36

I have TV that failed about a week after the 3 year guarantee expired.

Obviously this is annoying, and I'm back to using a 15 year old TV that I dug out from the attic.

Realistically, this failure so close to expiry of the guarantee is probably just a co-incidence, but it did get me thinking, the TV is a 'smart TV' with lots of electronics inside. It wouldn't be difficult to deliberately design it to stop working after exactly 3 years. If a manufacturer deliberately did this (and didn't mention it in their sales literature) would this be lawful?

This is slightly different from 'planned obsolescence' whereby spare parts aren't available, or an item can't be disassembled without destroying it, I'm talking about something very similar to buying a software license - where a fixed fee up-front allows you to use a product for exactly 12 months.

In practice, when I buy a physical item I regard the guarantee as the minimum period the item should work for with the expectation that with a bit of luck it should work for a lot longer. Could a manufacturer lawfully sell a TV/kettle/electric drill deliberately designed to fail after a fixed period?

mathlander
  • 439
  • 4
  • 21
ConanTheGerbil
  • 1,791
  • 1
  • 12
  • 18
  • 9
    Also consider the opposite: they potentially did very well in predicting how long they could make their warranty. – Daniël van den Berg Nov 20 '23 at 21:07
  • 8
    Warranty periods are sometimes slightly squishy in the name of customer service and avoiding disputes. If it was just one week, it may be worth seeing if they'll honor the guarantee anyway. – Zach Lipton Nov 21 '23 at 06:17
  • 3
    Side note: The Umweltbundesamt (German Environment Agency) published some studies about obsolescence a while ago. In 2012, they found that TVs were replaced on average after 5.6 years, and 60 % of the newly bought ones replaced a functioning device, only about 1/4 replaced a broken one (see https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/faktencheck-obsoleszenz). – cbeleites unhappy with SX Nov 21 '23 at 07:35
  • 5
    I recall reading a Mad Magazine comic back in the 1980s about an appliance of some sort that had a timer that caused the device to need an "expensive" repair right after the warranty expired (where the repair was just resetting a secret switch somewhere in the guts of the device). So this idea isn't exactly new... – Andy Nov 21 '23 at 15:12
  • 2
    A modern issue is that security and other software support may be guaranteed for a given period, after which you are on your own and at real risk. The device may work in some sense, but not safely or satisfactorily - it may need an internet connection to work but is not protected while making one. – Henry Nov 21 '23 at 19:37
  • @Andy Mad Magazine had a lot of ideas that seemed wacky at the time (that was the whole point) but which later turned into real products. Not sure how much was coincidence and how much life imitating art. – manassehkatz-Moving 2 Codidact Nov 21 '23 at 22:57
  • 2
    "'planned obsolescence" is usually a misnomer. What really happens is that a complany makes the product as cheap as it can, usually just good enough so it wont break before warranty expires. A lot of people don't understand that and think it's some "evil 'planned obsolescence" thing. It's not, it's just cost-saving and penny-pinching. Most companies also pay pennies to their employees, so they won't be able to afford a quality product, anyway. That's capitalism for ya: a race to the bottom for 99% of us. – osiris Nov 22 '23 at 11:52
  • In the 2000's there were Flexplay discs which were designed to become unreadable a few days after being opened, as a way to do DVD rentals without needing to return the DVD. In that case it was an advertised feature though. – IllusiveBrian Nov 22 '23 at 19:59
  • @Henry - How is the risk any greater after the warranty has expired? – MikeB Nov 23 '23 at 10:39
  • 2
    @MikeB - If you are using a smartphone with security updates guaranteed for two years, and somebody discovers a flaw three years later which allows them to attack and penetrate your phone and its data, then your old phone may no longer be protected even when its manufacturer is taking steps to protect newer phones. – Henry Nov 23 '23 at 11:12
  • @osiris Will you pay 20k for a sewing machine that lasts forever? Most savvy consumers wont and very few can. In engineering this is called good-enough and not over-engineering. Requirements differ for different consumers, so they are provided different solutions. That's capitalism for ya, providing a consumer with the product they need and can afford. – paulj Nov 23 '23 at 11:21
  • 1
    @paulj The thing is that it doesn't cost thousands more to have much better quality in most cases. It's called penny-pinching because it it is really just pennies that make the difference here. – BlackJack Nov 23 '23 at 13:26
  • @paulj, i would buy a 2k Miele washing machine because it's made to last at least 20 years and they'll provide all the parts during those 20 years if needed. A 500 "penny-pincher brand" one works, if we are lucky, 2 years. Thats 5k in washing machines in 20 years. – osiris Nov 23 '23 at 22:32
  • @Henry Like I said, how is the risk any greater - the flaw was there all along, so THAT phone is no worse than it was. Just because a flaw is newly reported, doesn't mean that the phone wasn't vulnerable before the report. – MikeB Nov 24 '23 at 07:44
  • Please consider the statistics, though. Most items that fail, fail within a very short time of either end of their expected lives.

    At the start, that's perhaps because the items were faulty in the first place, or they got banged about during shipment.

    At the end, that's perhaps because the items truly were reaching the end of their lives.

    In theory, we might extend the statistics either way but in fact, we can't look back beyond the time of delivery or installation.

    We can look beyond the end, and then we should expect more failures but how would you make them 'deliberate'?

     – Robbie Goodwin Nov 27 '23 at 22:43

3 Answers3

31

If your machine actively destroys itself after the warranty is up, you commit the crime of damage to someone else's property under StGB § 303. You might also be liable for fraud, as this feature was not advertised - the "this machine will destroy itself after three years" is a crucial feature that people need to be informed about to form a proper contract.

If your machine just wears out after the warranty is up, then your machine is just suffering from a case of planned obsolescence. That is currently still allowed.

However the EU parliament is discussing making planned obsolescence itself illegal and items that suffer from it banned from the EU market.

Trish
  • 39,097
  • 2
  • 79
  • 156
  • Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed. – Dale M Nov 24 '23 at 02:30
22

Deliberately rendering the TV non-operational through software would appear to be malicious damage.

Under the Australian Consumer Law, one of the statutory guarantees is that a product must be “durable”. Manufacturer’s can offer explicit warranties in addition but these in no way impact on the statutory guarantees.

What durable means depends on the product and the price paid for it. For a low end TV, 3 years might be durable enough although it’s arguable, but for a high end TV it wouldn’t be. For whitegoods, 10 years would be appropriate. A similar period would be appropriate for a car. However, for a Mars bar, maybe a week. And a restaurant meal, a half hour.

Dale M
  • 208,266
  • 17
  • 237
  • 460
7

In the UK for consumer products you can normally claim for a fault that was present or developing at the time of sale for up to six years after purchase (five in Scotland). However, after six months the onus is on the customer to prove that the faut was present of developing at the time of purchase (which in your case it may not have been and even if it was, you might need an expensive engineer's report to prove). Note that your rights are against the retailer not the manufacturer (unless they are the same entity).

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/somethings-gone-wrong-with-a-purchase/claim-using-a-warranty-or-guarantee/

There is obviously some flexibility in this in that not every product could be reasonably expected to last that long. If some kind of deliberate failure mechanism was built in then it would obviously be present at the time of purchase though so you would be able to claim. It seems an unlikely strategy for a mass market product as you would get potentially thousands of products failing at the same time for the same reason which would cause suspicion and be a big PR hit.

It's probably worth speaking to the retailer anyway to see if they would honour the warranty or offer some sort of goodwill - a voucher or discount maybe.

SBFrancies
  • 171
  • 2
  • 1
    Five or six years is the maximum claim period. It is not how long the product is supposed to be free of fault. That is “a reasonable time”, usually two years. – gnasher729 Nov 22 '23 at 17:59