Customers often debate whether it’s worth getting AppleCare+ coverage for their Apple products. This represents a substantial additional cost, but in the event that your device suffers accidental damage, the policy will cover most of the cost of repairs. On balance our advice tends to be that taking out third-party insurance instead, or simply saving your money, using a case and being careful, is a better option. But it’s really a personal decision.

Your decision may, however, be influenced by a case that surfaced on social media recently. A Redditor going by “frk1974” (possibly not their real name) says they were involved in a serious car accident in which their MacBook Pro was severely damaged: an accompanying photo shows a machine that is catastrophically bent and buckled. Worse still, when they went to Apple to ask for this to be covered by AppleCare+, they were told that it could not be replaced because it was “too damaged.”

Needless to say, frk1974 was displeased by this decision, describing it as a “sad story” and “money wasted.” It does seem odd since the entire purpose of taking out AppleCare+ coverage is to guard against accidental damage. Damage such as this, one would imagine.

I’ve just looked through the terms and conditions [pdf] for current AppleCare+ policies, and be warned that it’s 17 pages long; for this reason, as well as my lack of legal expertise, please don’t take my analysis as watertight. (It’s also possible that the Redditor has left out important aspects of the case, or is misreporting Apple’s actions and/or statements.) But while I can see a few reasons why Apple may have made this decision, none fit with the description “too damaged.”

In the T&Cs, there is a list of 14 exclusions: circumstances under which Apple will not cover accidental damage. And of these, I think two could apply here.

• (d) To repair damage caused by reckless, abusive, willful or intentional conduct, or any use of the Covered Equipment in a manner not normal or intended by Apple: Being involved in a car accident where the Redditor acknowledges they were at fault (“I was the driver that caused the accident”) could potentially be argued to be reckless conduct, and certainly wouldn’t be intended usage.





• (k) To repair damage caused by fire, earthquake or other external causes: It doesn’t appear that the accident caused any fire damage, but perhaps that vague phrase “other external causes” could be argued to include major accidents like this.

But the Redditor describes the conversation differently: “[They] immediately pointed me to a paragraph in the [AppleCare+] terms where they state: folded and crushed devices are not covered… This is not advertised at all of course, but it’s there.”

I’ve run a search for the words “folded” and “crushed” and can’t see them anywhere in the T&Cs I’m looking at. Perhaps this means the Redditor signed up at an earlier date and consequently has a different set of conditions. Or perhaps they, or the member of staff they spoke to, became confused at some point in the conversation.

AppleCare+ for Mac costs $299 for three years of coverage and is supposed to cost $99 for screen damage or external enclosure damage or $299 for other accidental damage. Apple also sells AppleCare+ with Theft and Loss but only for iPhones.

Nevertheless, it seems that we should update our advice to say that you should carefully check the terms of your AppleCare+ policy to see if unusual situations like this are covered. And be prepared to, as one commenter suggests, “take a hammer and make it straighter.”