Warrantys and 3rd party repairs

[mangurian]

The 1975 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act states that no manufacturer who charges more than $5 for a product can put repair restrictions on a product they're offering a warranty on. In May, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission sent warning letters to Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, HTC, Hyundai, and ASUS for violating the act by threatening to void the warranties of customers who repaired their own devices. Within 30 days, many of the companies had complied and changed the language on their websites around independent repair. It was a step in the right direction, but the PIRGs survey of the AHAM members shows that there's still a lot of work to do.

[ebiggs1]

The purpose of that law was, these exclusions of off brand repair and parts were not spelled out or expressed in the written warranty.  If the manufacturer says so in the written warranty they can refuse the repair. In others words read the fine print as it may state the repair must be done at an authorized dealer.

[mangurian]

Canon does not restrict 3rd party repairs - that's good.   Besides,  I don't think it can be restricted in any case (even if it is so stated).   Of course, choose the repairer carefully.  If you are having some non-warranty item worked on (for example, removal of an infrared filter from a video cam) or something really simple (a bent strap fitting) and the shop screws up something that is covered,  Canon is not responsible.

Here is a better explanation: 3rd party repair laws

Here is a Canon warranty:

https://downloads.canon.com/nw/cso/warranties/warranty_EF_lenses.pdf

[ebiggs1]

(c) Defective materials or workmanship where the defect is due to a Product having been serviced or modified by other than Canon or a Canon authorized service provider

(f) Damage or service resulting from modifications or alterations to a Product in any way (including any alteration or removal of its serial number or identification marks). 

That is pretty clear to me.

[mangurian]

(c) Defective materials or workmanship where the defect is due to a Product having been serviced or modified by other than Canon or a Canon authorized service provider

(f) Damage or service resulting from modifications or alterations to a Product in any way (including any alteration or removal of its serial number or identification marks). 

So you are good to go if the 3rd party repair does not break anything.   Your warranty is still good.

[wq9nsc]

For an item still in warranty it would be foolish except in an extreme emergency to take it to anyone but an authorized Canon shop for warranty repair.  You really don't want to get caught in a dispute between the manufacturing organization and an independent repair shop over the cause of a subsequent failure-especially with something as complex as a DSLR where one screw left slightly loose or a random contaminant introduced during another repair could easily have been the root cause of the current failure.

The M-M Act is one of the most misunderstood regulatory acts in the U.S. and much of that lies at the feet of companies involved in aftermarket modification products for cars and trucks.  The intent of M-M was pretty simple, the prevention of a manufacturer and its captive dealer and/or supplier network from forcing customers to rely upon that network for typical maintenance procedures and products.  The goal of M-M was simply to provide consumers with more choices and options in order to foster competition which is a recurring theme in the business regulations of most countries.

Prior to the M-M act, GM could have insisted that unless your car oil is changed by a GM dealer using OEM AC-Delco branded oil and oil filters then your warranty can be blocked.  M-M does allow the customer to use any service shop (or do it themselves) AND use any filter, oil, etc. AS LONG AS it meets those standards specified by the manufacturer. Of course reasonable documentation is necessary to prove that the procedure and supplies met manufacturer requirements.

What M-M does not do is what many aftermarket companies FALSELY claim, " GM has to prove that our product caused the failure".  Of course the answer to that is no, it will be up to the customer to prove to GM that this modification didn't cause the failure and that is a very high bar for a customer to clear when they add a "tune" that increases engine power output by 30% over what it was when it left the manufacturer.  One large Cat customer found out the expensive truth when his "high performance" aftermarket air filter flowed more air AND more dust into a $100.000 engine; warranty DENIED regardless of the claims of the filter manufacturer.

M-M has a pretty narrow focus and it came out of congress during the same era that franchising practices were also under scrutiny and the same basic philosophy was applied.  Under these revised policies McDonald's corporate (issuer of the local franchise agreements) could set standards for the ground meat used by the franchisees in producing hamburgers but they could NOT force them to buy only from the franchiser.  This made sense because the corporate trademark owner has a strong vested interest in maintaining the image of the chain.  Of course there were almost humorous attempts to get around this new set of policies and one large seafood restaurant franchiser published in their standards that the fish used by their franchisees had to be of a certain species caught within a clearly delineated small area of the N. Atlantic.  It sounds somewhat reasonable except the corporate franchiser had contracted for all of the output from the only fishing fleet doing business in that part of the ocean.

I believe that  what the original poster is getting into is more of the rapidly expanding "right to repair" controversy.  Many companies are claiming a right to restrict access to repair materials and knowledge in order to protect trade secrets and/or protect consumers from self-harm and the resultant liability for companies after Joe Blow gets his wedding ring welded across the main power bus with a large lithium ion battery pack in place.  As someone who restores vintage electronics gear going back to the 1930s I can see both sides of this argument.  Many items are simply not economically suitable for repair IF it has to go back to an authorized service shop where time truly is money.  However the hobbyist who has free time or the owner who is sufficiently sentimentally attached that they will spend an unreasonable amount to get the item back in service do have a point. 

On the other hand there are definitely hazards present that are waiting to bite the poorly informed owner.  I regularly work on vintage transmitters with power supplies producing 3,500 volts and higher with very high current capability and one mistake with one of these probably will be your last.  The lowly microwave oven produces high voltage (which may be present even with the appliance unplugged) and significant RF power output and the foolish owner who defeats the safety interlocks may cook himself as his last meal.  Some of these use a heat conducting/electrical insulating material in the RF power generation system that is extremely toxic when damaged allowing it to become airborne in its powdered state.  In the camera world, the triggered high voltage to a xenon flash tube is a good example of where four AA batteries can produce a voltage source high enough to overcome typical skin resistance with sufficient peak current capability to cause heart stoppage or even worse fibrillation.  My cynical view is the number of people willing to engage in repairing their own "stuff" greatly exceeds the number of people competent to repair their own stuff and in the current legal environment the manufacturer still bears a cost for consumer incompetence and logically engages in behavior to reduce that risk to profits.

Rodger

[Stephen · Accepted solution]

The basics (as they stand for now) are this:

You can buy parts from Canon directly. Anyone can. You can have your repair done anywhere you'd like. We'd prefer you have them done at Canon, because our technicians are expertly trained on nothing but Canon equipment, and we warranty our work. Everyone doesn't do that. If you do your own repair, it's at your own risk, and Canon doesn't provide any support or instructions on any parts purchased. They're all sold as-is, are non-returnable and non-refundable.

You cannot void your warranty. If your camera is under warranty, and you do a self-repair or have it repaired at a non-Canon approved facility, that repair, and anything that might fail due to that repair would not be covered by your original warranty. But the remainder of your warranty would still be intact. Super simple example - you took your camera to have the sensor cleaned by a local shop, and they scratch the sensor. They offer to repair/replace it themselves. They do this in-house, but they're not authorized by Canon. This repair is not covered by the warranty. In 3 months, the sensor fails, and you send it to Canon. If our team discovers that the sensor had been replaced, or there was any other damage due to the previous unauthorized repair, none of the "current" repairs would be covered by the warranty. 

If you have a repair done by Canon USA, we will always bring your camera back to Original Factory Specifications. That means not only would your warranty still be intact, but our repairs have a 6-month warranty of their own. Same example above - you send your camera to Canon USA for cleaning, and the sensor gets scratched. We replace the sensor and you have your camera back within the week. We let you know what happened, and you get a 6-month warranty on that repair. Even if your original warranty were to expire within that time. If the sensor fails in 3 months, you let us know, we send you a label to have the camera re-evaluated, and we repair the camera and you get another 6-month extension (if it's the exact issue). 

Turn around times at our Factory Service Center are normally within a week from the time we receive your camera, barring some unforeseen parts shortage, or extreme repair. 

The one caveat to all of this is the situation you'd alluded to - if you've removed your IR filter. If you send your camera into Canon, most of the time, our Factory Service Center is required to put it back. The reason is because of the warranty we provide. We have to bring the camera to "Factory Specifications." The IR filter being gone is out of spec, and it creates a loophole in the warranty we provide to you. Our lawyers get weird when that happens.

[ebiggs1]

mangurian, now it should be clear to you!

This reply is spot on, "The M-M Act is one of the most misunderstood regulatory acts in the U.S"

[mangurian]

See the "official" Canon response above.  Exactly what I said.

[Waddizzle]

---

@mangurian wrote:

The 1975 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act states that no manufacturer who charges more than $5 for a product can put repair restrictions on a product they're offering a warranty on. In May, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission sent warning letters to Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, HTC, Hyundai, and ASUS for violating the act by threatening to void the warranties of customers who repaired their own devices. Within 30 days, many of the companies had complied and changed the language on their websites around independent repair. It was a step in the right direction, but the PIRGs survey of the AHAM members shows that there's still a lot of work to do.

---

If I am understanding this correctly, manufacturers are being required to repair products during the warranty period, even if the device has had a botched DIY repair, or damaged by an incorrect repair by a third party.  

That just does not sound right to me.  Manufacturers are entitled to require warranty repairs to only be made by a factory authorized repair facility.  They should have a right to void a warranty if those terms and conditions are not met.