Why Are Appliance Warranties Based On Time?

[davebro]

Beko want me to take an extended warranty on my washing machine. If I only use it once a fortnight but someone else would use theirs 2 or 3 times a week why should we pay the same?

Such warranties should be based on the number of cycles e.g. 300 cycles = 6 years for me, 2 years for the 3 times a week guy.

[Prudie]

Well they won't know how to decide that will they and users won't predict honestly. We have given up with those, last machine (Ariston washer dryer)we paid it annually and never had to call out an engineer in 13 years. When it finally broke big time we'd paid out the cost of at least 2 new machines.

[bhg481]

You then have to start defining a cycle. Is it a low-temperature quick wash, a boil intensive wash, just a spin, just a rinse, or what; it starts to get complicated.

[davebro]

Shouldn't be too hard to put a usage counter into the machine?

[ummmm]

I was thinking this the other day. In 10 years we've only just used our sander.

[TonyV]

dave I am not into extended warranties anyway, if sales person offers me one, my reply is always "you are putting me off buying this if you do not think it is going to last a reasonably time"
But to your question the cycle thing on the face of it sounds reasonable, but what cycle you going to measure, so many programs, a high temperature long wash must cause more wear than a low temp short wash. I always double spin my washing is that going to count as a cycle?

[KARL]

What you are in reality asking for is that the item under guarantee be fitted with a recorder of usage - such as is for example fitted to large equipment such as bulldozers, generators, etc. (running/operating hours). These recorders would have to be reliable and tamper proof. At that point it would become possible to for example guarantee against failure for so many running hours, irrespective of how many days, months or years it took to build up that total. It is unrealistic to expect any manufacturer or insurer to simply accept that the customer has correctly anticipated the amount of usage in a given period or that he/she will be honest about keeping to that because it is highly unlikely that he/she will know how often or for how long the item has been in use a year or five down the road - and the question of honesty rears its head (not without reason).

[Prudie]

But you have to pay upfront not after a year so what's the point of a cycle counter? Also some appliances are more unreliable if they're not used much, things seize up if left to sit idle.

[Atheist]

I'd never agree to an extended warranty. I don't understand why anyone would. Take a chance for once. These goods are supposed to be - good- why pay extra for the protection you already have?

[10ClarionSt]

I think Dave's got a fair point. The difficulty though is verifying the usage, as pointed out by others. If there was a way to do it, then it should be done! But how?

[THELOONYCORBYN]

they arent to help you out , they are to make big profits per warranty for the companies that underwrite them based on the customers fear of the goods going kaput

[THECORBYLOON]

Many items come with a guarantee relating to a specific period of time. If you do it with extended warranties, why not with every other product guarantee where the number of times or length of time used can be measured?

[Tilly2]

What about a fridge freezer? Would it be based on every time you opened the door?

[Ryzen]

Because they have timers built into the pcb that send a zapp voltage through the components the day after the warranty expires.

[Old_Geezer]

There's no incentive for suppliers to add tech to count cycles. Besides equipment deteriorates even if unused. There's a need to keep things cheap & simple. If folk don't care for it they need not purchase.