What you need to know about the right to repair movement - Diana Clement

Who hasn’t thrown out a perfectly good item because it couldn’t be repaired? Photo / 123RF

Diana Clement is a writer specialising in personal finance and property investing. She has previously held roles writing about the Internet, business technology and small business.

OPINION

Who hasn’t thrown out a perfectly good item because it couldn’t be repaired? Maybe it only needed a $10 replacement plastic part. But the manufacturer no longer sells said part, or the fix needs a proprietary tool that isn’t available to the public.

The right to repair movement emerged earlier this decade. The movement’s main argument is that consumers have the right for their products to be repairable and manufacturers shouldn’t get in their way.

This is about personal finances as well as our planet. Every time we replace an item that should be repairable, we spend unnecessary money.

When my dryer needed a new spigot, lo and beyond Simpson/Electrolux didn’t supply the part in New Zealand, and I couldn’t convince an Australian spares shop to post here. That’s the point at which most people send the dryer to landfill and buy a new one for $1,000 or so.

Being me, I had the part delivered to my brother’s house in Australia, in anticipation of one of us visiting the other.

Currently, some manufacturers actively obstruct repair of their goods. As well as not stocking parts, they blatantly refuse to let unauthorised repairers fix broken items.

A Private Member’s Right To Repair bill going through parliament, if passed, will impose greater responsibilities on manufacturers that give consumers the right to repair their purchases, says Auckland University commercial law professor Alex Sims, who is a member of Right to Repair Aotearoa Coalition.

The Green Party’s Consumer Guarantees (Right to Repair) Amendment Bill would amend the Consumer Guarantees Act and do a number of things.

These include requiring manufacturers to guarantee that goods they supply in New Zealand can be repaired for a reasonable period, ensure spare parts are available, provide manuals and information needed for repairs, and allow consumers to request a repair rather than replacing.

The bill is not the complete answer to a vexing problem that limits the circular economy in New Zealand. It’s a start, however. Sims says legislators do need to be wary of the law of unintended consequences and having exclusions, for say, op shops selling appliances.

Sims says one of the main limitations of the Consumer Guarantees Act and the bill is that word “consumer”. Businesses are largely left out, yet buy all sorts of equipment in bulk.

The right to repair tractors is a big thing in the United States, where farmers have been hacking the software on their equipment to avoid exorbitant dealership repairs.

Nor might it address some of the other sneaky tactics manufacturers play to force us to upgrade. One dirty trick is “bricking”, where manufacturers programme software locks into their appliances to stop the item working after a certain date or period of use.

It’s as useful as a brick then.

Apple has fought the right to repair movement hard. In the US it has agreed reluctantly to self repair for owners. However, it’s still limiting them from using anything other than genuine Apple parts.

It does that with a sneaky trick called “parts pairing”. This is where replacement parts are linked to the serial numbers of specific devices.

If you replace the screen, for example, with a third-party one rather than an original Apple part, the phone stops working or shows error messages.

This forces owners to pay for overpriced repairs at the Apple shop, or upgrade.

Countries around the world are bringing in laws establishing the right to repair. Canada, for example, has promised an amendment to the Canadian Copyright Act allowing TPM software locks to be circumvented.

Readers interested in repairing broken items instead of growing them away should check out Repair Café Aotearoa.