The issue of product reparability may greatly affect the future of retail.
The EU Commission has opened a public consultation on this issue, also touching upon the duration of legal guarantees, a new right to repair for situations where the legal guarantee does not yet apply, and the cost of repair services. In parallel, the Commission is conducting a study on retailers’ experiences with repair services and legal guarantees. The responses will assist the Commission in assessing the option of changing a key element of its consumer protection legislation, the Sale of Goods Directive (EU) 2019/771. A proposal to amend the Sale of Goods Directive in this sense is expected to be presented in Q3 2022. Please also consult our Circular 03/2022 on a recent consultation on the right to repair. We kindly ask you to provide us with your responses by 24 March.
SHORT consultation on the reparability of goods
The Commission aims at providing consumers with incentives to encourage the sustainable use of products, and increase their ability to repair defective goods.
In our draft reply we argue that the costs of repair and the characteristics of the product need to be taken into account when promoting repair. If the costs of repair exceed replacement, the latter should be the preferred option. Repairing large household appliances, furniture, and vehicles can be acceptable for manufacturers and retailers while repairing electronics, small appliances and textiles will be difficult and should therefore not be covered by a new right to repair.
A right to repair could be introduced for situations where the legal guarantee does not yet apply, for example the situation where a customer accidentally lets a product fall is not yet covered by the legislation. We argue that the right to repair under the legal guarantee should only apply in cases where the defect has been caused by the normal wear and tear. Cases where the consumer caused a defect should not be covered under the legal guarantee. In this case the consumer should pay for the repair service.
In our view, it is primarily the manufacturer who should be responsible for the repair and carry the costs. As a second option the defective product can be repaired by the seller. Repairs will likely be too burdensome both for independent service providers and customers and will thus more often than not in reality lead to a replacement.
On top of that, the Commission is considering making repair as the primary remedy mandatory, restarting the legal guarantee after the repair, introducing longer legal guarantee periods, replacing defective products by refurbished products or introducing voluntary business commitments.
Please find our draft reply here and the consultation here. We welcome your comments by 24 March COB.
SHORT survey on retailers’ experiences with repair services and legal guarantees
The purpose of the study is to understand the current repair market and related market practices.
The questionnaire contains questions on:
- contractual agreements between the retailer and the manufacturer/spare part provider within the period of the legal guarantee or outside the legal guarantee;
- the repair process if it takes place during the period of legal guarantee;
- the repair process if it takes place outside of the period of legal guarantee;
- the factors influencing replacement against repair;
- the capacity of the European repair infrastructure;
- the impact of extending the period of legal guarantees;
- future developments of the repair market.
Please find the questionnaire here.
