Is your Whirlpool tumble dryer a fire-risk?

John, what part has the EU played in making tumble dryers unsafe?

Malcolm, most electrical items have the Euro symbol on them and something like “confirms to EU regulations”. Some things from China do, and some don’t.
So the EU is pretending to apply regulations to these products. Well, it didn’t work with the tumbler driers, did it?

“CE marking is a certification mark that indicates conformity with health, safety, and environmental protection standards for products sold within the European Economic Area (EEA). … The CE marking is the manufacturer’s declaration that the product meets the requirements of the applicable EC directives.”

The EU requires many products to conform to EU regulations, usually including EU (ENs) and international safety standards, before being legally put on the EU market. Such products should be tested to show conformity, which at least should be indicated by a CE Mark. The testing that supports this mark should be fully documented in a technical construction file and available for examination. It is the distributors’ responsibility to ensure this CE Mark is properly supported. Some, maybe many, products will also carry a mark and certificate number when they have been fully tested for compliance with a standard by a recognised national laboratory (such as BSI’s). The Kite Mark is an example of this.

One problem is that rogue or incompetent distributors will not check the CE Mark documentation properly, or at all, so they will distribute non-compliant products as we see from Which? tests (smoke alarms, CO alarms, children’s “slime” recently). Another problem, certainly in the UK, is that the authority appointed to protect consumers by policing the market, Trading Standards, is inadequately resourced and funded so cannot do its job properly. Still another problem is we appear not to penalise these distributors adequately when they are discovered – perhaps if the fine was like that for the BA data breach we might feel more comfortable.

Reputable companies generally behave well. It is the delinquent companies who exploit this system.

As for Indesit tumble dryers I have asked Which? a number of times whether these have been tested for compliance with the safety standard EN 60335-2-11 but they have not replied. It may well be that the dryers did meet the standard but longer-term use revealed a design defect that allowed a gradual accumulation of lint/fluff near the heater. There is an international working group examining the safety of certain domestic electrical appliances, including tumble dryers. I expect this is on their agenda.

A new (2019) tumble dryer standard has been issued by the IEC, (from which standards ENs are usually derived for use in Europe). I presume at some point this will appear as an EN, but we do not have to simply take it as it is; the EU can add it’s own requirements and modify the document if felt necessary for local use. Bear in mind the EU standards organisations, including BSI, will have contributed to the preparation of the IEC standard. Which? are on the BSI committee and may know what changes this standard brings with it.

The EU sets the regulations. These are delegated to each member state to apply, by their Market Surveillance Authorities – UK Trading Standards in our case. If we want proper consumer protection we need to pay for it by resourcing Trading Standards to do a proper job for us.

Thanks for posting the photo, John.

You are right to be concerned because if lint and fluff accumulate in the vent of the dryer this restricts air flow and fire can occur if it comes in contact with the heater, which operates at a high temperature. I expect that your duct/hose is plastic or light-weight corrugated aluminium tube, neither of which would contain a fire.

In the US and Canada it is a requirement (UL standard introduced around 2006) to have metal duct/ or flexible hose on ‘clothes dryers’ as tumble dryers are generally referred to. UL also require dryers and washing machines to be able to contain a fire. We are well behind in our safety standards.

As far as I know – but you may know differently – the US uses the international standard IEC 60335-2-11 but UL requirements may also be used in some states. I do not know if a fire-containing enclosure, such as UL reported on a few years ago, is mandatory throughout the US.

UL sit on the international committee that draws up the safety standard. If they have evidence of a significant improvement in safety then I expect that to be part of the deliberations.

I’d question the statement “we are well behind in our safety standards“, with due respect to your motives, without getting expert input. Which? could perhaps contribute? “We” is all of the EU and much (most maybe) of the rest of the world.

Dryer fires still seem to be a problem in the US – “Facts about home clothes dryer fires
2,900 home clothes dryer fires are reported each year and cause an estimated 5 deaths, 100 injuries, and $35 million in property loss.
Failure to clean the dryer (34 percent) is the leading cause of home clothes dryer fires. “!.

I’ll be interested to see the latest international standard.

The last time I checked, a third version of the UL 2158 standard had been proposed and that contained an additional test related to fire containment. I do not know which US states use which standards.

Duncan Lucas drew our attention to this website: https://www.electrical-forensics.com/Dryer/ElectricClothesDryers.html It refers to UL 2158 being harmonised with a Canadian standard and goes into detail about the problem of lint accumulation. From this and other sites it appears that vented dryers are most popular in the US and Canada. I recall posting a link that indicated that dryers must have metal ducting/vent hose to meet insurance requirements.

Even if improved safety standards are introduced people can carry on using existing equipment. It would be very interesting to know if requirements for fire containment are effective.

I have had my tumble dryer modified. And less than a year the fuse blue and I smelt burning and melted the plug socket. Where do we stand in this

It’s not possible to be sure, Shernn, but the problem is likely to be due to a poor connection in the socket or the plug. A dryer uses a lot of power and any high resistance connection will cause heating and eventual failure. Even if the dryer is using more power than it should, the fuse should ‘blow’ without causing overheating. It’s important that the socket is replaced before it is used again.

It would be worth contacting Whirlpool to see if they will provide a slim drier. I expect that they have offered a standard size dryer because these are more popular.

Peter, this is a narrower machine from Indesit, with a 4kg capacity.
Indesit IS41V 4Kg Vented Tumble Dryer – White – C Rated

• 4kg drum capacity – great for small households
• Dimensions (cm) – H67 x W49 x D48
https://www.which.co.uk/reviews/tumble-dryers/indesit-is41v-white
There are very few small dryers; most are nominally 600mm wide.
It was Indesit who were responsible for the design of the affected machines. Whirlpool, probably unwittingly, inherited the problem when they took over Indesit.

That seems unreasonable, Martin. I suggest you speak to them again and if they cannot supply a grey model, push for a refund.

This comment was removed at the request of the user

In this case Whirlpool are offering a replacement for a failed product. If it is available in grey to match the failed one then I believe they should replace like for like, although if they do not have a grey one available I don’t believe they are legally bound to provide one.

Depending upon the age of the appliance the refund offered may be significantly less than the cost of a replacement.

I don’t have an Indesit dryer. In view of all that has been said over the years about the “repair”, I wouldn’t touch a repair as a solution. I would look at the ratings of tumble dryers marketed by Whirlpool as a potential replacement before accepting one. I note that they all carry a “safety” warning in the Which? reviews https://www.which.co.uk/reviews/tumble-dryers/article/recommendations/which-dont-buy-tumble-dryers accompanied by the note “The safety alert concerns versions of this machine that were made before October 2015. Models made after this date are not affected by the issue.“. As, presumably, many or all of the dryers listed are now “safe” (unless Which? know differently) it seems unhelpful to label them in this way, 3 years after the problem.

The reason why Which? recommends we don’t buy Hotpoint etc. tumble dryers is because they handled the safety issue so poorly and has even questioned whether modified dryers are safe to use. From the Which? website:

“Hotpoint safety alert
At Which? we’re committed to giving you all the information you need to make an informed choice about the products you buy and this includes telling you about how companies handle safety issues with their products. We have identified that this product comes from a group of companies that we believe has previously handled a product safety issue poorly (though the issue affected tumble dryers only).”

I am aware if the likely reason. I think that is the wrong way to tackle product reviews – penalising the company for its actions rather than simply assessing and presenting its current products. Posting “safety alert” against a product – as far as I know the products listed are not unsafe – is not the same as labelling “customer service alert”, which is what we should be warned about.

As I also said, I would not touch a modified dryer. I don’t believe anyone – Whirlpool, Trading Standards, OPSS, Which?, examined the remedy in an objective way. Before being released there should have been a full and independent examination of the proposed remedy and confidence established that it would provide a long term solution, not just a short term fix.

This comment was removed at the request of the user

A pity to dub two of them as “engineers”. Even “technician” seems too good a description when they appear incompetent at diagnosing a fault. Perhaps “trainee repairer” would be best. One seems worth employing.

At the risk of derailing yet another thread, poor engineers do not (usually) make good technicians in my experience. A good technician – such as the one who followed procedure and fault-found correctly – is worth his weight in gold. Engineers and technicians serve different functions. It is very rare that an engineer would be called out to a customer’s premises to attend a routine failure.

In similar vein, if I’d just suffered a broken leg, I’d sooner be attended to by a paramedic than any old doctor of philosophy.

DT – It’s common advice that condenser dryers should not be used in garages, so I would not be too hard on anyone that gives this advice, which may be in the manual. https://www.which.co.uk/news/2019/02/10-things-you-should-never-do-if-you-own-a-tumble-dryer/