The debate on the right to rectification has been relatively active for several yearspartly because of commercial techniques as reprehensible as the planned obsolescence, but also because of the excesses of the social and economic model, in which repairs to a wide range of product types were completely condemned. A time when a product or device that still works perfectly but has a problem in one of the components is discarded and replaced with a newer one with all points against such an attitude.

Fortunately, more and more people are aware of the nonsense that this model assumesand bit by bit the habit of repairing returns. A very insignificant example, which I have been repairing for years, are shoe repair shops, because at least the closest ones seem to have seen an increase in clientele recently. Of course, this is not the case when a claim is so necessary, as footwear manufacturers generally do not prevent their products from undergoing repairs.

Therefore, when we talk about the right to rectification, we need to pay special attention to the consumer electronics market Well, while it’s not the only one, far from it, it’s one of the most representative abandonment fixes. And in some respects, this is understandable, because fixing certain types of problems, such as a broken board or a burned chip, is very difficult at the technical level. Here, however, comes the right to repair, due to its construction and design, it is ultimately the right to replace some components that would facilitate this in other designs.

In other words, Manufacturers generally do not have the right to repairand in many cases they act accordingly, with proposals that make it difficult or even preventable, as well as unpaid fees for technical services, very restrictive policies regarding informal repairs, etc. I give an example with which I recently lived close: iPad Mini 5 gen. a loved one falls to the ground and the screen glass shatters. Official repair price? € 331.10. Unofficial technical service? Around 100.

Fortunately, it seems increasingly clear to regulators that this is not the way to goand that we must return to a situation where the right to redress is respected and a culture of redress has been re-established. Of course, not as a duty, but as a standardized option for anyone who wants it. And there they are, even though we already know that palace things are always slow.

The good news is that almost a year after the European Parliament voted to rectify, anda proposal that has been under development since then and is now complete (can be consulted here) has been voted on and approved, which, despite the enormous complexity of the regulatory process within the European Union, should be the last step in making the right to rectification legally established on the old continent.

And with that, the European Union requires manufacturers to consider repairability at the design stage of their productsto guarantee a longer duration of the same and that there are more problems that can be solved in technical services. And I say this in the plural, because the proposal also emphasizes the need to provide end-users and external repairers with better access to spare parts and instructions.

It is clear that even if the rule is finally approved, we should not expect the right to rectification to be established immediately, because there will certainly be a moratorium that will allow companies to adapt the design of their equipment to this new standard, not to mention that many Member States of the Union will have to transpose the European standard into their own legal framework. However, it is a breakthrough and therefore great news for consumers.