will be able to get more by appealing to Apple's sense of fairness than two quarters taped to a postcard, you might want to consider taking matters into your own hands by placing that call to Cupertino yourself.

source: PCVALaw via AppleInsider

Related phones

iPhone 6
  • Display 4.7" 750 x 1334 pixels
  • Camera 8 MP / 1.2 MP front
  • Processor Apple A8, Dual-core, 1400 MHz
  • Storage 128 GB
  • Battery 1810 mAh(14h 3G talk time)
iPhone 6 Plus
  • Display 5.5" 1080 x 1920 pixels
  • Camera 8 MP / 1.2 MP front
  • Processor Apple A8, Dual-core, 1400 MHz
  • Storage 128 GB
  • Battery 2915 mAh(24h 3G talk time)

FEATURED VIDEO

70 Comments

1. Derekjeter

Posts: 1438; Member since: Oct 27, 2011

All class suits only benefit the lawyers. This is nothing but BS of a firm trying to get rich. Since there's so many Apple haters and wannabes the law suit will most likely happen.

3. maherk

Posts: 6632; Member since: Feb 10, 2012

Expect AlikMalix to award this comment as the post of the day lol

28. AlikMalix unregistered

Herk, oh no, I agree with the crowd on this one. Apple messed up big on this. The fact that there are so many ways to deal with potential security problem that can arise from this - bricking it was wrong. Hopefully this lawsuit wins and Apple forced to figure another way to keep devices secure that don't have original parts. Too bad the layers will get a big check and the ones affected get the "if you were affected by this, please sign and mail it back to receive your $5.47". PS: post of the day! +1.

40. ibend

Posts: 6747; Member since: Sep 30, 2014

yeah right, they have the right to void warranty, but deleting all data and bricking the phone is obviously too much... last year, a couple can sue apple because their staff deleted their recent honeymoon photos (they get 2000 eur), I guess the people who get error 53 deserve to get more than 2000 eur each :-/

62. xondk

Posts: 1904; Member since: Mar 25, 2014

This is the point of the matter. They can disable all services they have on that phone that requires interaction with Apple in one way or another. Breaking a eula and similar means you use everything forward from that point, they cannot take anything away you've already bought, this includes that they can't brick the users product. Doing so is very illegal. Though that said it is unfortunate that class law suits are the only real way to sue such companies, especially since lawyers are the only ones really gaining anything.

32. NoToFanboys

Posts: 3231; Member since: Oct 03, 2015

I wouldn't be surprised if he defended Apple on the court itself.

36. AlikMalix unregistered

If they paid me what the paid their lawyers.... You would too, I'd hire techie to write my opening and closing statements.

45. NoToFanboys

Posts: 3231; Member since: Oct 03, 2015

LOL that would make the session longer than it should be.

72. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

HAHA! My opening statement would start off saying "Apple is raping their customers" and since raping is a crime, you have no choice but to find them guilty.

4. Mxyzptlk unregistered

+1. This is just another dick move by some shady scumbag lawyers to profit off of stupidity. What part of UNAUTHORIZED parts did they not understand?

7. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

If you read other articles, it's not unauthorized parts, it's non original parts. Apparently these parts have some kind of serial number or signature to show if they're original or not. From what I've read there is a process Apple does when repairing these devices to authorize the new parts, something a third party repair facility doesn't have access to. In one case, a guy didn't even repair his device, it was damaged but usuable so he continued to use it as is and the update gave him an error 53. http://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/feb/05/error-53-apple-iphone-software-update-handset-worthless-third-party-repair I would say at the very least, Apple should've given people a warning before the update so they wouldn't end up bricking their device.

23. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Stuff happens. No one bats an eye when issues pop on Android, particularly Lollipop. How many freaking issues did it have? The article here says unauthorized parts and that's not the first time something has happened from using unauthorized parts.

35. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

How many times has Google or any of the Android OEMS intentionally bricked their users devices in the name of security, and without telling them no less? I'll wait. Other articles are saying non original components. And with electronics, it's not unauthorized components that cause issues, it's out of spec or tolerance components that cause issues. As long as the part is electronically identical (same specs and tolerances) there will be no issues. Apple in this case (and in a way with their cables as well) have engineered there to be issues when using "non approved" parts. In the lightning cables, having that resistor in only serves to signal to the device that it has been made by an approved vendor. If you'd read the article I linked to, you would've seen that it wasn't just devices repaired by third party techs either.

38. MrElectrifyer

Posts: 3960; Member since: Oct 21, 2014

This move from apple is as stupid as having your MacBook get bricked 'cause you used an "unauthorized" USB peripheral. The fingerprint reader doesn't hold no data, It's a meh human interface device (HID) for the OS to receive input from the user, the OS then stores data in a "secure enclave" according to Apple. Having a different HID wouldn't put the data that's already stored at risk, worst case would be the HID would be reading incorrect input data, thus the OS won't be able to match the input with what already stored. To avoid any risk, the OS can simply disable the HID device. But no, instead apple would rather screw their customer's data and brick the entire device...unfortunately they have mindless zombie followers like you defending this bullcrap.

49. vananucho

Posts: 83; Member since: Jun 01, 2011

I have replaced my Razr's screen digi twice with the cheapest chinese parts available and it still rocks as brand new. I call this apple thing BS. But that's what you get with money grabbing evil companies and their stupid patent protecting tech & policies bs. Anyway, if you own an iphone, and happened to 'suffer' from this, is your fault, with so many reliable & repairable options in the market *cough* *droid turbo II* *cough*

74. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

Has nothign to do with it.

11. Furbal unregistered

That is an idiotic statement. non original part should void the warranty, and disable the fingerprint scanner, not break the device.

16. engineer-1701d unregistered

no all of you no matter apple fans or haters should know changing parts not at oem approved locations voids warranty nothing to do with disabling the item. AGAIN thats like having your brakes changed at local mechanics shop then passing 40mph and the brakes are turned off.

33. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

Actually with modern brake systems, especially ones electronic controls this CAN happen if repaired wrong. Or worse yet...not work at all. They disabled the software that you DO NOT OWN. Your device still works, they did not destroy the functionality of the device.

44. PopeFrancis

Posts: 110; Member since: Aug 05, 2014

It's funny watching fans trying to defend Apple on this one. You just said it, if repaired wrong, it is not the case here. I can think of a dozen ways of handling the security problem, without rendering the devices unusable and without damaging their image with their loyal customers, but see, this is not only about security, is about having even more control, which ends up translating in money. You're right, the software belongs to Apple, but is there a way to keep using the device if Apple disables the software? If Apple allowed to use the device with different software, I think I would agree to certain extent, but there is no other way than Apple's.

59. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

Good thing I am no fan of apple. I am a fan of defending idiots from not reading the terms. Do I think it is stupid...of course. That doesn't make them wrong and the consumer right. Simply stop buying their s**t, that's how you fix it.

64. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

I think that's what they're risking here, losing those customers. I left Apple when a similar issue happened. I sent my iPod classic in for repair, to Apple no less. The battery and hard drive had to be replaced. When I received the repaired device, it would no longer recognize me as the legitimate owner of the media I purchased. I spent a week back and forth with Apple support trying to solve the issue. When we couldn't come up with a solution to reauthorize my device, they told me to repurchase the media. I asked if they would credit me, and I was informed they couldn't do that. So because of an issue on their end, I was supposed to be out over $100 to get back what I'd lost. I left them after that incident. The worst part was, I was all set to get an iPhone when it launched on Verizon, but because of their greed, they lost a customer and all the revenue I would've brought them going forward. Considering I pick up a new device every year, that easily outshines the money they tried to get from me earlier. If they're not careful, they'll be in the same boat but with a much larger group of people.

68. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

They should loose them, imo. While I like certain things about apple from a tech perspective in the job I am in and probably choose them over Android if I was forced too, there is still things that just keep me away from both platforms for the moment. I rather go down in flames with my win10 device. If it fails, I will switch to a tablet with lte, and Skype#

53. vincelongman

Posts: 5579; Member since: Feb 10, 2013

Terrible comparison Brakes are critical Fingerprint reader isn't and there's PIN already setup as fallback, more secure as well And Apple bricked iPhones Its like having your cracked windscreen replaced at your local mechanics, then your car not turning

60. Nopers unregistered

It's not though, I assume it is to protect personal data if somebody were to tamper with the Touch ID or other parts.

65. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

That may be the reason. My two issues with their handling of it are that 1. They could've warned their users that this would happen, and 2. At the very least why was there not a way to send it into Apple with proof of ownership and have the device be repaired and reauthorized so that the device and the content stored on it could be salvaged rather than simply making it filler for a landfill? Also it's not that the device wouldn't function after the repair, so the parts were correct, the issue was it wasn't repaired by Apple. Destroying all the user's content stored on the device and rendering it a paperweight to protect the user is a very shortsighted way of handling the issue.

69. vincelongman

Posts: 5579; Member since: Feb 10, 2013

Just disable the fingerprint reader Then their iPhone is now more secure than a new iPhone No need to turn it into a $650+ paper weight

22. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Just like a faulty Galaxy S battery shouldn't fry the phone and cause it to burn up. Oh wait. It's just like rooting your phone, you risk having it getting bricked or messed up.

34. NoToFanboys

Posts: 3231; Member since: Oct 03, 2015

You are slowly becoming one of those you hate, albeit on a different side.

37. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

You're comparing a hardware issue that can affect any manufacturer to something Apple did intentionally.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.