Warning over right to repair

Proposed legislation covering right to repair is well-intentioned but too simplistic and would grind the automotive industry to a halt in its current form.

That’s the view expressed by the Motor Trade Association (MTA) in its submission on the Consumer Guarantees (Right to Repair) Amendment Bill. 

Instead, industry and policymakers should work together to develop enduring, industry-specific solutions, it says.

Lee Marshall, pictured, the MTA’s chief executive, says the Green Party should be commended for the proposed amendment, which recognises a valid and growing issue.

“The bill was seemingly written with small household electronics in mind and with reducing landfill as its aim,” he says.

“We support that sentiment. But a car isn’t a dishwasher. Vehicles can and do get fixed, parts are available, and good recycling systems and product stewardship schemes are already in place for all manner of vehicle components.

“As drafted, the Green Party’s bill would cause major disruptions to original equipment manufacturer [OEM] viability in our small market.

“It would make it nearly impossible for the used-import market to operate – possibly forced to provide information and parts they don’t have and can’t access. We could end up with less competition, higher costs to serve and, ultimately, higher prices for consumers.”

The MTA contends right to repair in automotive is more about the need for access to repair information, tools and necessary specifications, which is a problem that grows daily with ever more complex and technology-reliant vehicles. 

Legislation for automotive would look a lot different to what has been proposed because the problem is different.

“It’s a conversation that has been simmering for more than 20 years in our sector with a significant effort from the general repair sector to bring it to the fore lately,” says Marshall.

“The MTA has been working in the background to broker an industry-wide solution, connecting the group currently advocating for ‘choice of repairer’ with new vehicle dealers and manufacturers.”

However, the association recognises it’s a polarising subject, even within the automotive industry. 

The general and collision-repair sector would say this is about ensuring consumers can choose where to have their car fixed, fair competition and limits on how manufacturers can exclude non-OEM-affiliated repairers from the market by keeping information to themselves, explains Marshall.

From a new-vehicle industry perspective, it’s about protecting hard-earned intellectual property and ensuring cars are correctly and safely repaired by technicians who are trained in the specifics, of the product.

“Of course, both are right,” says Marshall. “Both have valid points and the answer will be somewhere in the middle.

“Given they are all our members, we can’t take sides so we’ve been trying to broker a common ground, which I’m optimistic is close. All parties have shown tremendous willing and I’m hopeful we can continue in that vein.

“But for now we’ll be hoping this bill is squarely declined with a door left ajar for an industry specific solution in the future.”

What the bill is about

Submissions on the Consumer Guarantees (Right to Repair) Amendment Bill are being heard by parliament’s economic development, science and innovation select committee. It would amend the CGA. 

The Beehive’s website states it seeks to require manufacturers to make repair parts and information available to consumers in order to extend the lifetime of products. 

The bill would replace the CGA’s guarantee as to repair and spare parts, requiring manufacturers to:

• Reasonably ensure that facilities for repair of goods and supply of parts for the goods are reasonably available for a reasonable period after the goods are supplied.

• Provide the consumer with – upon request – information, spare parts, software and other tools used for diagnosing, maintaining or repairing goods.

The Consumer Guarantees (Right to Repair) Amendment Bill would also:

• Provide consumers with a right of redress against manufacturers when goods fail to comply with the guarantee.

• Enable consumers to request that a supplier repairs goods rather than replacing them.

• Require suppliers to repair goods within a reasonable time if such a request is made by a consumer.

• Repeal section 42 of the CGA. It provides that repair facilities and parts don’t have to be made available if the consumer is notified at the time the product is supplied.