Is your washing machine built to fail?

I agree with you there, Malcolm.

When it comes to mainstream brands sold by John Lewis, I presume they come to some sort of arrangement with the manufacturer over the longer warranty; I can’t believe JL don’t expect the manufacturer to take some or all of the cost of this benefit on board in return for promotion of the product. It must put them in a tricky situation when the original manufacturer’s appliance is on the shop floor alongside the John Lewis own-label version.

Malcolm – I had great hopes for the new Consumer Rights Act but even following progress of the Bill it became clear that it would not help us pursue our rights for products that fail outside the warranty period. As it stands, people are turned away by retailers including Currys and John Lewis, as Which? undercover investigations have shown.

There certainly is a distinction between between reliability and durability in my eyes too. Which is more important may depend on whether the owner is a light or heavy user, but both classes of user deserve fair protection from premature failure.

Thinking back, it was common for some goods to have a longer warranty on expensive parts, such as the compressor in fridges and freezers and the tube in the days of CRT TVs. My own washing machine came with a ten year warranty on the polypropylene tub. If manufacturers want to use integrated assemblies such as sealed tanks to cut their production costs then at least give a decent warranty on that component. I suggest ten years.

Problem is Malcolm that a lot of things on appliances are wear and tear items. They will fail beyond any doubt whatsoever at some point.

How does the owner, the retailer, the manufacturer or a judge determine what’s “reasonable” in that regard?

The answer is that it will normally come down to an opinion on one or more of the parties or, evidence from the producer of the item, be that a part or the product whole.

In this conversation a good example is bearings in a washing machine, they will wear out and fail without a shadow of doubt but a number of factors will determine the time that they may last. Loading, detergent use, spin speeds used, wash programs used and so on to the point where it is almost infinitely variable.

Meanwhile they could be tested to last on average in normal average and proper use for say 2000 hours.

So for a court or a producer you need to have reliable information that shows that the machine has been used correctly and the component/s have failed sooner than expected and, in most cases this is not available. In fact I’d argue from experience that in virtually every dispute of this kind of nature that no party has the information.

But it comes down to the claimant having to prove their case.

So, the claimant has to prove that the failure is premature and that the retailer or manufacturer is liable at their cost. This takes time and is not easy to do.

Then you’ve the court procedure, that also takes time.

Meanwhile there’s a bust washing machine with a retail value of less than a week’s wages from mot people causing a family dilemma that is probably a few years old and worth £10-50 at best.

In essence in practical terms, it’s not worth pursuing.

You are correct as is wavechange on longer warranties in this respect but I can tell you that, from first hand experience, where a claim is rejected as wear and tear, abuse etc the customer goes off on one usually threatening all manners of retribution but, they are back into that system at the start of this post. No net gain really if this is the case but all parties involved get a headache from it.

Every decent retailer and manufacturer is all too aware of this and, the best you can hope for if they choose to write the machine off which will often be a condition of longer warranty, is a repayment of the current market value. Well, the current market value of a used washing machine that’s busted and beyond economical repair is not a lot at all. Trade value would be £10-15 roughly at best, if you don’t have to pay to have it removed. In short, it’s pretty much worthless.

Like cars, appliances lose value and depreciate hugely, far worse than cars.

In this where we have sealed tanks, if the tank goes obsolete or the cost simply too great then you might get a token payment back and have to dispose of the old machine.

I wholeheartedly agree that this only serves to exacerbate the problem as it will often make what should be a perfectly serviceable machine a worthless hunk of junk.

K.

Of course they gave a ten year warranty on the tank wavechange but, just on that one part.

As do LG on motor stators that rarely, if ever fail.

A poly tub will not fail other than something punching through it or perhaps the motor mounts snapping but, well enough made there’s never an issue with them apart from smells.

The impression given is that the product is great design and so on but, is that true?

I can cite one example on a machine just like yours owned by my former accountant. One or two weeks out of warranty the bearings failed and he was refused any assistance on repair, I ended up doing it at a fraction of the price Philips or Whirlpool (I forget which at the time) wanted to do it.

The parts, as with most Whirlpool stuff, were a horrific price.

I recall it due to the circumstance but also that the bearing set was about £70.

It is my experience and what I can see is that long warranties on specific components are given on components that are both highly unlikely to fail in normal use and that cannot be user replaced so, you have to pay an over the odds cost often to have it done “free of charge” at any rate.

You’d also be amazed at how many people assume, wrongly, that the entire product carries the same warranty as a single component as well.

Another example of good marketing winning out over practicality.

K.

Kenneth, earlier you say “Everyone should buy a Miele then if that is what is wanted. Long warranty, good enough build, sorted.” Durability need not be expensive – decent design and good quality components. I|f Miele can do it, why can’t others – and cheaper. Bearings, for example, of good quality cost not much more than rubbish ones.

I agree it is all a problem. I don’t want to see us having to pursue retailers through the courts, just for them to accept that a washing machine sold at a decent price that fails not long after its short warranty is unacceptable. Durability is tricky, but if we look at what consumers actually experience on average on different brands of appliance in different price brackets we might get a handle on what we should normally expect.

Wear and tear should be the user’s responsibility – providing they get reasonable use from the wearing item, and providing it is sensibly replaceable. If a manufacturer regards bearings as likely to wear well before the rest of the machine is going to fail then they should design them to be easily changed. This happens in industrial situations where they are far less tolerant of poor performance.

There can be progress in the consumer’s favour as long as we address it. At present it seems to me consumer groups avoid it.

When I started and for some time in the industry I didn’t understand it all either Malcolm, things like why can’t they just use something of a bit better quality or, make it more repairable but over time I’ve come to understand that a lot of it boils down to hitting retail pricing points. Or, making the business profitable.

I get totally what you say about industrial applications but even in our industry there’s a massive difference between say a commercial washer and a domestic one.

A commercial will be at least, if not more, than double the cost of the most top end domestic washers as they are engineered to take more wear, tear and abuse and will also lack many of the features found on domestics.

Yet again, you can have the quality, durability and repairability but it comes at a significant cost.

K.

I think the term ‘reliable’ is not much use on its own. ‘Reliability’ is really a sub-state of ‘durability’. A machine can be relied on to underperform! A durable machine will not let you down and will keep going for a long time because it is well-made from good components and materials and is precision-engineered for a specified standard of service over a given duration. The length of the warranty might be a clue to that duration.

I was going to make the same point Ken, they only give long guarantees on parts that virtually never fail and the guarantee is only against manufacturing defects, not wear and tear. So in effect the guarantee is a gimmick.

I think that’s a bit harsh Andy. 😉

No warranty covers wear and tear and most all exclude accidental as well.

You are right though, it’s warranty on things that are almost never seen to fail or rarely other than through misuse or they wear out.

But, case in point, LG according to feedback I’ve had from customers will charge about £115 to come out to determine if a stator is faulty and would be replaced in warranty, they warranty that part for 10 years.

But, they rarely fail and it’s likely to be something else, often the hall sensor or something completely unrelated. A hall sensor is about £13.

The kicker is though, a new stator runs around £60 to £80 roughly. Retail.

Cost to LG is likely to be a lot lower.

So, free warranty is it?

K.

I thought you might like to take this up with AMDEA. It is a pity that the legislation on durability is so nebulous. Where I do support AMDEA is over the need to make a decision on a case-by-case basis. It is essential to examine faulty equipment to determine why it has failed. That could be poor design or use of substandard components, it could be wear & tear, it could be random failure of a good quality component, or it could be abuse. No impartial person could make a judgement without an examination.

Why should I take it up with AMDEA? Of course durability, like any failure, would (should) be taken on a case by case basis. However, like recalls, it may be shown that a particular product – or batch – fails the durability test more frequently, and for common common (s), than is reasonable. This sort of intelligence will help consumers if they find the need to make a claim.

The law (SoGA and CRA) cover all products and, therefore, are like much legislation general in their application, but not “nebulous”. What needs to be done is then establish specific failures in relation to different products, and different groups within a product range – say cheap. middle and high prices domestic appliances’ so potential claimants and adjudicators have benchmarks against which to judge the extent of the claim. Otherwise what help is there when your £500 washing machine, used normally, fails a month after its one year guarantee runs out? No one says it is easy but not tackling it at all is, in my view, of no service to consumers.

I have asked Which? whether this view is reasonable, and they have to date avoided the issue. What is Which? for if not to protect consumers?

I suggested this because you have mentioned contacting trade associations before.

I stand by my claim that the legislation on durability is nebulous. The example of wellington boots has been posted many times on these pages but that does not help with washing machines or other products.

“What needs to be done is then establish specific failures in relation to different products, and different groups within a product range – say cheap. middle and high prices domestic appliances’ so potential claimants and adjudicators have benchmarks against which to judge the extent of the claim. Otherwise what help is there when your £500 washing machine, used normally, fails a month after its one year guarantee runs out? ” Anyone with experience of repairing washing machines will know that there are very many possible faults, so I don’t understand how your suggestion might work in practice.

It would be helpful if manufacturers published a list of common faults that qualify for free repairs, as Apple has done for years. I presume that this information is generally known only to the trade.

It would be very helpful if Which? could offer us advice on how to proceed with a claim under the Consumer Rights Act for an expensive washing machine that has failed just outside the guarantee period.

There is legislation. The Consumer Rights Act is such. It IS illegal to deny consumers their rights. Where has fairness to both sides been under dispute?

The legislation is not working. As I said above, we are routinely turned away be retailers. That is not fair.

Companies are being treated unfairly by anyone who expects the Consumer Rights Act to behave like an extended warranty. It is not. As you agreed above, faults must be judged on a case by case basis.

Legislation only works if we use it. We need help and advice if we are to make effective use of the Consumer Rights Act (and the Sale of Goods Act if you bought anything before last October).

I have never suggested treating the CRA (or SoGA) as an extended warranty. Why suggest that? At present the supplier has, as we have seen with some major retailers, attempted often successfully to put customers off by telling them they had no claim outside the guarantee or to go to the manufacturer. Without knowledge many will simply give up. That is what is unfair. If it is necessary to use the law that will decide “fairness”; but until consumers get some support on the grounds on which to make valid claims we will continue with the consumer being the underdog. I think that is unfair, don’t you?

Extended warranties? Great – but when will we get them. And they are different from CRA. A warranty, at some cost to the consumer, is an insurance that will, for example, often pay for the full repair or replacement cost. A durability claim would almost certainly, if justified, make redress based upon the use of the product to date versus its expected normal life, so it would be a partial redress. A different result but, in my mind, an equitable one.

However, our consumer champion, Which?, have, they say, no plans to look at durability so that’s hard luck on consumers generally. Nor have I seen any plans to try to get generally fairer warranties. So when you get a product that doesn’t last, throw it away and buy a new one. Is that good for the environment? Or just good for the producers?

Why insist that retailers should inform customers of their legal rights and then go on to say that legislation is not working? I see no logic in that. We need to get legislation working.

If retailers did inform customers of their legal rights then we might make a start to get legislation working. I’d be happy to work together I will leave you to this topic for the time being.

Hi, as has been spotted by Wavechange, we have published a new Convo which talks about how we worked with Richer Sounds to get ‘Your consumer rights’ booklets at their checkouts: https://conversation.which.co.uk/technology/car-dealers-insurance-trains-richer-sounds/ We’d like other retailers to follow.

If Which? want to help consumers they should campaign, along with the European consumer groups, for appliances that are repairable at sensible prices and, moreover, that are durable. This is a policy of the umbrella group BEUC, but we need actions as well as policies. Nothing wrong with cheap, throwaway products providing we are told this before we buy. Equally, products that can be sensibly repaired should also be publicised so we can make an informed choice.

Along with this of course we will benefit if there were long repair or replace warranties, either as part of the initial price or as an extra, at realistic prices.

“Nothing wrong with cheap, throwaway products providing we are told this before we buy.” I disagree, on environmental grounds. A smartphone is likely to be outdated in two years but major appliances don’t change that much. BEUC has the right ideas but it is difficult to see how to take on the might of industry that continues to move towards products that are not economically repairable.

Darron – Parts-only guarantees have been with us for many years. I have not made a claim but believe that you are right about high labour charges and have seen the advice that it can be cheaper to use an independent service engineer. Sadly, the companies will not provide the spares free of charge and let you fit them. 🙁

I would like to see repairable goods publicised, as Malcolm suggests, but the first requirement would be for manufacturers to hold spares for a reasonable period – perhaps at least ten years in the case of a major appliance.

There are people who, for their own reasons, would buy a £200 washing machine expecting it to last 2 or 3 years years and then replace it. We might think they are wrong environmentally but I don’t think we can impose our views on others – there are so many products bought that we either throw away or don’t use that consume resources that we could also condemn on environmental grounds. Another candidate would be gas-guzzling cars.

What is wrong is when people are not made aware of the consequences of what they are buying, which is why repairability, and a measure of durability, should be declared up front. How many might still buy the cheap washing machine if told that when the bearings fail in 2 or 3 years it cannot be repaired?

From memory, BEUC’s position paper on appliance durability and repairabilty recognises the need to hold spares for the likely life of the product.

I suspect that there are also people who will buy a £200 washing machine and get 5 – 10 years life out of it.

In my family we have two such machines that are both about 5 years old now. I doubt that either of them is used heavily but I know that both of them are in regular use.

If someone who ought to spend much more than £200 for a heavy duty machine only buys a £200 machine, then they may only get 2 or 3 years use from it – buy they still might prefer having a sequence of cheap new machines to the bother of getting a better made one repaired periodically.

In my house, I use a medium priced Zanussi that I bought almost 30 years ago. It has only ever needed one or two very minor repairs, which I was able to do myself. When I bought it from my local Co-op, it cost £120. At the time, that was 50% more than the price of the cheapest machine that they sold.

I have a long standing interest in how long household products last and why they fail. Historically at least, Derek is absolutely right that inexpensive washing machines can last a long time if the owner is able to carry out repairs and they are not in heavy use. Whether this still applies to the budget machines on sale in 2016, I do not know. In general, more expensive machines will be more reliable but I know of many cases where people have scrapped expensive appliances because they cannot be economically repaired.

Longer parts and labour guarantees and affordable warranties are becoming more common and I believe that if the public is prepared to look for them, durability could improve. Since the company has to pay for repair/replacement, the manufacturer cannot afford to produce products with poor durability. It has certainly worked for cars and we have moved on a lot since cars came with a one year guarantee.

Here in America, it’s not any better. LG/Samsung/Whirlpool/Maytag/Kenmore are designed to fail intentionally within 5-6 years due to using an aluminium spider arm which will degrade after 5-6 years of normal use. As for repairs, the expense outways the cost of a new unit, probably also by design.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYKLPpBhPo0&t=40s

or google: “washer spider arm failure”

This comment was removed at the request of the user

Thanks Duncan!

It looks like on European models, washers are designed to fail with sealed drums / bearings, but in the US, Frigidaire, Samsung, LG, Whirlpool and Kenmore/Maytag seem to have jointly colluded together in planned obsolescence of washing machines, by purposely designed a spider arm that will fail in 5-6 years…this has been going on for over a decade with this intentional faulty design. My Frigidaire Affinity of 6 years broke down because of the same reason. Sadly, it’s cheaper to replace then repair.

Just google: “washer spider arm failure” — doesn’t matter how much money the machine cost, whether it’s $400 or $1300, it’s designed to fail. It seems like Speed Queen in the US offers models that are as reliable before these disposable units came on the market, but you’ll never find them in retail stores like BestBuy/Sears in the US; you really have to do research on washing machines to find them, usually, only commercial laundry mats use them.

However, let’s say manufactures are sued and they fix the spider arm, I’m sure they’ll find another way to compromise the machines to only last 5-6 years.

Here are some examples:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYKLPpBhPo0&

https://www.applianceblog.com/mainforums/threads/2077-Tub-spider-corrosion-breakage/page3?s=9cddef0a69f27e50f1e13cf11c9fe11e

http://www.automaticwasher.org/cgi-bin/TD/TD-VIEWTHREAD.cgi?49740

This comment was removed at the request of the user

Hi Duncan,

I just created that nick today, so sorry, it wouldn’t be me. I was searching online for washing machine issues and found a lot, esp. intentional failures by manufactures. I just created a post about 2 hours ago with my experience and what I’ve found, but it’s still awaiting moderation.

Just heard about the Ariana Grande concert explosions in the UK, good grief, when is this going to end.

I guess if you include links in your post, it goes to review…so here’s my reply without links based on my experience here:

Thanks Duncan!

It looks like on European models, washers are designed to fail with sealed drums / bearings, but in the US, Frigidaire, Samsung, LG, Whirlpool and Kenmore/Maytag seem to have jointly colluded together in planned obsolescence of washing machines, by purposely designed a spider arm that will fail in 5-6 years…this has been going on for over a decade with this intentional faulty design. My Frigidaire Affinity of 6 years broke down because of the same reason. Sadly, it’s cheaper to replace then repair.

Just google: “washer spider arm failure” — doesn’t matter how much money the machine cost, whether it’s $400 or $1300, it’s designed to fail. It seems like Speed Queen in the US offers models that are as reliable before these disposable units came on the market, but you’ll never find them in retail stores like BestBuy/Sears in the US; you really have to do research on washing machines to find them, usually, only commercial laundry mats use them.

However, let’s say manufactures are sued and they fix the spider arm, I’m sure they’ll find another way to compromise the machines to only last 5-6 years.

Here are some examples:
[Links waiting moderation in a previous post]

Hi ghostinthemachine. You are very welcome here. I’m glad you are referring to front-loading machines because most of us know little about the top-loaders that are common in the US.

Aluminium is quite a reactive metal that is well protected by a thin layer of oxide. In moist conditions it can corrode, especially at high or low pH (alkaline or acid, respectively). I was surprised to learn that aluminium is used for the spider (the part that holds the drum onto the rotating shaft) of front-loading machines, since laundry detergents are likely to be alkaline. Titanium would be better than aluminium but that would make the machine more expensive.

My guess is that it’s important to make sure that the machine is rinsing well and not leaving detergent. It should help to leave the door open when the machine is not in use – if it is safe to do so. Once aluminium starts to corrode, the loose oxide layer will retain moisture, allowing corrosion to continue.

It is important to do a regular maintenance wash at high temperature if the machine is mainly used for washing at temperatures below 60°C. That prevents the insides becoming coated with a ‘biofilm’ containing bacteria and fungi that can cause a bad smell. Some of these bugs could speed up corrosion of aluminium.

How long an aluminium spider will last will depend on the formulation of the laundry detergent, so unless the failures are confined to certain models, it might be the detergent to blame. I would be wary of using chlorine bleach (sodium hypochlorite plus sodium hydroxide) and washing soda (sodium carbonate) because these are highly alkaline and will not do aluminium components any good.

We see this in the field a lot.

To dumb it right down and avoid conspiracy theories as, honestly, manufacturers can’t organise a barbecue most often let alone hatch a plan as nefarious as that…

The stock advice is, dose correctly, use the correct programs and detergents and leave the door open after use. Overloading won’t help it much either.

This is, from what we can all gather, largely a result of build up of bacteria, leftover detergent and so on that congeals on the alloy spiders and eats them away.

It’s nothing new, I saw this when starting in the industry in the late eighties as we all used to replace Hotpoint, Hoover and so on spiders all the time for the same thing. usually around the same time the bearings were on the way out.

What has changed is that it used to be a fairly cost effective thing to change but now, it’s often a full drum assembly only that’s the best part of £100 here at least, if you can get to that at all these days. More often now it’s a full tank assembly at going on for £200 or more so the big change is that these days, as you can’t get to or get the parts, it’s not cost effective to repair it.

Price you pay is no guide, I’ve seen £700+ BSH product (Bosch/Neff/Siemens) with sealed tanks among other gems, Whirlpool do it, Electrolux and more so in the US it’ll be Frigidaire’s, Kenmore etc that will probably be more or less the same deal. Almost all are effected I’m afraid and they all use similar design, that’s just the way it is to be competitive.

The manufacturers will be dismissive as, in their eyes, the lifespan is now 5-8 years for most the way they see it so by the time these fail they’re often beyond that age therefore they could care less.

K.

In a marine environment, zinc sacrificial anodes are used to protect aluminium and alloys from corrosion, but that only works where an item (e.g. an outboard motor) is immersed. It’s quite possible that different ‘spiders’ are made from different materials but unless the manufacturer provides this information, we have no way of knowing.

I would be interested to know if any machines do use titanium rather than aluminium.

LM6 alloy does not use sacrificial anodes. It is used, for example, in seawater pumps as well as static items. Design is about choosing the right material for the application, and making it structurally suitable.

You can’t say that an alloy does not use anodes, but it’s irrelevant in this application because the ‘spider’ is not submerged. Certain stainless steels might do the job but might be at risk of fracturing due to vibration, which is why I suggested titanium. Good anodisation of aluminium alloys can help improve corrosion resistance. I think the priority is to look at how machines are used to minimise the risk of damage. It would be interesting to explore whether users with failed ‘spiders’ are keeping their machines free from bugs and to find out if they are using highly alkaline products. Kenneth has pointed out the danger of detergent residues.

I used aluminium alloys for marine applications – a potentially corrosive environment – and no anodes were involved. Certain alloys are more suitable than others for standard or hard anodising and for different applications.

We do not have (yet) substantiating evidence to show US manufacturers collude in producing a spider arm designed to fail, nor the mode of failure. If it fails it may well be through stress points, vibration, insufficient factor of safety, or it may not be a deliberate failure at all. I rather thought the US were hot on such collusion if there were incontrovertible evidence.

Without knowledge of the materials used the the machines that have failed prematurely and what chemicals and misuse they might have been subjected to, I don’t think we can make much progress.

I am certainly not accusing manufacturers of colluding to sell products with a limited life and I suspect the problem lies mainly with the chemicals we put in machines and how they are used.

I’ve had plenty of experience working with materials used in corrosive environments too.

“What are the chances?”

Low I expect. 🙁

K.