Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.mobile.ipad,aus.computers
Subject: Re: Apple have stolen my iPAD
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 08:16:21 +1000
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <dnig9oFlpseU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <dn2kc5Fl7foU1@mid.individual.net> <dn9ot8FfegcU1@mid.individual.net> <dn9rlaFg5e2U1@mid.individual.net> <dna558Fikd5U1@mid.individual.net> <571046a7$0$44966$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net> <dnc5htF3fm3U1@mid.individual.net> <dncf0iF5qvlU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net B6tzHbuliuWHKhvkkT7tow4nnyTItfoSo0ekHOFWApXXrRpOg=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:V14BOiGRPYxMi01UJ9OQPoD5RJs=
In-Reply-To: <dncf0iF5qvlU1@mid.individual.net>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
Xref: csiph.com comp.mobile.ipad:55723 aus.computers:52045



"Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote in message 
news:dncf0iF5qvlU1@mid.individual.net...
> Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>> Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <dna558Fikd5U1@mid.individual.net>,
>>> Frank Slootweg  <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>>>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope. If he had followed standard procedure for forgotten passwords, 
>>>>> he
>>>>> wouldn't be locked out of his account.
>>>>
>>>> *If* Apple would have told/advised/<whatever> him to follow that
>>>> "standard procedure". I'm sure he would have done so, but they did
>>>> antthing and everthing *but* that. So apparently the procedure is *so*
>>>> "standard" that Apple support is not aware of it.
>>>
>>> Apple Support wouldn't normally even come into the picture until after
>>> the above procedure failed. Did the OP even try the password recovery
>>> feature, or just keep entering the wrong password until he got locked 
>>> out?
>>
>>   Irrelevant
>
> Oh, it's quite relevant.
>
>> because Apple *did* come in the picture
>
> *After* he locked himself out, no doubt. Again, it's relevant.
>
>> and then fscked up
>> by demanding proof of purchase
>
> Demanding proof of legitimate ownership of a device before unlocking a
> locked account is warranted and expected.
>
>> rejecting the proof multiple times
>
> It was rejected because the company isn't an authorized reseller and the
> receipt did not include the device serial number (and hand written serial
> numbers don't provide sufficient proof of ownership). The second receipt 
> is
> from a shady Chinese company that may not be an authorized seller either
> for all we know.

Legally it doesn’t have to be an authorised reseller and in fact
it is illegal in Australia to only sell thru authorised resellers.

Apple gets to like that or lump it.

>> not doing any checking themselves (Is the iPad indeed reported as
>> stolen? How was the Apple ID used the last months/years? Which device is
>> associated with the Apple ID? Etc..).
>
> You don't know what checks Apple has done.

We do know what they can do to satisfy themselves that
Don has always been the owner of that particular ipad and
that they clearly have not done that because that would
show that he has always been the owner of that ipad.