www.r2rc.co.uk/home/content/view/27/97/
Seems like these money grubbers want to make sure we all get totally screwed over by main dealers. They have already been lambasted for over priced and poor quality service so the EU in their wisdom want to stop us choosing where we take our car for repair! I assume the disappearing legislation is something to do with block exemption coming to an end
In my opinion the car repairs industry needs to be competitive. M/Fs should not force dealers to buy hugely expensive equipment to service their cars. All technical information should be freely available and all TSBs should be available to all in the industry not just the main dealers. The practice of tying a part to a car so it can't be used on any other should be banned (citroen do this to the chagrain of many citroen dealers). Warranties should be m/f based and not dealer backed as they are just a way of forcing owners to put up with overpriced and poor quality post sales servicing and repairs. Giving consumers choice will put all the rubbish dealers out of business and rightly so.
|
teabelly- any link to the original proposal? This is second-hand (at best), and I'd like to see the detail.
tt
|
It's something to do with the end of the block exemption legislation. I'd like to see the detail too!
|
|
|
|
There is a petition pointing out how this ruling would affect motorists and lead to the closure of many small independent mechanics but I wonder how many have actually bothered to click the link and sign ?
We , as a nation , get the kicking we deserve through our apathy and laziness. Those of us who oppose this endless aggravation are accused of being moaners or " angry ".
|
Lets see the original proposal first.
tt
Edited by theterranaut on 27/12/2008 at 11:39
|
www.iir-events.com/IIR-conf/LawCompliance/EventVie...1
Some legal conference about it.
Some uni boffins have written about it here:
snipurl.com/95qgc
It seems to be more to do with supply chain issues.
Considering it could have far reaching consequences I am surprised there isn't more information about it.
|
|
|
|
We as a nation get the kicking we deserve through our apathy and laziness. Those of us who oppose this endless aggravation are accused of being moaners or " angry
Nooo not at all. Just a jumper.
Conclusions and bandwagons.
|
|
|
|
>Giving consumers choice will put all the rubbish dealers out of business ..
Of course, this is the natural law of the marketplace - at least in theory. But it looks as though many dealers, rubbish or not, will go out of business anyway, so the result may be less choice, not more. And that choice may be between less suitable suppliers too, and possibly further from home. The choice mantra doesn't necessarily lead to a better result.
|
Here are a couple to chew over:
the AA is of the opinion that the current block exemption rules run out in 2010s
tinyurl.com/6wn9yp
and here's a .GOV.UK perspective on the current rules
tinyurl.com/9397lf
On the face of it, if not renewed, it could cause the grief described.
|
Thanks teabelly.
tt
|
What a load of hot air about nothing.
The EU Block Exemption rules for Car Manufacturers/distribution/dealerships and repairs willl expire in May 2010.
The EU have recently issued consultation on what will take its place.
You have to bear in mind that without the exemption the current exclusive arrangements in place for dealerships would be illegal under European law.
So if nothing happens the situation cannot revert to how it was previously, anyone who wants to buy cars from a manufacturer will be able to do so.
The overall EU view is that areas need reform but the agreements to allow independants access to repair technology and intellectual property currently work well.
I suspect that there is little chance of that disappearing.
Oddly how can people who rile against government intervention in other areas rile against the possible removal of intervention in this area?
|
|
|
Of course, if the Block Exemption was not renewed then the retail trade would be subject to the competition requirements under the Treaty of Rome that nearly other industry is.
This means that there'd be fewer dealers around. Probably cheaper cars.
Have a look at this:
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1801759.stm
note how the Germans were desperate to keep the block exemption to protect Opel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I go to a family-owned franchised dealer, with which I am totally satisfied, so this won't affect me.
|
>I go to a family-owned franchised dealer, with which I am totally satisfied, so this won't affect me ..
Again, Snail - provided they stay in business. I just bought from one such - company director is gt-grandson of original (1911) founder, and parts manager is grandson - but they all have to keep their heads above water.
|
|
|
|
In my opinion the car repairs industry needs to be competitive. M/Fs should not force dealers to buy hugely expensive equipment to service their cars. All technical information should be freely available and all TSBs should be available to all in the industry not just the main dealers.
That's your R & D budget stuffed, then!
Sorry teabelly, as much as I agree with the basic principle, what's the point of manufacturer X spending squillions on designing a new system, then allowing any tom dick or harry to have access to how it works?
Think medicine - there is a patent period in play. After that, the generics come into play.
|
|
|
If I read this right, people are complaining that the EU is not interfering enough? Is that right?
The anti-europe pseudo free-traders are blaming europe and claiming that europe will 'force' people to act in a particular way?
When I've stopped laughing....
|
Correct. The EU is not interfering enough.
Treaty of Rome contains a whole stack of free trade provisions (Common/Single Market - remember?). If the motor trade had to comply with these then some of the shannigans (such as trying to restrict parallel imports) wouldn't have happened.
The old Block Exemption allowed the motor trade to get away with murder. The current one requires the motor trade is more open. The trade is still protected.
Beneficiaries tend to be manufacturers and franchised dealers.
Edited by LondonBus on 27/12/2008 at 19:01
|
"as much as I agree with the basic principle, what's the point of manufacturer X spending squillions on designing a new system, then allowing any tom dick or harry to have access to how it works?
Think medicine - there is a patent period in play. After that, the generics come into play."
Ok, except that the manufacturers (vehicle assemblers really) put together parts and ideas actually created by other companies, but then exercise their (possibly) unfair right to protect that information from reaching other repairers. Some examples, ABS, airbags, electronic control units and systems, etc.
Its not quite as unfair as you make it out.
R&D by vehicle assemblers is probably not what you think it is! There R&D is more marketing based. Any no repairer in the country (1 man band through to major companies) actually wants any less cars on the road, just more information.
Why should a 5 year old car be consigned to the scrap heap for lack of information, technical system to cope with it? If you allow cars to be scrapped at such young ages its bad for lots of reasons, not least of which is the effect it will have on prices of new and nearly new cars. Then theres the environmental issue.
|
But we live in a system that protects intellectual property no matter what it relates to.
The dissemination of information from manufacturers and distributors was agreed as part of the renewal of the block exemption. Normally the owner of the IP is allowed to keep it secret or only allow those that they wish to know it to do so.
Would you really expect a major pharmaceutical company to hand over all its IP to anyone who asked for it? And if they did are you going to pay for the development of the new drugs? As they couldn't.
|
>>Would you really expect a major pharmaceutical company to hand over all its IP to anyone who asked for it? And if they did are you going to pay for the development of the new drugs? As they couldn't. >
When you take your body to an independant doctor to be serviced, rather than to a dealer franchised by the original manufacturer, you will find he has service literature on all the major drugs, their properties and side-effects.
If you need a spare part, you are free to source one from a breakers yard rather than going back to the original manufacturer.
|
When you take your body to an independant doctor to be serviced rather than to a dealer franchised by the original manufacturer you will find he has service literature on all the major drugs their properties and side-effects.
but he/she wont have all the relevant information, or special tools to hand, and will attempt to rebook you at a later date with someone who hopefully does have all the required info/tools.
If you need a spare part you are free to source one from a breakers yard rather than going back to the original manufacturer.
this follows on from the above.... attempting repairs without the relevant tools/info, or if the body is uneconomic to repair, will result in it being broken up for spares.
|
|
Hang on a minue didn't the E.U state that it was cracking down on makers who refuse to honour warranties when a car has been serviced by an independent. Sounds like a scare story to me as to force you to go to a dealer would be illegal as it goes against E.U competition law. I can't see this happening and when (long story) my Skoda dealer wants to charge me £350 to replace dodgy front suspension carrier bushes (need to replace the whole front suspension guv) and my local VAG indy quotes £100, I think I know where I will go....
|
|
|
|
