Right to Repair Act back in Congress

Should automakers share technical information about their vehicles with independent repair shops? That is the question regarding the Motor Vehicle Owners' Right to Repair Act that is back in the spotlight in Washington. If the bill is passes, it would require automakers to make the same technical service information available to consumers and independent auto shops as they do for their dealers. This would give consumers more freedom in choosing where they will have their vehicle serviced, and it could afford more protection as some manufacturers and brands struggle to survive.

There is much debate on both sides of this topic. Modern vehicles are very complex systems with an increased use of computers and electronics that control vital equipment such as air bags, brakes, emissions, transmissions, and many other vehicle systems. Currently, some services on these computerized systems needs to be handled through the dealership. Independent shops (and even consumers) can purchase a scan tool for about $35 that can read generic engine, transmission and ABS fault codes to diagnose vehicle faults. But there are many other systems and manufacturer-specific fault codes that these readers can not identify. We believe that scan tools should have the data available from the manufacturer to identify all vehicle faults and allow technicians to reset and adjust systems to the manufacturer’s specifications. These would include many simple service and maintenance tasks like adjusting the steering position sensors on ESC systems to allow technicians to perform a vehicle alignment and reset electronic parking brakes to change the brake pads. But keep in mind that all recalls need to be performed by the dealer at no cost to the owner.

The independent shops are hoping this bill breaks the hold that dealers have over these systems, so that any mechanic can diagnose and repair your car. Many independent shops have to turn away vehicles that need work on high-tech systems, such as hybrids and premium luxury cars.

Consumer Reports agrees, in principle, with the Right to Repair Act, as it restricts its scope to “repair” which would increase repair options for car owners. We want the bill to place appropriate restrictions on the ability to modify programming that can adversely affect vehicle emissions and safety systems.

This legislation comes at an interesting time for consumers and automakers. A “Cash for Clunkers” proposal currently being considered in Washington could cause the demand for servicing old cars to be reduced, thus further impacting the smaller shops. Also, many dealerships are closing, giving consumers have fewer choices as to where to get their vehicles serviced. This bill would allow more flexibility in choosing a place to service your car and could save you money.

A recent Consumer Reports survey found that people are more satisfied with service from an independent shop than those who went to a dealer. We also found it helps to shop around for car maintenance. Prices can vary greatly between dealerships and independent shops. No matter where you get your car serviced, it’s best to do your research and compare quotes.

—Liza Barth

Comments

[Bernard Katz]

The "Right to Repair" also must include work undertaken by consumers. Anyone unfamiliar with automotive technology should have repairs done at any independent shop desired. However, there exist a number of consumers who are very technically oriented, including rebuilding of engines, in-depth body repair, suspension setup and the like. Retail firms like Sears and JC Whitney sell(or have sold)engine hoists, front end alignment tools, cylinder bore honing tools and the like. Closing options for consumers to diagnose ECU code information forces those who are talented and experienced in automotive technology to be forced into giving up information learned over many years.

In my own case, I have an older high performance car with a relatively complex turbocharger and computer system. I know the car and my other vehicles (including motorcycles) from top to bottom. Only 2700 hundred of them were sold in 1991. No shop will touch it except for simple repairs (brakes, oil changes, etc.) It was up to me to rebuild the engine, diagnose startup problems afterwards and get it running to pass inspection.

Many car enthusiasts have many technical interests that interweave into automotive considerations. Many, myself included also hold Professional Engineering licenses.

Bernard Katz
Rockaway, NJ

[C V Gruner]

I am a retired electrical engineer with much computer experience. It seems to me that many private and public entities have suffered security losses due to negligence and, in some cases, stupidity. I hope there are security measures in this bill to protect certain codes which can override, for example, start up release codes for the vehicle. If the wrong persons are able to get this information, many cars could easily be stolen or, as hackers do now on computer systems, caused to malfunction for fun or further repair profit later on. Our government is far from technically astute and has made many unfortunate decisions in the past as, I am sure, it will do in the future. There is a wise old maxim, "Think ahead!" That is something our esteemed legislators are not noted for doing. Sometimes the best action is no action at all. As usual, part of this proposed legislation is sorely needed; part of it is very dangerous and potentially harmful. Oh, representatives of our republic, please, look before you leap!