I’ve just received the following consumer question about an expensive hob which has only lasted 4 years –
Q: I purchased a NEFF induction hob 4 years ago for £820. Now 2 rings do not work, and the Neff engineer says that the cost of repair would be £600+ so says it is not worth repairing and we have to buy a new one.
We called NEFF when it went wrong and they ‘sold’ us a policy (14 a months for 12 months) whereby if the hob repair costs were less than 250 they would repair it within that policy and then cover for the next year. If the cost of repair was over £250, they would cancel the insurance policy. Do we have any comeback uder the sale of goods act? The hob is used probably 5 days a week but no more.
A: In my opinion yes you do have a case under the Sale of Goods Act. £820 for a hob, which 4 years later is beyond economical repair just because 2 rings have gone is completely unacceptable. Not only should you not expect 2 rings on a quality product to have failed by now but it’s outrageous that they want to charge around 80% of the purchase cost to repair it. It’s also very disappointing that they seem so content to write it off.
I’ve had this argument on another article regarding some Miele repair costs. Any manufacturer who’s business model is selling high quality, superior, very expensive products should find it an anathema to see any one of their products scrapped at 4 years old. Everyone within the company should find it equally unacceptable to have this happen to any of their customers, which undermines their entire business model.
From my observations most people within these companies hide behind the defence of, “most people do have many years of life from their appliance, it’s only small minority of people this happens to”. This is the same argument used when people are killed or their houses burn down due to a badly designed or a faulty appliance, and is simply not on. It’s not the percentage of people affected that is relevant, it’s the severity of the consequences. You can’t dismiss serious consequences simply because they are relatively rare.
What is the point of buying a high quality appliance if it lasts such a short time and cannot be repaired?
There seems to be a small minority of companies making products which claim to be considerably superior to all the others and cost a lot more to buy. But they sell us the idea that “investing” a lot more money in their top quality product will reward us with not only a more pleasurable and sophisticated product to use (which they generally deliver), but one which will last a long time – much longer than the cheap (“rubbish”) ones.
Most people would be likely to feel even if they’d bought the cheapest hob for just a few hundred pounds that 4 years was still disappointing. However, most people would probably feel inclined to reluctantly accept it and even blame themselves for not investing in a better quality one. They’d either buy another of the same or invest in a more expensive better quality one next time.
I think you have a strong case for arguing that the hob has not lasted a reasonable time. However, unless Neff want to try and restore your confidence in their appliances you will need to make your case to the retailer you bought it from under the Sale of Goods Act and if necessary threaten to take them to the small claims court.
At a cost of £820 you should expect a lot longer than 4 years, and I’d be very surprised if a small claims court judge felt any differently.
In my opinion there are only two possible explanations for why high quality expensive appliances are so outrageously expensive to repair –
- They genuinely cost that much to repair because of the higher standards of their aftersales networks, the higher quality of parts, and the relatively low volumes of spares manufactured
- They think a high quality product should be expensive to repair, that people expect it and are generally prepared to pay premium repair prices
If it’s the former, then unfortunately that’s a big flaw in their business model. But they should avoid letting any customers down like this – especially in these modern times when everyone has internet access and knows how to use it. They should subsidise repairs like this and set them at acceptable prices even if it loses them money. Their entire good name depends on the public being confident in investing in their appliances.
If it’s the latter, they need a wake up call as they’ve now taken it so far they are looking like they are selling appliances that may be generally very reliable but are not very repairable and there’s no strong certainty they will last long enough to justify the extra costs.
Which one is it? I honestly don’t know. A third possibility is that in order to keep finished product costs down they are selling the appliances with little or no profit (even though they are so expensive) and hoping to make money on aftersales instead. This is a well known business model (I personally hate) employed by games console and printer manufacturers. If so, it can work, but only if people don’t feel exploited and £600 to repair a 4 year old £800 product is cloud cuckoo land.
Related articles:
David says
May 14, 2012 at 4:28 pmI am the person referred to above. I emailed Neff and firstly received an email saying my complaint was with the retail outlet rather than themselves. I then emailed again with basically a précis of the above and received a much more helpful reply with two options.
Firstly they could cap the cost of repair of the faulty hob at £250, then guarantee those repairs for a year or secondly offer me the current equivalent new hob for the concessionary sum of £387.00 inclusive of VAT. We felt that to have the faulty hob repaired would be risky as the other two rings could go wrong which would leave us back at square one, so we have chose the replacement upgraded model at £387 which includes installation as well.
By doing this we have a brand new model, guaranteed for a further 2 years for just £387, when the cost price of that model is still £822.50, saving around £435.00. We have never had a problem with Neff appliances so far, so hopefully this has been a one off. We weren’t out to get ‘something for nothing’ but felt that a quality appliance should last longer than 4 years, and obviously Neff agreed. Once I got through to the right person they were very helpful and understanding. Many thanks to the whitegoodshelp website for the advice.
Washerhelp says
May 15, 2012 at 3:18 pmThanks for your update David. It shows that most manufacturers and retailers are not to be trusted when it comes to our consumer rights but when pressed they will usually start conceding ground. It’s pretty disingenuous. As far as they are all concerned we have the guarantee (usually 12 months) and after that we pay. It’s that simple to them. However, the government says that’s not good enough.
Retailers should be selling decent products, and if not they should have to deal with the consequences. If a product is so poor that some of them are scrap after just a year or so they should stop selling them or make sure they are so cheap most people will accept it. If your hob had been £199 you might well have accepted 4 years, but not at £820.
Supposed high quality appliances at premium prices should always perform much better than normal and should not suffer serious and outrageously expensive breakdowns so young. All of the quality appliance manufacturers seem to have a very serious problem in that they don’t seem able (or willing?) to repair their products at reasonable prices. It’s hard to understand how one can seriously quote £600 after 4 years to replace 2 rings on an £820 hob. To me it comes across as either showing total contempt for customers, or living in an alternative reality.
At least they have accepted how unacceptable it is and have offered to try and make amends. If they have a good name to defend it should be more than worth it to them. The question is, were they taking the proverbial before, or are they substantially subsidising the repair to keep their good name?
If these prices are real they have a serious problem with their business model because they are making appliances that essentially can’t be repaired. It may only be a small percentage of people getting affected (I’ve no idea but let’s give them the benefit of the doubt) but it’s pretty outrageous to be unable to repair their own quality products because of crazy prices, and expect customers to just write them off after 4 years.
And if it genuinely is so rare for such a thing to happen there’s even less of an excuse for expecting customers to take such a hit after investing in their good name.
Michelle Drakes says
January 18, 2018 at 2:26 pmGlad to hear that your issue has been resolved. Unfortunately I am not in such a good position. Purchased an Induction Rangemaster for £2370 32 months ago. Now has a major problem with the hob and getting quotes of £1150 to repair. Rangemaster won’t entertain any help, not even a reduction in the price of the parts which amount to just over £1000. AO who I bought it through are only willing to offer a depreciated refund of £1327. Cannot believe the arrogance of Rangemaster who won’t offer any support.
Andy Trigg (Whitegoodshelp) says
January 18, 2018 at 3:42 pmHello Michelle. It always saddens me to see such ridiculous prices to repair high quality products. Maybe it is no longer such good value for money to buy high quality appliance? The main point of spending extra money is that the appliance should last considerably longer than the cheap ones and therefore prove better value for money in the long run.
Your case is the same as David’s in the last comment, except much worse. £2,370 for 32 months use of an appliance just isn’t good enough. If they are quoting 50% of the purchase cost to repair it after just 32 months I would say you have rights under the sale of goods act because of they extremely high cost of the appliance. I think it’s fair to expect that an appliance costing that much should not break down within 32 months and need a ridiculously expensive repair.
It may be that you are entitled to a free repair. You could consider asking AO to pay for the repair instead of giving you money for a refund . However, you might have lost all confidence in the appliance now. The retailer is entitled to offer a depreciated refund. However, any money knocked off should be fair. The normal method would be to try and decide how long an appliance should normally last on average. So for example the average age of modern washing machine is reportedly only around 7 years. Therefore if one had lasted 3 1/2 years it has lasted on average about 50% of its expected lifespan.
I would expect a Rangemaster costing £2,370 should surely last about 20 years? Not necessarily without ever breaking down but not so soon and needing such high cost repair. If that is the case, and I can’t guarantee it is, then the figure they have quoted you appears to be based on an assumption that it is lasted about half its expected lifespan. I would strongly dispute that because it should last more like 20 years.
If you check out this article ( Out of guarantee – even by a long time doesn’t always mean you should pay) you can see that Which? Advised one of their members who had purchased an “expensive” coffee machine but it had only lasted 30 months that they should be entitled to expect it to have lasted more than 30 months – and were entitled to a free repair. So I would think it reasonable to assume that with the amazing amount of money your appliance cost they would advise exactly the same.
If you are by any chance Which? member, get in touch with them. If not you should try somewhere like Consumer rights UK.gov.
As I am a Which? affiliate and also a member I do promote them a lot. I would recommend becoming a member if you aren’t already – Why subscribe to Which?