New right to repair rules: what do you think?

This article from the Restart Project provides an example of a manufacturer that advertises that its products are repairable but that proved rather untruthful: https://therestartproject.org/news/diy-repair-story-manufacturers/

I see having parts available from third party suppliers as a bonus but all manufacturers should make parts available. I want to see parts freely available and not just restricted to their appointed agents.

As I and others have said in the past I want to see spare parts at sensible prices and repair manuals made available to everyone, not just professional repairers.

However, I wonder what the legal liability is for the manufacturer if anyone is injured when making a repair or making a faulty one? We can all buy spares for our cars – brake discs, pads, suspension and steering, and all the rest – whether we are qualified mechanics or not so I don’t see any reason why other spares should be denied to us.

I had read the same article, Malcolm, but have not managed to find out whether owners of products will be able to purchase manufacturers’ spares and obtain information for diagnosis and repair of faults. I suspect that many more people could carry out their own repairs than do at present, which makes repair more attractive than replacement.

I agree that parts must be affordable but wonder how this can be achieved. With popular white goods, for example, third party spares are usually readily available at sensible prices.

Something you picked up that I meant to add. Many appliances either generate a fault code or have a connection to enable a separate device to be used, as on cars for example. It would be essential to have the ability to determine the specific problem and, hopefully, repair necessary before deciding how to approach it and whether it was worth employing a repairer. Visible fault codes can often (?) be interpreted in the instructions or online.

Modern cars have an OBD2 port – a connector that allows a garage identify errors and reset warning lights. DIY tools with lesser capabilities are readily available.

It can be difficult to find out what error codes mean for household appliances, especially where manufacturers restrict this information to their own repairers. My understanding is that manufacturers will have to make the information available to other repairers but not necessarily to the public.

Rather than having error codes, why not just display the nature of the fault on the screen?

That might need a big-ish screen and many older appliances – the ones more likely to break down – don’t have that. I think a code is sufficient if it can be properly interpreted.
I agree; manufacturers must give fault information.

I’m thinking more of the future when most products are likely to have screens.

From our earlier discussions I remember that Hotpoint use code F06 to indicate a fault with the door lock in their washing machines. It would not be difficult explain the fault in words rather than a code.

Yes, I realise that. But I want this to help people with existing appliances, those most likely to have a fault, as well as new ones.

If the information has not been provided in the manual (some manufacturers do) it could be provided on the manufacturer’s website.

Indeed.

But now that the UK has left the EU, I doubt that any new EU legislation will govern how these companies behave in Great Britain.

We have already seen that legal rulings in the USA, to protect the use of 3rd party printer inks there, do not seem to be proving any obvious protections to EU or UK consumers.

100% agree with you on tech as being heavy polluters Zoltan, from mining and processing the raw materials to manufacture, shipping and disposal at the end of a very short life (less than 4 years with Samsung). But as they have become a fashion statement and status symbol with the younger generations, you never hear them include their tech when they protest on saving the planet.

Another waste of tech are smart meters. The first generation already needs replacing, and as both hardware and software quickly becomes obsolete, it will also become unrepairable and add to the mountains of e-waste around the world.

I am not sure that the car industry has addressed the problem of waste, Zoltan. In other Conversations and on motoring forums there is considerable concern about the cost of dealing with faults. A common problem is that a warning light appears on the dashboard, indicating either a genuine problem or a malfunction in the electronics, resulting in an MOT failure. Some cars are scrapped prematurely because these faults can be prohibitively expensive to repair.

Mobile phones have received a great deal of attention and the fact that the user cannot replace the battery in any of the most popular models must change, or batteries must last the life of the phone. Phones are for many people the most used products they own. Many of us stuff our homes full of electronic products that see little use before they are discarded.

Synthetic clothing is also one of the big polluters – microfibres going down the drain after washing. We buy far too many clothes, driven by the fashion industry and exploited cheap labour. We use far to much in the way of quite unnecessary cosmetics. We package food in plastic when aluminium containers are virtually 100%recyclable. The list of our profligate waste of resources goes on, and needs a culture change to have any effect, something that the Covid lockdown showed is not only possible but, to many, acceptable.

Which? is caught in a dilemma here. On the one hand it wants to, and does, inform consumers about products, so helps promote consumerism; on the other hand it wants to promote sustainability. They are almost diametrically opposed concepts. But it wants to retain its readers. Is that, perhaps, the best model for a consumers’ association?

Does every Which? subscriber expect to get a payback on their subscription? I doubt it. Many enjoy reading the magazine and learning about consumer affairs but don’t necessarily use the product comparison information other than occasionally. I am sure many readers would support a more ethical stance against the throwaway culture and like Which? to take issue with manufacturers who think obsolescence is a unique selling point.

My main concern about rechargeable cleaners is that sooner or later the battery will fail and replacements may not be available or could be expensive. Before the first pandemic I decided to buy a second vacuum cleaner to save having to keep carrying my 20 year old cleaner up and down the stairs, a concession to age and a desire to have a backup. I decided to go for another mains-powered cleaner. Cordless cleaners might be more convenient, and I have used them when staying with friends, but I don’t see them as worthwhile for me, especially in view of my concerns set out above.

If I struggle to do my cleaning when I am older I will certainly look at robot cleaners, but at the moment, vacuum cleaning provides useful exercise. I would have concerns about smart cleaners controlled by a mobile phone because the cleaner might no longer work if the phone had to be replaced. I’m concerned that smart products in general could have shorter working lives than their predecessors.

My 35 year old cleaner would probably fight back of I tried to carry her up the stairs. But then she does clean the showers, wash floors, sanitise worktops, vacuum and more. I do have a cheapish robot cleaner to tidy between visits but it is not particularly smart.

I’d like to see all battery packs made so the cells can be replaced when the pack fails, either by a competent user with a soldering iron or through a local repair shop. I have never found an overwhelming need to replace my Miele corded cleaner though. I think some battery-operated appliances can be an unnecessary fad, bad for the planet.

Rebuilding battery packs is made easier by the fact that most vacuum cleaners will use the very common 18650 lithium cells. These can have a very long lifespan if the battery pack or product has ‘active cell balancing’, which can greatly reduce loss of capacity and premature failure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_balancing

It would be good if Which? could tell us which battery packs are designed in this way but so far all we are given is whether replaceable battery packs are available. It is a useful start.

It’s good that it has a five year guarantee. The mains-powered Dyson have had this guarantee for years but the non-robotic cordless ones are covered for only two years.

I have not tried a decent robotic cleaner but a friend lent me a simple one to play with. If I was in the market for one I would like to see it in action in my home. I would certainly want to know what functionality is dependent on connection with a phone.

I am not keen on the way that we seem to be heading towards a world filled with smart devices but if they can help disabled and elderly people, that’s a little different.

My unsophisticated robot vacuum cleaner does a sort of job, but it needs preparation and tending. Chairs have to be stacked from under the dining table for it to reach that part of the carpet, trailing wires from, say, floor lamps, chargers, have to be moved or it will get into a tangle, it can get stuck under furniture, it doesn’t like the fringe on a chinese rug, and it can be the devil to track down if it hides itself, and of course being round it doesn’t clean corners…… then its dust capacity is limited. So, on the whole, I regard it as a novelty that really requires more attention than it is worth.

Getting the Miele Cat and Dog cleaner out is the best solution, in between visits from the cleaning lady; I can pay her to do the “hoovering” for 4 years for the cost of the Dyson.

That would be ideal for a cleaning a lighthouse, Malcolm. I don’t think they have corners.

I experienced similar problems with my friend’s robot cleaner, which had been received as a Christmas present. Apparently it has now been abandoned in a cupboard.

Cromer Lighthouse is octagonal on the outside but I don’t know whether the inside is curved . A robot vacuum cleaner could probably cope but lighthouse keepers often have time on their hands after trimming the wick and don’t need a robotic appliance.

I don’t know that one, John. Is the postbox marked ‘No circulars’?

I don’t know. I couldn’t see it in the dark then there was a blinding flash. I don’t know whether it is there to help the fishermen catch crabs and lobsters on the offshore chalk reef or to assist mariners navigate away from it. Cromer crabs are famed for their flavour and are one of Norfolk’s top three culinary specialities.

I agree Tom. The latest government information is here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/electrical-appliances-to-be-cheaper-to-run-and-last-longer-with-new-standards This does not mention anything other than white goods and TVs. Will manufacturers have to keep spares for the many other products we use in our homes?

Lithium batteries are a problem, as you say. The Which? guide ‘How to live sustainably’ (September 2019) points out that they are difficult to recycle and that many end up in landfill, causing environmental problems. As well as that we have limited world supplies of materials used to make them.

The fundamental problems are that companies want to sell new products and that many consumers are all too willing to buy them.

” Lithium batteries are a problem, as you say. ” which is one reason why we should consider the future of transport and not just get swept up in the charge to EVs.

I agree, Malcolm. It worries me that making more products is often seen as a way of reducing environmental impact. We are frequently urged to buy new white goods that are more energy efficient, but what about the impact of disposing of the old ones and making new ones?

EV batteries are likely to be recycled, since owners are likely to sell their car rather than just stop using it because the product has been replaced or the owner has lost interest. Hopefully EV batteries will not end up in landfill and that we can improve the recovery of valuable metals.

There is so much to change if we are to cut down on waste. There should be a ban on sending stuff to landfill, other than specific items. They should all be recycled or the materials recovered. Paid for by making a disposal charge on the owner ( fly tipping police needed, no doubt). That will deter some/many from ditching usable goods.

Somehow we should also deter people from just changing to a newer model, with little advantages, because it is new – like mobile phones. That requires education and a change of attitude. Which? could help by being more critical in what it promotes.

We should encourage establishing repairers, spare parts availability, easy repair diagnosis and manuals to help keep products going.

I wonder whether I am on my own in only replacing stuff when it is beyond repair? I’m even repairing my hosepipe spray guns that suffered in the winter.

The problem underlying all this is keeping the economy going by stimulating consumer demand. That would be least affected by recovering materials instead of dumping them in holes in the ground. Let’s make that illegal

I doubt that charging for disposal would work for the reason you have given. We have more than enough fly tipping. I suggest that cost of disposal should be added to the initial cost, as is done with tyres. Some tyre dealers show this as an environmental charge and others hide it in the price.

There is little incentive for manufacturers to provide service information because (in most cases) they would prefer owners to replace them. Hopefully we will see legislation that will change this.

Which? now offers guidance about how to deal with common problems that occur with washing machines, fridges, vacuum cleaners, etc. That’s good but perhaps each product review could invite us to consider using products for longer or repairing them if they are broken. I’ve read that electrical goods taken to recycling centres are often in good working order or require only a simple repair.

I don’t agree that stimulating consumer demand is necessary a good idea, certainly not if this leads to increasing use of our limited resources or creates more pollution. Consider the incredible amount of rubbish that is bought at Christmas. Many of the gifts are not even wanted. There are less damaging ways of supporting the economy. Buying paintings or other artwork, books, a personal number plate or tickets for local activities come to mind.

Disposable income and loans fuel this. No cure for that. Perhaps we should encourage people to invest some of that spare dosh in government bonds or shares to finance certain state-run or initiated industries, like renewable energy generation, fossil-less vehicles, launch Made in UK goods, that would deliver a reasonable return and help people finance their retirement. If only we could find people with the knowledge, experience, drive and integrity to run them.

These are certainly possibilities. What about trying to promote repair of products, both commercially and by their owners? That would tie in with right to repair.

I don’t know how many people build and upgrade computers but perhaps there are opportunities to expand this into other practical activities including repairs. Derek recently mentioned repurposing old smartphones to monitor the activities of hedgehogs. That sounds more fun than fixing a washing machine.

I watch YouTube videos out of interest and to help me carry out repairs. Many are produced by enthusiasts in the US and Canada. Perhaps we need more UK enthusiasts making a mark.