Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 106: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she will consider amending consumer protection legislation in order to safeguard consumers who purchase a product from a company or source and when there is no requirement upon such a company or source to stock replacement parts or equipment once the warranty given has expired as long as such parts might be available somewhere else; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [46992/09]

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Section 12 of the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980 provides that, in a contract for the sale of goods, there is an implied warranty that spare parts and an adequate after-sale service will be made available by the seller in such circumstances as are stated in an offer, description or advertisement by the seller on behalf of the manufacturer or on his own behalf and for such period as is so stated or, if no period is stated, for a reasonable period. The Section further provides that any term of a contract exempting this implied warranty shall be void.

The thrust of the Deputy's question would seem to be that Irish legislation should place an additional express requirement on traders to stock replacement parts or equipment after any warranty they have given has expired provided that those replacement parts or equipment might be available somewhere else. While I sympathise with the aim of the proposal, it raises a number of issues requiring further and more detailed consideration. As the Deputy is aware, the European Commission published in October 2008 a proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Consumer Rights. The proposal has been drafted on a full harmonisation basis and, if adopted on this basis, would preclude member states from going beyond its protections in national legislation. The proposal includes provisions on warranties and guarantees and, as it is still under discussion by the Council and the Parliament, I am not in a position to state whether a provision in domestic legislation along the lines suggested by the Deputy will be necessary or permissible in the future. Any judgement of this kind must await agreement on the final text of the proposed Directive.

I believe that, while everything possible and reasonable must be done to ensure that consumers are adequately protected, we should not place unrealistic or impractical obligations on traders. Supply chains for many consumer goods are long and complex. These goods often originate not just outside Ireland, but outside the European Community. It is proper to ask in this context if it is reasonable to require Irish retailers, particularly small retailers, to take legal responsibility for stocking replacement parts made by companies with whom they may have no direct commercial relationship and who may be located thousands of miles away.

It is relevant to note in this context that countries whose legislation goes further than current Irish legislation in requiring traders to make spare parts available also recognise the effective limits to statutory requirements of this kind. The New Zealand Consumer Guarantees Act 1993, for example, provides that the manufacturers of goods supplied to consumers in New Zealand must take reasonable action to ensure that facilities for repair of the goods and supply of parts for repair are reasonably available for a reasonable period after the goods are so supplied. This obligation does not apply, however, where reasonable action is taken to notify the consumer at or before the time that the goods are supplied that the manufacturer does not undertake that repair facilities and parts will be available for those goods.