Should we all have the ‘right to repair’?

Ugo, thanks for the informative link. I agree that repair instructions and spare parts should be made available to all, accepting that diy repairs will be at the owner’s risk. Not so sure about withholding repaor manuals for 2 years after the launch of a product; all products will be under guarantee for at least 1 year and many consumers will not buy the product in the first year after launch.

I suspect that the internet will step in – many repair manuals already seem to be available there, as are spare parts. A big concern is how the design of products is made such as they can be “easily” accessed for repair; this may well compromise the performance of products – resistance to moisture for example.

Even when we have repairable products I see one obstacle being the labour cost of a repair – calling a professional repairer out to see what is wrong with a washing machine for example, before deciding whether it is worth the cost of a repair. It would be useful to have access to diagnostics to identify possible problems.

When we pay for a product it becomes ours and we should not be denied the means of looking after it ourselves.

Making a correct diagnosis of the problem is just as important as having the skill and parts required to effect a satisfactory repair. More could be done to make fault-finding easier and through standardisation of components to rationalise and simplify repair techniques.

If you buy a product such as a Hotpoint washing machine, it is likely that some of the components will be identical to those used in other brands owned by the parent company, Whirlpool. With popular brands. components often continue to be available for years – either from the manufacturer or third party source. There is less chance that components are the same as those used by other manufacturers. I’m a bit out of touch but computers, especially desktop ones, often share components such as hard disks, memory cards, CPUs and fans.

It would be a huge step forward if more manufacturers shared components but I don’t know how that could be achieved.

Hi Ugo – Unfortunately there is no local group at the moment. I do repairs for myself and close friends and I’m always happy to give advice to anyone who just needs a bit of encouragement.

When circuit boards first became available they were often repairable especially when circuit diagrams were readily available, but when integrated circuits, double-sided boards and surface-mounting components arrived, replacement became the only realistic option.

Thanks for your point about the price of spares. I very much support legislation that would the maximum cost of spares relative to the cost of the product. I can’t see manufacturers agreeing to that, but there are more consumers than manufacturers!

Which is one of the few organisations in the UK with the right to make a super-complaint and ideally would be part of a coordinated effort within Europe and possibly elsewhere.

Making spare parts available is only part of the problem. Some products are built in a way that makes repair difficult or not economically possible. For example, replacing drum bearings in a washing machine was once a straightforward job in most cases but now that machines use a ‘sealed tank’ it is necessary to replace the drum, tank, bearings and other components as a single assembly. This may be deliberate planned obsolescence or merely the result of making assembly of washing machines easier and cheaper, but either way the customer is very likely to need a new machine. With smaller products it’s well nigh impossible to do repairs and the case may even be glued together. That might be planned obsolescence or to help make it more water-resistant. Yes we need a super-complaint, DorsetMike.

We need, I’d suggest, a European initiative to require some products (initially) to be produced on a more sustainable basis – economically repairable both for parts and labour – and movement on the required durability of products (before they need a repair or other action to keep them working). I do not think the UK can do it on its own with most of the manufacturers being overseas and serving a much bigger market than us.

I say “some products” because this opens up the question of whether consumers should also be offered the cheapest products that still do the basic job required of them. This may require methods of building that are cheaper but do not lend themselves to (economic) repair.

This month’s Which? mag mentions (Feedback) a Beko washing machine as a “best buy” at £231; it is said to do the washing job well but “takes forever to complete a wash, is noisy and inefficient”. I question the concept of “best buy” when there is no indication of how long a product might last. BEKo had 14% failures by year 3 – I’m not sure that is particularly good. Is this a “sustainable product” if it is not economic to repair, and should it be classed as a “best buy”? I think we need to give some thought to what we are looking for. Maybe we need two product classes identified – one to satisfy the low user or those with very limited funds, and one for the normal user prepared to pay more for a durable product that can be economically repairable/maintainable.

As far as I know, the Which? figures do not distinguish between faults that are easy to repair and ones that result in the machine being scrapped. That is an important difference and without more detail the figures are not very meaningful.

I don’t believe that it is sustainable to make products that are not durable. Even if people can afford to pay for more expensive products they often opt for cheap ones because replace often makes more economic sense these days.

I’m not too sure whether you are just drawing attention to the need to take care and understand your limitations duncan; I’d agree with that. However I would not want that to be an excuse to deny everyone access to information and parts needed to effect a repair. Any diy repair should be at the individual’s own risk providing repair information is clear.

Many of us undertake diy which can be dangerous if care is not taken. A circular saw can cause serious injury but anyone can buy one.

One of the reasons I would like to visit a Restart Project is to find out how those involved are taught to work safely – dealing with potential dangers in a safe way.

Electrical equipment that uses an external power supply to provide low voltage means that the equipment can be worked on ‘live’ without risk of an electric shock. Examples would be phones, laptops, some printers, some radios, etc. If people are repairing their own mains electrical equipment, I assume that this will be done when not connected to mains voltage, and inspected and tested by someone with expertise before it is reassembled and plugged in.

Live working has always been a potential hazard when trying to fix mains equipment. I’ve recently scrapped a small desk fan with a broken motor coil. Had it been for my own own use I might have attempted a repair, but I did not want to take on any safety liability in regard to electrical and fire safety in its owner’s house.

In a world where we expect the highest possible standards of electrical and fire safety from our white goods, I’m not sure I’d be entirely happy with using anything repaired by a keen but unqualified amateur.

The safety liability is why I do not now carry out repairs for anyone other than close friends and family, though if they are prepared to do the job I am happy to offer tools and advice.

From the Restart Project’s website:
“Do fixes include software and hardware fixes? Which are more common?

With laptops, software fixes are just as common as hardware ones.”

It would be interesting to hear from Ugo to learn how risk is managed at Restart repair sessions. What happens, for example, if someone turns up with an iron, a toaster or other small item that is directly connected to the mains rather than using a low voltage power supply.

Thanks Ugo it is great to know that you are dealing with those issues.

This comment was removed at the request of the user

Thanks Ugo. I had assumed that safety matters were in hand and it’s good that you have confirmed this.

We bought a chainsaw many, many years ago and the first thing I did was to get a local tree surgeon pal to teach me the ins and outs of using the thing. He mentioned some things to which I’d never given any thought; encountering a nail or embedded piece of wire can have catastrophic consequences. Glad to say I never had an accident, but was always extremely careful about using it.

As hosted by Gloucester Library, these computer buddy sessions mostly focus on helping folk to use either the library PC’s or their own devices.

For the latter, that might include software upgrades but won’t usually include obvious hardware surgery.

This may change in the future, because the planned provision of a 3D printer may be used to establish some kind of “maker workshop”.

Thanks Derek. Software upgrades are one way that users can prolong the useful life of computers. There is a limit to what can be done in a library but with the right facilities and experienced staff, plenty can be achieved. In my experience people often replace products because of trivial problems that can easily be dealt with.

In my former life as a sales droid, I was told that most folk act to buy new goods and services on the basis of irrational choices (or “buy factors”) rather than because of sound technical/rational needs. We were also told that technical factors would be applied to allow the retrospective justification of those choices against more rational criteria.

Hence, for example, “I want a new PC” becomes “I need a new PC because (reasons…)”.

In certain shops, sales staff will be trained to guide new customers through this process, even (or especially) when the customer has no real need to acquire new kit. In the past, I have also wondered whether some Which? reviews have also unduly hyped the benefits of buying new kit in contrast to the option of carrying on with existing kit.

I can see it now…”These are not the laptops you want. Move on.” 🙂