Unhappy Thermomix customers with faulty machines claim they were ‘gagged’

CUSTOMERS have suffered horrible burns and wasted thousands on faulty machines. But the cult brand is forcing them to stay quiet.

AT HOME SUZE DEMARCHI Suze DeMarchi is the lead singer of the Baby Animals and has released a solo album, called Home. Thermomix. Picture by Chris Pavlich for The Daily Telegraph

UNHAPPY Thermomix customers have accused the company of using “dirty tactics”, saying the cult kitchen brand demanded they sign nondisclosure agreements before receiving refunds for faulty products.

For the uninitiated, the Thermomix is a hi-tech food processor which costs $2089 and combines 10 appliances into one unit. It chops, blends, heats, juices and weighs food, and the company claims to have 300,000 Australian customers.

But critics have accused management of intimidating and bullying customers who try to arrange a refund, repair or replacement of faulty machines.

Carly Cindric, from Western Australia, purchased a TM5 Thermomix in 2014. By February 2015, the lid would not lock and the machine shut down whenever she tried to use it. She spent the next few months lobbying the brand for a refund.

“They only offered me a refund after I lodged a consumer complaint with the Magistrates Court of Western Australia, outlining all the problems I’d had,” Mrs Cindric told news.com.au.

“Thermomix did attempt to get me to sign a gag order, but I refused. I was successful in getting a refund in the end.”

The Thermomix costs $2089 and can only be purchased through an official Thermomix consultant. Picture: Chris Pavlich.

A Sydney woman, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, says she was “coerced” into signing an NDA in November last year after suffering severe burns when the seal on her TM31 Thermomix broke.

“They said they wouldn’t give me a refund unless I signed the gag order and I was sick of fighting,” she said.

Another woman from Victoria, who also wanted to remain anonymous, said Thermomix were happy to give her a refund of her faulty TM31, but required her to sign the document and agree to keep quiet.

“I was forced to sign a gag order, which I stated from day dot that I refused to do. After fighting for over 12 months, I just wanted the machine gone and a refund,” she said.

The nondisclosure agreement, which news.com.au has seen, states the terms of the “settlement” are confidential and must not be discussed without prior written consent.

Blogger Lana Hirschowitz was vilified by obsessive fans of the appliance when she confessed last year she didn’t love her Thermomix.

“You also agree not to disparage, speak ill of, or comment negatively about Thermomix or [parent company] Vorwerk, and not to take any action which is intended, or would reasonably be expected, to harm the reputation of Thermomix or Vorwerk, or lead to unwanted or unfavourable publicity,” the document states.

A spokeswoman for Thermomix told news.com.au it is “standard legal practice” for all parties to sign a confidentiality agreement when a legal dispute is settled.

But she refuted claims customers who request a refund on a faulty item are required to sign an NDA.

“Where a customer has asked for a refund due to a fault with an appliance, and our technicians confirm such a fault after inspecting the appliance, we provide the customer with a refund and do not require them to sign a confidentiality agreement,” she said in a statement.

Refunds on machines damaged in transit can only be processed within 48 hours of receiving the items. They do not offer change of mind refunds.

“Any other reason to request a refund would have to be considered on a case-by-case basis,” the spokeswoman said.

Many customers say the seal on the lid of their Thermomixes is faulty.

Consumer group Choice says it is concerned by the reports that Thermomix is “playing hardball” when it comes to customers seeking a refund.

“Choice is aware of one such customer, whose Thermomix TM31 has reportedly suffered multiple failures, claiming the company tried to pressure her into signing a confidentiality agreement in exchange for any refund,” spokesman Tom Godfrey said.

The ACCC is “currently considering a number of issues associated with the recall of defective Thermomix products,” a spokesman said.

These allegations come just a week after Western Australia woman Danika Jones revealed she is pursuing legal action against Thermomix. Ms Jones was left with second-degree burns to her chest, stomach and arms after her Thermomix burst open.

Originally published as Unhappy Thermomix customers with faulty machines claim they were ‘gagged’