My Lords, I have considerable sympathy with my noble friends’ amendment. However, I should like to return to the issue of the iPad of my noble friend Lady King, which she described as “stuffed”, following the iOS upgrade. I am sure that Apple would argue that the modifications embedded in the upgrade are of benefit to consumers, remedy issues or security risks, and improve the functionality of the iPad. Whatever the reason—it may be an old iPad that cannot handle the iOS, or it may be user or Apple error; I do not know the circumstance of her iPad being “stuffed”—the point that I am trying to make, certainly when others upgrade their iPads with the new iOS, is that if they have an old version of the device they would be struggling. We know that plenty of software upgrades depend, to some extent, on whether your hardware can cope with all the extra features that Apple in particular include. I wonder whether my noble friend’s amendment can deal with such a scenario in which benefit may apply to most but not necessarily all consumers. The amendment may be better than what is in the Bill, and it may be that I am just pointing out the complexities of this area, but I should be interested in his and any other responses to that point.
Consumer Rights Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Knight of Weymouth
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 20 October 2014.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Consumer Rights Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
756 c200GC 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2021-10-12 15:46:50 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-10-20/14102017000174
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-10-20/14102017000174
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-10-20/14102017000174