Technician Act and Technician Delays: The Complete Guide and Cease and Desist Letter Download

What is the “Technicians’ Law” and what constitutes “Technician Delay”?

In 2008, Amendment No. 24 to Section 18a of the Consumer Protection Law, 1981, known as the “Technicians’ Law,” came into effect. This includes provisions regarding technician delays.

The amendment aims to define the obligations and extent of liability for businesses selling certain goods or services. This includes specifying technician arrival times, appointment scheduling procedures, permissible delays without penalty, and consumer eligibility for compensation without proof of damage (e.g., technician delay).

Over time, Amendment 24 proved insufficient. Firstly, its scope was limited to a small number of service providers and an even smaller range of products, primarily electrical and electronic goods.

Secondly, the original wording stipulated that if the delay was due to circumstances unknown to the service provider at the time of scheduling, no compensation was payable. Businesses exploited this loophole:

Technicians suddenly fell ill, vehicles malfunctioned, and various other excuses were used to avoid compensation. Consequently, consumers lacked recourse for many transactions; even those covered by the law were cumbersome.

Therefore, in 2017, Amendment 55 to the Consumer Protection Law was enacted and integrated into Section 18a of the Law. This expanded the list of service providers and products covered.

As a result, the range of cases where consumers are entitled to compensation was broadened. To eliminate loopholes, the standards for businesses avoiding liability for delays were also tightened.

The underlying principle is clear: if a company representative is late, the business will compensate; unequivocally. The amendment serves a dual purpose: (1) establishing a deterrent for businesses regarding consumers’ valuable time; (2) providing fair compensation for a wider range of situations where consumers have been inconvenienced and their time wasted.

Who is covered by the “Technicians’ Law”?

Although known as the “Technicians’ Law,” since 2018 it applies to additional parties: Amendment 55 to the Consumer Protection Law extended liability to other service representatives. For example, food chains may be liable if their delivery personnel are late. It’s crucial to clarify: the technician/representative themselves are not personally liable under the law, but rather the service provider they represent. Consumers can, of course, sue the technician/representative if they believe they have grounds to do so; however, such a claim would not typically seek exemplary damages.

Cases covered by the “Technicians’ Law”:

• Technician/representative visits under a warranty certificate during the basic (one year) or extended (as per contract) warranty period, for products purchased for over 150 ₪ and being one of the following: new electrical, electronic, and gas appliances (including mechanical and electrical mechanisms in furniture);
• Technician/representative visits as part of long-term contracts where the goods’ functionality at the consumer’s premises is a condition. For example: a technician visit from a cable company whose service depends on a functioning set-top box; emergency buttons; gas cylinders, etc.;
• Technician/representative visits due to the service provider’s obligation (by law or contract) to remove or install goods they sold, rented, or lent;
• Technician/representative visits for periodic inspections of domestic gas installations;
• Representative visits for delivery of goods sold by the service provider to the consumer. For example: a delivery person from a food retailer from whom products were ordered;
• Technician/representative visits to perform repairs on goods for a fee, based on the service provider’s obligation under a long-term agreement.

Appointment Scheduling Methods

Businesses are well aware of the “Technicians’ Law,” yet, unfortunately, history shows that some have employed questionable methods: informing consumers that a technician/representative will arrive within a four-hour window (e.g., 13:00-17:00); and when the consumer objects to the long wait, offering a “sole alternative” of a phone call. This means that instead of a pre-arranged appointment, a technician/representative will arrive within two hours of the consumer receiving notification. Thus, the technician/representative can give 10 minutes’ notice, and the consumer who chose the call option must be ready.

However, this entire approach is fundamentally flawed: a service provider cannot schedule appointments within a time frame exceeding two hours; a “phone call” is not a sole alternative; and businesses must inform consumers that they are entitled to refuse this option if it is not convenient for them. As mentioned, the burden of proof that the service provider informed the consumer of the right of refusal rests with the business.

Scheduling Technician/Representative Visits

According to Section 18a(c)(1a) of the Consumer Protection Law, technician/representative visits (by prior arrangement) must be scheduled:

• On weekdays: between 08:00 and 19:00
• On Fridays and eve of holidays: between 08:00 and 13:00

Can a Service Provider Postpone a Scheduled Technician/Representative Visit?

Yes, a service provider may notify a consumer of a postponement and schedule a new date and time, subject to two conditions:

1. The service provider must notify the consumer of the postponement by 20:00 on the evening before the scheduled visit, at the latest;
2. The new visit must not fall outside the statutory visit times.

For example: if a technician visit is scheduled for Wednesday at 13:00, the service provider may notify of the postponement and reschedule by Tuesday at 20:00.

What Constitutes Technician/Representative Delay? Why do Service Providers Schedule Visit Windows Instead of Exact Times?

According to Section 18a(c)(2) of the Consumer Protection Law, appointments can be scheduled within a window not exceeding two hours. The waiting time for a technician/representative shall not exceed two hours beyond the agreed-upon window. For example: if a visit is scheduled for a weekday between 13:00 and 15:00, and the technician arrives at 17:30, this constitutes a delay entitling the consumer to compensation, as the technician arrived two hours after the agreed-upon time window.

The legislator allowed service providers considerable leeway: a two-hour arrival window. Additionally, a “legally permissible” two-hour buffer is provided, due to the nature of a technician’s/representative’s work. This can account for travel time, unforeseen repair durations, and traffic conditions which, in the absence of a two-wheeled vehicle, may hinder adherence to precise schedules. In other words, the legislator acknowledged that technicians/representatives, like any professionals, may encounter unforeseen delays; hence the buffer. However, to prevent abuse, the legislator limited this buffer, with the clear message that delays exceeding two hours beyond the time window will incur a penalty of several hundred shekels.

Important note: Some businesses operate using questionable methods and set four-hour appointment windows. This is prohibited. Consumers encountering this should insist on a two-hour maximum window, and, having read this article, should be able to explain why.

Can a “Phone Call” be Scheduled Instead of an Appointment Time?

Yes, but under two conditions:

• The consumer’s waiting time at their residence shall not exceed two hours;
• The service provider clearly informed the consumer that they are entitled to refuse the offer if it is not convenient for them.

If the service provider violates either of these conditions, the consumer is entitled to compensation of 300 ₪. This applies if the technician arrives more than two hours late, or if the service provider failed to inform the consumer of their right to refuse.

Entitlement to Compensation for Technician/Representative Delay or Breach of “Phone Call” Conditions

Delay between two and three hours beyond the agreed-upon arrival window: Compensation of 300 ₪ without proof of damage. For example: a technician can schedule an arrival time within a two-hour window (e.g., 10:00-12:00). If the technician arrives two hours past the latest time in the window (e.g., arrives at 14:30), the consumer is entitled to compensation.

Delay exceeding three hours beyond the agreed-upon arrival window: Compensation of 600 ₪ without proof of damage.

Breach of “phone call” conditions: Compensation of 300 ₪ without proof of damage.

It is important to note that compensation is not dependent on demonstrating damages. The mere violation by the business of any of the above provisions entitles the consumer to compensation.

Can a Service Provider Offer an Alternative to Monetary Compensation?

Yes. A service provider may offer compensation in kind (goods or services of equivalent value) instead of monetary compensation, but under two conditions:

• The service provider informed the consumer of their right to choose between monetary and alternative compensation;
• The consumer consented to the alternative compensation.

According to Section 18a(e) of the Law, the service provider bears the burden of proving the consumer’s consent to alternative compensation.

Cases Where Consumers Are Not Entitled to Compensation Despite Technician/Representative Delay

Amendment No. 55 to the Law amended Section 18a(f) for the second time. The circumstances under which service providers are exempt from compensating consumers for technician delays have been reduced. For this exemption, both conditions below must be met:

1. The delay was due to circumstances unknown to the service provider at the time of scheduling the visit, and one of the following applies:

• The service provider could not have been aware of the circumstances; or –
• The service provider did not foresee or could not have foreseen the circumstances

2. The service provider could not have prevented the circumstances that caused the delay.

Can Compensation be Claimed if the Contract with the Service Provider Specifies a Longer Waiting Time Than That Stipulated by Law?

Yes. Section 36 of the Law states that the provisions regarding technician delays supersede any waiver or agreement contradicting them. Thus, if a service provider’s representative is delayed beyond the two hours stipulated by law, they have no defense. In other words, they cannot argue that the consumer consented to this beforehand in the contract. In fact, the service provider should not have included such a contractual clause in the first place.

I Gave a Purchased Product as a Gift. Does the “Technicians’ Law” Apply?

Yes (Section 17 of the Consumer Protection (Warranty and After-Sales Service) Regulations, 2006). The consumer’s rights under law, the warranty certificate, or any other contract with the business in this regard shall be granted to the subsequent owner of the product.

How to Claim Compensation for Technician Delay?

In some cases, the matter is resolved by sending a letter of demand to the business. The consumer describes the incident, demands compensation, and warns of their intention to file a lawsuit if their demands are not met. If this fails, a small claims court lawsuit is the most suitable option. For your convenience, we have included a sample letter of demand for free download.