Hotpoint urgent tumble dryer recall

Fosterdog

AJXX wrote: »

I'm not sure if this is the same as the ITV news bulletin or not but this (link below) interview with a lady from Hotpoint was released today and gives a good indication that they're actively employing more engineers and call centre staff - she also answers questions as to using the machine when fire bodies have said not to etc...

http://player.vimeo.com/video/155704348?title=1&byline=1&portrait=1&autoplay=0

Note: The reporter is acting like this woman is a devil worshipper for no particular reason. He is also annoyingly repetitive with questions the lady has already provided solid answers to.

I'm all for in-depth interviews and a good roasting when needed; but this reporter is basically just whinging all the way through and seems to lack the critical ability to remain neutral and think on his feet to ask further questions vs just repeating the ones he no doubt memorised whilst his mother drove him to the interview.

It's a terrible interview IMO because ITV appear to have sent an angry man-child to conduct it - but if you can overlook this the lady from Hotpoint does answer some of the 'hot' questions very well.

I agree with you completely on how bad that reporter was and how well the whirlpool lady conducted herself, she gave good answers and tried to clear up the concerns going around.

Very interesting that she said that out of the 5.3 million tumble dryers the have only been 750 cases of fires being caused by this safety issue in 11 years. That is a tiny amount in comparison.

It just goes to show that all the press are trying to do is create mass hysteria and the reports of the 6000 fires are either other brands, poor maintenance, other faults or a combination of the three. I also can't help but wonder what important things are slipping under the publics radar right now in government, something new to screw over the working population that is either not being reported at all or small reports hidden amongst the hype for this.

beefturnmail

Fosterdog wrote: »

I agree with you completely on how bad that reporter was and how well the whirlpool lady conducted herself, she gave good answers and tried to clear up the concerns going around.

Very interesting that she said that out of the 5.3 million tumble dryers the have only been 750 cases of fires being caused by this safety issue in 11 years. That is a tiny amount in comparison.

It just goes to show that all the press are trying to do is create mass hysteria and the reports of the 6000 fires are either other brands, poor maintenance, other faults or a combination of the three. I also can't help but wonder what important things are slipping under the publics radar right now in government, something new to screw over the working population that is either not being reported at all or small reports hidden amongst the hype for this.

Yes and even 6000 fires wouldn't represent a huge risk that your particular dryer is faulty - it's about the same level of risk as dying in a car accident over the next year - and no-one stops getting in cars because of this risk.

Zandoni

beefturnmail wrote: »

Yes and even 6000 fires wouldn't represent a huge risk that your particular dryer is faulty - it's about the same level of risk as dying in a car accident over the next year - and no-one stops getting in cars because of this risk.

It may be very similar to dying in a car accident but this can be avoided more easily.
The bit that annoys me the most is that they have been churning out these faulty products for 11 years, they should be prosecuted.

wealdroam

Zandoni wrote: »

It may be very similar to dying in a car accident but this can be avoided more easily.

I don't understand what you are saying here.

Are you saying it is easier to avoid dying in a car accident, or it is easier to avoid dying by a faulty tumble dryer?

I think I know which is easiest to avoid, but I would be interested in what you actually meant, and your reason for that view.

paulb76

This is an interesting one for me as a serving fire officer of many years and owner of an affected machine. This means I am both customer and qualified to give advice on fire risk. And lets be clear, this is most definitely a fire risk as agreed by the manufacturer.
Some of the comments on here have surprised me.
I have been to many a fire involving drying appliances, mostly causing moderate damage to a room but some having devastating consequences. The latter almost always due to the occupier being out or in bed whilst the fire grows. And this is my first point. For many years and before these issues came to light we have advised that these appliances in particular be used only whilst the owner is in and awake. This has nothing to do with known possible faults causing fire but rather to reduce risk of fire and its escalation. Exactly the same as turning off the cooker if you go out or turning the TV off before you go to bed.
The difference here is that its been accepted by the manufacturer that there is a known problem and 'increased' risk. And that is the crucial part. This is why the advice given to continue using is somewhat irrelevant. Would you be willing to continue using an electric blanket if you received a letter telling you it may be a little more dangerous than it should be?

The advice in the letter and in fact the entire letter is professionally put together as to negate any liability. A potential FAULT has become a 'potential safety and quality concern' Engineers are not out to FIX the problem but rather 'update it to a higher safety standard' And the absolute last thing they want to say is stop using. This ultimately accepts all liability. So the only alternative is to say it can be used whilst supervised. And as many have said, this merely implies that you can just call 999 much sooner should a fire start. Sterling advice. I am very surprised how naive some people are to read 'you may still use but do not leave unattended' as 'its all fine as long as they say it is'

You would be astounded if you watched an article about fake phone chargers in which the experts said 'these fakes are poorly designed and the risk of fire is increased' 'but carry on using it as long as its not unattended'

For the many of the opinion that compared to the amount sold, the amount causing fires is somehow tiny or insignificant. Would you feel the same if the same was said about a known fault in baby car seat? Out of the millions sold only a relative few have caused serious injuries or death.

Now on a personal level as a customer. Mine was just over a year old and registered in November and i have been told August as a repair (not update/modify/rectify potential issue) date.
Nine months to rectify a known fire hazard. This is completely unacceptable, especially when affixed to a note that i may still use it albeit with an increased risk of fire. My machine is in the garage, i only ever use it when i am in but still i can neither see it or hear it. Is this an acceptable definition of attended? If so then is being 2 floors up in the back bedroom also acceptable?
My advice 100% of the time would be not to use any appliance with a recall because of increased fire risk so i would be a hypocrite if i hadn't stopped using mine. This now leaves me with a further wait of 8 months before i can dry clothes. Do not feel the need to make ludicrous comments like 'surely you have radiators' I have 2 very young children and those making such inane comments probably live alone with a weekly wash of 3 pairs of pants and a pair of socks.
I have been offered a new inferior washer for £99. Surely this is exactly the same as me just binning my present one and buying a new one for £99. How much they claim it is worth is irrelevant. My current one was half price.
I am also on economy 7. My electric is 3 times the price in the day and i am advised to use appliances like this at night because of it. Suddenly i am told not to use it at night for 9 months. So technically for anyone who used theirs at night, their electricity bill with this power hungry device is now 3 times higher! You wouldn't want to pay for a repair so why should you want to spend more to continue using it.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion and mine is that these time scales and the inconsistency of dealing with the problem is not at all acceptable. As soon as someone dies as a proven result of these faults it will get sorted immediately. No great result for the family involved.

Mabel_Moo

paulb76 wrote: »

This is an interesting one for me as a serving fire officer of many years and owner of an affected machine. This means I am both customer and qualified to give advice on fire risk. And lets be clear, this is most definitely a fire risk as agreed by the manufacturer.
Some of the comments on here have surprised me.
I have been to many a fire involving drying appliances, mostly causing moderate damage to a room but some having devastating consequences. The latter almost always due to the occupier being out or in bed whilst the fire grows. And this is my first point. For many years and before these issues came to light we have advised that these appliances in particular be used only whilst the owner is in and awake. This has nothing to do with known possible faults causing fire but rather to reduce risk of fire and its escalation. Exactly the same as turning off the cooker if you go out or turning the TV off before you go to bed.
The difference here is that its been accepted by the manufacturer that there is a known problem and 'increased' risk. And that is the crucial part. This is why the advice given to continue using is somewhat irrelevant. Would you be willing to continue using an electric blanket if you received a letter telling you it may be a little more dangerous than it should be?

The advice in the letter and in fact the entire letter is professionally put together as to negate any liability. A potential FAULT has become a 'potential safety and quality concern' Engineers are not out to FIX the problem but rather 'update it to a higher safety standard' And the absolute last thing they want to say is stop using. This ultimately accepts all liability. So the only alternative is to say it can be used whilst supervised. And as many have said, this merely implies that you can just call 999 much sooner should a fire start. Sterling advice. I am very surprised how naive some people are to read 'you may still use but do not leave unattended' as 'its all fine as long as they say it is'

You would be astounded if you watched an article about fake phone chargers in which the experts said 'these fakes are poorly designed and the risk of fire is increased' 'but carry on using it as long as its not unattended'

For the many of the opinion that compared to the amount sold, the amount causing fires is somehow tiny or insignificant. Would you feel the same if the same was said about a known fault in baby car seat? Out of the millions sold only a relative few have caused serious injuries or death.

Now on a personal level as a customer. Mine was just over a year old and registered in November and i have been told August as a repair (not update/modify/rectify potential issue) date.
Nine months to rectify a known fire hazard. This is completely unacceptable, especially when affixed to a note that i may still use it albeit with an increased risk of fire. My machine is in the garage, i only ever use it when i am in but still i can neither see it or hear it. Is this an acceptable definition of attended? If so then is being 2 floors up in the back bedroom also acceptable?
My advice 100% of the time would be not to use any appliance with a recall because of increased fire risk so i would be a hypocrite if i hadn't stopped using mine. This now leaves me with a further wait of 8 months before i can dry clothes. Do not feel the need to make ludicrous comments like 'surely you have radiators' I have 2 very young children and those making such inane comments probably live alone with a weekly wash of 3 pairs of pants and a pair of socks.
I have been offered a new inferior washer for £99. Surely this is exactly the same as me just binning my present one and buying a new one for £99. How much they claim it is worth is irrelevant. My current one was half price.
I am also on economy 7. My electric is 3 times the price in the day and i am advised to use appliances like this at night because of it. Suddenly i am told not to use it at night for 9 months. So technically for anyone who used theirs at night, their electricity bill with this power hungry device is now 3 times higher! You wouldn't want to pay for a repair so why should you want to spend more to continue using it.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion and mine is that these time scales and the inconsistency of dealing with the problem is not at all acceptable. As soon as someone dies as a proven result of these faults it will get sorted immediately. No great result for the family.

Extremely helpful and informative post. I am amazed at some of the laid back comments on here regarding fires and a strange kind of misplaced loyalty to Hotpoint.

Zandoni

wealdroam wrote: »

I don't understand what you are saying here.

Are you saying it is easier to avoid dying in a car accident, or it is easier to avoid dying by a faulty tumble dryer?

I think I know which is easiest to avoid, but I would be interested in what you actually meant, and your reason for that view.

What I was trying to say was that if the odds of dying in a car are the same as owning a Hotpoint tumble drier and having a fire, this would mean you double your chances of having something nasty happen to you.

beefturnmail

It's nothing to do with the risk of dying in a tumble dryer fire.

It's the risk of any one particular tumble dryer catching fire which is roughly the same as the risk of dying in a car accident. The risk of dying from said fire would be much lower than dying in a car accident. Don't get me wrong - I'm not being casual about fires or defending Whirlpool - just trying to put some perspective on it, because I agree that the media are scare mongering by over-egging how much of a risk they actually are.

wealdroam

Zandoni wrote: »

What I was trying to say was that if the odds of dying in a car are the same as owning a Hotpoint tumble drier and having a fire, this would mean you double your chances of having something nasty happen to you.

Oh I see.

In the same way that owning two cars would double the chances of getting killed in a car crash.

Or to get back on topic - owning two tumble dryers would double the risk of having a tumble dryer fire.

Statistics - we can make them say what we want, can't we.

AJXX

I am amazed at some of the laid back comments on here regarding fires.

What laid back comments? If you're referring to advice to continue supervised use of the machine then that would seem the logical thing to do in this situation. Why?

• Because that's the advice of the manufacturer (whom conducted testing and certified reports) and has seemingly had this approved by Trading Standards vs fire bodies who are saying "don't use it!!!" based off what data exactly?
• The opinion of a fire officer vs a dedicated independent hands on safety report/tests is very different in my opinion, personally I believe the latter.
• Because objective data tells us that less than 1% of units sold has actually suffered any kind of malfunction/caused a fire. This is a very low figure and suggests that the vast majority of machines are certainly not going to spontaneously combust like some people on here seem to believe.

a strange kind of misplaced loyalty to Hotpoint.

Nobody here has any "loyalty" to Hotpoint. I myself am waiting for a repair and have posted several times at my disappointment with how the situation has been handled.

What I haven't done, however, is throw my hands up in the air and lost my sh*t like some people on here seem to do: OMG my dryer is a fire hazard my house is going to burn down I have 7 kids what am I going to do with my life now! I refuse to use this dryer AT ALL, I used to go out and leave it on for hours on end I'm suprised my house hasn't already burned down hehe but OMG there is no way I can use it now THAT I KNOW IT'S A FIRE HAZARD! what are my 7 kids going to do. I can't be LOGICAL about this, I can't periodically check my dryer whilst I'm using it HOW UNREASONABLE! Clean the filter? I don't have time for that I have 7 KIDS! OMG *ring ring* yes, hotpoint I want my dryer repaired NOW! right now! what do you mean I'm being unreasonable I have 7 kids! NO I CANT WAIT OMG 7 KIDS! I want a NEW MACHINE What do you mean I have to pay £99 for a brand new dryer, mine is only 5 years old and I refuse to use it, dont you know it's a FIRE HAZARD, a FIRE HAZARD I SAY! I want a free dryer NOW NOW NOW! Gimme gimme gimme, I'm important I have 7 kids!

Just because someone makes a very logical point or calls someone out for overacting/doing the wrong thing does not mean they're "loyal to Hotpoint".