Apple Starts Sending 'Batterygate' Settlement Payments to iPhone Users - MacRumors
Skip to Content

Apple Starts Sending 'Batterygate' Settlement Payments to iPhone Users

Apple in 2020 agreed to pay up to $500 million to settle a class action lawsuit in the U.S. that accused the company of "secretly throttling" some iPhone models, and payouts finally started going out this week to individuals who submitted a claim.

iPhone 6s MacRumors YouTube
The website for the so-called "batterygate" settlement said payments would likely start to be distributed this January, and payouts have began on schedule. MacRumors readers Ken Strand and Michael Burkhardt are among the individuals who have received payments of $92.17 per claim from Apple as part of the settlement.

The lawsuit was filed in December 2017, shortly after Apple revealed that it throttled the maximum performance of some iPhone models with "chemically aged" batteries when necessary to prevent the devices from unexpectedly shutting down. Apple introduced this power management system in iOS 10.2.1, but it initially failed to mention the change in that update's release notes. Apple apologized about its lack of transparency, and temporarily lowered the price of iPhone battery replacements to $29 in 2018.

Despite apologizing over the way it communicated the change, Apple repeatedly denied all allegations and never admitted to any legal wrongdoing. Apple said it agreed to the settlement only to "avoid burdensome and costly litigation."

The class included any U.S. resident who owned an affected iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus, and/or iPhone SE that ran iOS 10.2.1 or later, and/or an iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus that ran iOS 11.2 or later, before December 21, 2017. The deadline to submit a claim for a payment was in October 2020.

Apple continues to have a performance management system on the iPhone 6 and newer.

Popular Stories

Four iPhone 18 Pro Colors Mock Feature

iPhone 18 Pro Launching Later This Year With These 10 New Features

Tuesday May 26, 2026 6:32 am PDT by
While the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max are not launching until September, there are already plenty of rumors about the devices. It was initially reported that the iPhone 18 Pro models would have fully under-screen Face ID, with only a front camera visible in the top-left corner of the screen. However, the latest rumors indicate that only one Face ID component will be moved under the...
Apple Watch Ultra 2 Black Titanium

watchOS 27 Will Add These New Features to Your Apple Watch

Sunday May 24, 2026 11:53 am PDT by
Apple will unveil watchOS 27 during its WWDC 2026 keynote on Monday, June 8, and a handful of new features have been rumored already. The first developer beta of watchOS 27 should be available immediately following the keynote, and a public beta typically follows in July. The update should be released to all users with a compatible Apple Watch model in September. Below, we recap watchOS...
Apple Watch Blood Glucose Monitoring Feature 2

Apple Watch for Diabetes: The Latest on Apple's Plans for Non-Invasive Blood Sugar Monitoring

Tuesday May 26, 2026 9:30 am PDT by
For many years now, it has been rumored that the Apple Watch will eventually gain non-invasive blood sugar monitoring capabilities, which would enable millions of people with diabetes to track their blood glucose levels without needing to prick their skin with a needle or wear a dedicated continuous glucose monitor. According to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman, Apple recently shifted oversight of...

Top Rated Comments

CWallace Avatar
31 months ago
One of the times Apple's penchant for secrecy bit them on the bum. It would likely have been seen as positive PR if they had been upfront as to why they were doing it - "rather than have your phone suddenly shut down, we're going to limit how much power it can draw for a short period of time".
Score: 20 Votes (Like | Disagree)
31 months ago
The tech media STILL can't report on this issue correctly.

Throttling was not just for end-of-life batteries. It was also for new batteries that were operating below 20% charge or were operating in cold temperatures. All three of those scenarios could result in voltage demands that the battery couldn't supply which could potentially do permanent damage to the phone hardware.

This was always one of the stupidest lawsuits from a consumer perspective. Without throttling, the phone would simply shut off in either of those three scenarios. All the throttling did was allow the user to continue what they were doing albeit in a slower speed.
Score: 17 Votes (Like | Disagree)
dynamojoe Avatar
31 months ago
Three claims here, three payouts. The sad yet fun part is that Apple is probably just going to get this money back later on.
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
31 months ago
Woke up to three (Two 6 Plus and a 7 plus) $92.17 deposits this morning and was very confused but also very happy.
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
vegetassj4 Avatar
31 months ago
Mine hasn't shown up yet and I gave them my Apple Savings Acct: #

I tried asking Siri:



Attachment Image
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
WarmWinterHat Avatar
31 months ago

The tech media STILL can't report on this issue correctly.

Throttling was not just for end-of-life batteries. It was also for new batteries that were operating below 20% charge or were operating in cold temperatures. All three of those scenarios could result in voltage demands that the battery couldn't supply which could potentially do permanent damage to the phone hardware.

This was always one of the stupidest lawsuits from a consumer perspective. Without throttling, the phone would simply shut off in either of those three scenarios. All the throttling did was allow the user to continue what they were doing albeit in a slower speed.
I don't know why you, and several other people, refuse to see the reasons for this. It's not what Apple did, it's that they didn't tell anyone they did it., and there was no way for the end-user to know what was happening.

If they were upfront and said "we're enabling this, and here is how you know if it affects you", there would have been no lawsuit, no case, and no payouts..

Transparency would have solved this.
Score: 10 Votes (Like | Disagree)