June 2019

BY Neil Pattemore F ollowing last month’s article about the European Commission’s launching an ‘evaluation roadmap’ to consider if the existing Automotive Block Exemption Regulation (BER) should be renewed when it expires in May 2023, I explained the background and how important BER is to the abilities of the UK aftermarket to conduct their day-to-day business and offer the motoring consumer competitive choices for the service and repair of the vehicles. However, since the original BER was drafted in 2002 and subsequently updated in 2010, much has changed concerning the design and functionality of today’s vehicles, with much more likely to change in the coming years. If you think that 2023 is a long way ahead, just think about the Olympics in London in 2012 – does that seem like such a long time ago - and this is nearly twice the period between now and 2023. What should the legislator consider? Firstly, there is the fundamental question of why the BER exists and if the original requirement is still valid. The answer is not so clear, as the original BER has already been modified in 2010 to allow franchised dealers to sell outside their geographical area and the way that vehicles are being distributed and sold is changing to different outlets (think shopping centre ‘pop-up’ shops as well as the internet). It is also appealing for the vehicle manufacturers to oppose the renewal of the BER, as this would provide them with a much more ‘flexible’ approach to supplying vehicles – either directly from the vehicle manufacturer to the new vehicle owner, or as part of tomorrow’s ‘mobility services packages’ on a ‘pay by use’ basis – in both cases avoiding having to pay the dealer margin. It would also release them from the legislative obligations for the provisions for the aftermarket and thus avoid supporting their competitors in vehicle servicing. Vehicle manufacturers are increasingly selling vehicles online and with the exponential increase of the ‘connected car’ retain a direct relationship with the vehicle owner/driver – again negating the involvement of the dealer. The original ‘vertical agreements’ are changing to be ‘horizontal agreements’. Equally, the legislator may also view this as a natural evolution of the vehicle distribution sector and a valid reason not to consider renewing the BER. Aftermarket perspective Most importantly, where does this leave BER from the aftermarket perspective? Clearly, the original key elements need to be maintained, namely the honouring of warranties, servicing in the context of leasing contracts, the supply of spare parts, the use/purchase of tools, access to technical information and access to authorised repairer networks to buy original parts. Some important aspects are also covered in other legislation, such as the access to the repair and maintenance information (RMI) under the Euro 5 vehicle type approval, but this is complimentary legislation and is not a replacement for the BER. Critically, there are both important changes in vehicle technology and the way that the vehicle manufacturers themselves have become an active competitors for aftermarket services which the legislator should also consider. At the moment, BER and the guidelines provide protection against a number of distortions. They serve as an important framework which allows OE parts producers the right to supply independent parts distributors as well as the independent and authorised aftermarket. These OE parts suppliers also have the right to brand their OE products with their own logo (dual branding) and the definition of ‘original and matching quality parts’ has had an important effect in the aftermarket helping to demonstrate the true origin and quality of parts to consumers and their subsequent competitive choices. All this needs to 12 AFTERMARKET JUNE 2019 BUSINESS www.aftermarketonline.net BER: WHAT NEXT In part two of his look at the future of the Block Exemption Regulation, Neil Pattemore asks what we might expect to see in a new BER