"The manufacturer is only required to repair it at no charge to you under warranty and provide parts to the service center for a period of 7 years."

Richard, this is a myth. There is no requirement for manufacturers to back stock parts. We live in a mass-produced, throw away culture. Polaroid has no parts supply and admits that you are on your own if one of their TV's fails outside of warranty. Have you read this? http://hdguru.com/?p=107

I couldn't get a part as simple as a power supply for a 5 year old Teac CD recorder. It was a nice unit with unique features and I had to shit-can it. I had a 5 year old Panasonic HDTV that was useless when the video board went out. I work at a store with a good service department and they couldn't find the replacement board anywhere.

This problem is only going to get worse, and our landfills are going to be filled with TV's, computers, and other electronics that aren't very old. It is a shame, but it is one of the results of mass production in 3rd world countries combined with an international economy. Parts are supplied by multiple vendors all over the world and assembled in other countries. The labor to build the products is low, but a skilled technician like you needs to make a living diagnosing the problem. It ends of costing more to fix many products than it does to replace them. And that is if parts are available.

LewBob

This post has been left intact because the information provided is relevant. To be clear, a federal law requiring parts availability does not exist.

Richard, this is a myth.

It's not a myth, it's a law and it used to be 10 years but was changed in the early 90's.

It sure seems like a simple law and as I recall the law really is that simple leaving it to the consumer to enforce it and the courts to decide how to apply it.

As with all laws the first place to start is damages and that is where the loophole resides. If I buy a $50 DVD player and it breaks under warranty or out of warranty and can’t be fixed for what ever reason what are my damages? $50. Hardly worth the effort. Most folks are going to buy a different brand the next time and let their friends know about the other one! Depending on your location and lawyer a reasonable fee could run $50-200. Using that as a base line the damages you seek would have to be well beyond the lawyers fee to make it reasonably worth your while unless you have money to blow in fighting the good battle based solely on principle.

Let’s paint another example where the product retailed for over $1500, it’s 5 years old and the part is NLA, no longer available. What are your damages? For this example lets make that a part which is reasonably priced so the repair on your product is reasonable, $400, for the legal basis that actually having it repaired would be considered reasonable and ordinary. In this case the manufacturer has no choice but to provide a new product in exchange but how much should that run if anything? It would seem reasonable for the manufacturer to deduct the repair fee because if they could provide the part you would have had to spend that amount of money. Next comes depreciation and use; the TV is 5 years old so that can also reasonably be deducted.

During my career this has been left to the free market to resolve and the well known manufacturers we grew up with have always stepped forward providing a solution acceptable to the consumer. I am not aware of anybody legally challenging a manufacturer. My personal experience as a service center is the manufacturer will make a deal with the customer on a new product. I have not had one customer complain. The exact opposite; they smiled and grinned and thought how cool it was that they would get a new TV after all those years of use even if they had to pay some to get it!

Call the mass market fools if you want but that has been the response and the free market approach seems to have worked just fine.

Much has changed over the last 10 years and the biggest change has been inexpensive Chinese product flooding the market place with numerous name brands never seen before along with the unexpected outcome that most of them cannot or will not provide parts and service in or out of warranty or that to receive repairs the product must be sent to the manufacturer forcing you to ship it to them which in many cases may not be practical or reasonable.

I and most service centers would be quick to agree that the above is clearly not in the best interest of the consumer, our landfills or the service industry and that many of these companies are doing things to circumvent what consumers would feel should be their obligation and responsibility as a company of integrity yet integrity in manufacturing is not federally legislated and is covered instead by consumer protection laws passed by the states.

Unfortunately you will have to couple that with the fact that manufacturing has greatly improved and failures rates have dropped dramatically over that same time period. Will there ever be enough people upset with a product to put together a class action lawsuit as an example to the rest?

This problem is only going to get worse, and our landfills are going to be filled with TV's, computers, and other electronics that aren't very old. It is a shame, but it is one of the results of mass production in 3rd world countries combined with an international economy.

Long before we start picking on TVs, representing a small bump, the public needs to look at all the other stuff filling them solely due to cost replacement such as VCRs, DVD players, HTIB, cell phones, I-pods, MP3 players, PC circuit boards, microwave ovens, etc.. This will get this thread off topic quickly as it becomes a discussion of capitalism and the free market; the mass market wants it cheap and plentiful. Who is willing to hug the planet and spend $10,000 on a TV instead of $2,500? $500 on a DVD player instead of $75? Prevent new technologies and better performing products from coming to the market? If you want to open that discussion please start another thread!

I had a 5 year old Panasonic HDTV that was useless when the video board went out.

Gotta model number or can you tell me what technology it was? You may be shocked by my answer and yet another thread on that topic!

Richard, Thanks for the reply. Exactly what statute is it that requires a company to maintain parts for seven years? I explored this a few years ago and came to the conclusion that it was a myth. Don't worry about my Panasonic. Fortunately I had bought a five year extended warranty so I was covered by the warranty company. LewBob

PS, This is a new thread!

Did you read the HDGuru article that I attached a link to? He claims that Polaroid told him that they offer no out of warranty support for their TV's. That sounds like the basis for a class action suit if the law you speak of really exists.

The Magnuson-Moss Act requires manufacturers to be clear in the terms of their warranties, but I don't believe it says anything about providing parts. LewBob

This post has been left intact because the information provided is relevant. To be clear, a federal law requiring parts availability does not exist.

I don't know what statute it is but it is a federal law.

The reason I ask about your older TV is because it may very well be that it did not need to go the landfill. There are retailers in my area with service departments running around giving estimates to replace a board that is not or never was available when that board could be repaired to component level or worse yet the manufacturer NEVER PROVIDED A BOARD because it was SUPPOSED TO BE COMPONENT LEVEL REPAIR.

I would hate to think your TV is in a landfill because of that...

Yes, I have read that article and you are correct! Now go find everybody with damages and figure out how the lawyer is going to be paid in the interm...

That is one of the main reasons for state consumer protection laws - to be able to enforce a reasonable expectation without requiring unreasonable means to make it happen.

My set didn't go to a land fill. It was a multi-scan TV and the 480i inputs worked fine, so I gave it to a shelter that wanted a TV. Thanks for asking. I was glad that I could find a home for it. LewBob

I know of no federal law that requires parts availability but several states have them.

See this link:

http://www.nesda.com/consumers/parts.html

I didn't think so. Richard, I don't see Georgia on the list! BTW, this means that companies that do work something out for the consumer when parts aren't available are really good guys. I have seen Mitsubishi do this a number of times.

One of the crazy things is the requirement of some of the state laws is the availabilty of parts for a given number of years after the sale. Some [parts] could sit around on shelves for years before they are finally sold. That is unfair to the manufacturer. LewBob

Hey lewbobski, changed a word in your post from products to parts assuming that is what you meant. Let me know if you really meant products...

I did go into major research mode over the last number of days and was preparing to remove my calf and foot from my mouth. Thanks Leonard for the link, you beat me to it...

Lewbobski, you are correct - it is a myth!

Most myths and legends are tied to some event that has been misconstrued and that is what I cannot find. What I have found is that most of us think this law exists so I am in good company over my career. Nearly all information concerning parts availability relates to the automotive industry. At the FTC all I could find about electronic parts was one case concerning Kodak decades ago related to their decision to stop providing parts to independent service centers for repairing copy machines. An interesting case and outcome, Kodak won, that many still do not agree with since it has been used as precedence in other cases. In the Kodak case the FTC was far more concerned about the ability to control markets, monopoly, and how that affects consumers rather than protecting the free market ability to get the product serviced by independent servicers, not just Kodak. The FTC believed that the Kodak copier business was not large enough to enforce a monopoly on the consumer. There were other arguments related to patent because that was the legal stance Kodak was taking to affirm it's right to not sell the parts.

What I have found is numerous statements that make it clear the FTC believes in the power of free markets and if a manufacturer is doing something that the consuming public thinks is wrong they will lose their market position and business if they don't correct the problem. No manufacturer is required to provide a warranty on their product yet the FTC also points out that sales may be difficult without one.

It appears the key ingredient to any case one would have against a manufacturer relates to: the product must be of normal durability, considering its nature and price.

Any consumer rights or consumer protection law has been left to the states so check your consumer affairs department for yours.

Interesting reading for those who want to know more...

Federal Trade Commission
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/warranty.shtm

I provide this quote for two reasons. The first is the legal term and time frame of a recall which for electronics comes in the form of class action lawsuits and that appears to be covered in the following. Another is the statement of how long a product should last.

Generally, there is no specified duration for implied warranties under state laws. However, the state statutes of limitations for breach of either an express or an implied warranty are generally four years from date of purchase. This means that buyers have four years in which to discover and seek a remedy for problems that were present in the product at the time it was sold. It does not mean that the product must last for four years. It means only that the product must be of normal durability, considering its nature and price.

You are right, I meant parts. I had thought this law existed too, then did research when I couldn't get parts for the TV. I can't remember who clued me in that it was a myth, but I found out. Thanks for doing the homework. LewBob

Most myths and legends are tied to some event that has been misconstrued and that is what I cannot find.

CALIFORNIA CODES
CIVIL CODE
SECTION 1792-1795.7
http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/code/getcode.html?file=./civ/01001-02000/1792-1795.7

An interesting law

1792.1. Every sale of consumer goods that are sold at retail in this state by a manufacturer who has reason to know at the time of the retail sale that the goods are required for a particular purpose and that the buyer is relying on the manufacturer's skill or judgment to select or furnish suitable goods shall be accompanied by such manufacturer's implied warranty of fitness.

Products less than $100

1793.03. (a) Every manufacturer making an express warranty with respect to an electronic or appliance product described in subdivision (h), (i), (j), or (k) of Section 9801 of the Business and Professions Code, with a wholesale price to the retailer of not less than fifty dollars ($50) and not more than ninety-nine dollars and ninety-nine cents ($99.99), shall make available to service and repair facilities sufficient service literature and functional parts to effect the repair of a product for at least three years after the date a product model or type was manufactured, regardless of whether the three-year period exceeds the warranty period for the product.

Products over $100

(b) Every manufacturer making an express warranty with respect to an electronic or appliance product described in subdivision (h), (i), (j), or (k) of Section 9801 of the Business and Professions Code, with a wholesale price to the retailer of one hundred dollars ($100) or more, shall make available to service and repair facilities sufficient service literature and functional parts to effect the repair of a product for at least seven years after the date a product model or type was manufactured, regardless of whether the seven-year period exceeds the warranty period for the product

I can’t find out when this was passed but it was referenced in an article 17 years ago
http://www.psoca.org/user_pages/march_issue_-_give_me,_buy_me,_take_me___3.shtml

Here is a recent reference related to parts availability with our new HDTV's
http://www.psoca.org/user_pages/march_issue_-_consumer_protection_3.shtml