A few days ago a Canadian realized that his iPhone was stolen while he was with friends at a bar. The man contacted the mobile phone operator, blocked the card from the terminal and of course the iPhone became unusable. Seeing that the iPhone can no longer be used, the thief made an appointment at an Apple store to exchange the terminal for an unlocked one. The real owner received the email by which the programming was confirmed and seeing that he has a chance to recover the terminal called Apple. Unfortunately, those from Apple did not want to help him in any way, not even to suspend the programming until the completion of a police investigation.
[Barkley] called the store to tell them that the person who showed up for that appointment would probably be carrying his stolen phone. Perhaps, Barkley asked the clerk on the phone, Apple might want to notify mall security? Barkley was told that it is Apple's policy not to get involved in such matters.
The help came from the police who were already investigating the theft of the iPhone and who managed to take over the stolen terminal from Apple and put it back into service. The problem is that the thief received another decoded iPhone from Apple without any employee of the company notifying the police at any time to arrest the person in question. Even so, the user whose iPhone was stolen got his device back, but Apple lost a few hundred dollars and a few "image points" by offering a decoded iPhone to a thief.
Detectives called Barkley to tell him he could pick up his phone at the police station. It turns out someone did come in with the phone – before Barkley and the police arrived – with a story about buying it from a friend of Barkley's uncle, only to find the phone didn't work. In fact, it wasn't working because Barkley had had the service disconnected.
The Apple clerk at the Genius Bar assumed it was a phone malfunction, and seemingly without checking to make sure, handed the man a brand new phone and put Barkley's stolen phone in the back, to be sent off for servicing.
The policy adopted by Apple in such cases is more than questionable. Apple could not give credence to its own customer in the absence of evidence from the police, but I think that the employees should have called the representatives of the local police when the alleged thief entered the store. This did not happen and more than likely this is not the only case where someone was left with a bitter taste after such an experience.
