Specialist buggy not built for real disabled family life
We have had an extremely disappointing experience with Etac/R82 regarding our son’s Chilla specialist buggy.
Our son is medically complex and fully dependent on specialist mobility equipment. His Chilla buggy was kindly funded through a charity and was only around nine months old when it developed serious faults. We received it in September; the brakes failed in December, and the handlebar broke in May.
The brake issue happened while using the buggy on public transport, when the bus swerved and the brake mechanism appeared to fail and pop out of place. The handlebar later snapped at what appears to be a plastic joint when the buggy had to be carried up three steps at the entrance of a building where there was no ramp, with our son seated in it.
We raised this through the supplier, who contacted Etac/R82 under the warranty process. We were told that Etac/R82 considered the damage to have been caused by “external forces” and “usage outside of the intended operational use of the buggy,” rather than a manufacturing defect or component failure.
I find this response honestly shocking.
If a company is manufacturing specialist mobility equipment for disabled children, they should understand the real world in which disabled families live. We do not move through perfectly accessible showrooms. We deal with public transport, curbs, uneven pavements, stairs, broken lifts, narrow entrances, inaccessible buildings and situations where there is simply no ramp or step-free option available.
If Etac/R82 considers using a specialist buggy on public transport, or carrying it up three steps where no ramp is available, to be outside the intended use of the product, then I genuinely question whether they understand the lives of the families these products are supposed to serve.
At this price point, I would have expected a specialist disability buggy to be more robust than a standard high-street pushchair, not more fragile. Instead, we have been left transporting our disabled child in a buggy with unreliable brakes and a damaged handlebar being held together with gaffer tape, because we have no immediate safe alternative.
For families like ours, this is not a luxury item. It is essential mobility equipment. Every outing already involves planning, medical needs, feeding, equipment and physical handling. Being left with a faulty buggy after less than a year, and then being told that normal real-life use is effectively outside the intended operational use, is incredibly upsetting.
I also feel strongly that families, therapists, charities and funding bodies should be made aware of this. If public transport, unavoidable steps, bumps or lifting may invalidate warranty support or be treated as “external forces,” that should be made very clear before these products are recommended, supplied or funded.
I wrote directly to Etac/R82 setting out these concerns and asking them to review the matter. I have not received a response.
This experience has left us feeling extremely let down by a company that should understand disabled children and their families better. Specialist disability equipment should be built for real life, not just ideal conditions.
