Brussels

At the street market there are lots of 2nd-hand phones with “Testachats” printed on the backside. Testachats is a consumer rights org in Belgium. So I’m wondering why their name would be printed on smartphones. Does testachats get phones for quality testing, then dump them into the market when they’re done?

My Beko washing machine died. I have a multimeter and need to test the various components but I have no idea what the voltage and resistence measurements should be on each component. MediaMarkt sells Beko parts but they were helpless when I asked for a service manual. They said go online. The Beko website is useless.

The EU has be discussing and negotiating a right to repair law for like 10 years now. And this law still has not been implemented. Hence why I’m screwed.

The question is, would I still be screwed even after the right to repair gets enacted? There is some vague mention that manuals will be obligatory, but no mention if that refers to user manuals or service manuals. Service manuals are always hard to get because manufacturers do not want amateurs repairing stuff. And suppose service manuals will be liberated. Will the law retroactively require docs on existing products, or only on new products going forward?

I would like to read the current mobility & transports law. I believe this is the original law because it seems to read like it’s complete and not just changes:

https://etaamb.openjustice.be/fr/loi-du-10-juin-2014_n2014014330

There have been several amendments, e.g.:

• https://etaamb.openjustice.be/fr/arrete-royal-du-10-juin-2014_n2014014338.html
• https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/cgi/article.pl?language=nl&sum_date=2024-11-04&pd_search=2014-07-09&numac_search=2014014330&page=1&lg_txt=F&caller=list&2014014330=4&view_numac=&ddd=2014-06-10&text1=mobilite&choix1=en&choix2=en&fr=f&nl=n&du=d&trier=afkondiging
• https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/cgi/article.pl?language=nl&sum_date=2024-11-04&pd_search=2014-06-17&numac_search=2014014160&page=1&lg_txt=F&caller=list&2014014160=2&view_numac=&ddd=2014-06-10&text1=mobilite&choix1=en&choix2=en&fr=f&nl=n&du=d&trier=afkondiging

Since my French is bad it would be a real struggle to read all the amendments and try to derive from the original law what the new version is. It would be nice if these pages showing changes would simply link to the current final version. Is there a site which publishes the current final?

(update) I think the answer is to use this site, which seems to be openly accessible (unlike many sites storing belgian legal code):

https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/wet/wet.htm

Le distributeur de cadeaux Saintnicolis de bpost fait son retour dans 15 villes belges du 6 au 30 novembre. Le distributeur de colis fera escale dans des lieux stratégiques partout en Belgique. Centres commerciaux, cinémas Kinepolis et gares principales ont été choisis pour leur accessibilité, permettant au plus grand nombre de familles et d’écoles maternelles et/ou primaires de s’y rendre, précise bpost. Parmi les endroits choisis, on retrouve notamment le shopping Rive Gauche à Charleroi (8 et 9 novembre), la gare de Namur (13 et 14), les Kinepolis de Bruxelles et de Braine-l’Alleud (16 et 17), le shopping Médiacité à Liège (22 et 23), le Docks Bruxelles (22 et 23), l’Espace Arlon (22 et 23), et les Grands Prés à Mons (29 et 30).

Les cadeaux sont offerts par plusieurs partenaires de bpost. Outre ce distributeur spécial, bpost gère comme chaque année le secrétariat de Saint-Nicolas. Tous les enfants désirant envoyer une lettre peuvent le faire à l’adresse suivante jusqu’au 15 décembre: Saint-Nicolas, rue du Paradis 1, 0612 Ciel. Toutes les lettres postées seront ensuite traitées et une réponse écrite du Grand Saint sera renvoyée.

To reach the Belgian datasets of open data from Tor you must go through archive.org:

http://web.archive.org/web/20241003145143/https://data.gov.be

And because the website is interactive and also not completely archived, I ultimately could not even browse through to see what data there is beyond the first page of databases. Thus not entirely “open”.

But the Brussels datasets are open to all.

I could not find the data I was looking for. That is, I wanted to know how many complaints are sent to the various different SPF regulators as well as ombuds people -- and very specifically how many complaints are ignored. Some offices produce annual reports but I have never seen an annual report that exposes the count of ignored complaints.

Anyway, the question I have is what section of legal code covers open data in Belgium?

I bought a drive at a street market. It was broken. The guy had a pile of them so I returned the following week. He was kind enough to let me swap for another drive. He had no working laptop to test with. When I got home the 2nd one was broken too. Then I went straight back with laptop. He was shocked; in complete disbelief. He let me attach the other drives to my laptop to test. They were all broken. He seemed quite sure that it’s impossible. But he was kind enough to refund my cash.

A week later he is still selling those drives. He did not have to give a refund and was generous for doing so. But still seems a bit off that he’s still trying to sell them. It’s possible that he distrusts my tests. But still, someone else will likely get burnt and maybe not bother to try to track the guy down again.

I spotted a bicycle in a dumpster which was only missing the rear wheel. The front wheel had a disc brake so I grabbed that (wheel and disc and caliper), left the frame. Next day I noticed the frame was gone. Someone must have found that useful. Now I’m kinda bummed because whoever took the frame probably would have liked to have the caliper and disc brake, which I only salvaged to prevent the waste of it in the off-chance that I decide to upgrade to disc brakes.. which is unlikely since I might need to weld a loop on the frame.

Two other bicycles were tossed in this dumpster, and gone within a day.

Brussels really needs to get their shit together with waste management, despite being far ahead of the rest of world. Anything even remotely useful should be going to a junkyard where people can pick through it. If that were to exist, I would not have seen functional parts in a dumpster which I then try to save from the landfill.

There were a dozen or so lists to choose from. I selected a list. Normally I would just select the list and tap submit. But someone told me that if you select an individual it adds weight to the vote or gives them more power somehow. So when I choose a list, the screen is filled with a candidate for every position.

Should I select every single name on that screen? Someone told me you only need to select the party and all names are automatically chosen. But what’s the situation with the extra weight?

I got an A4 paper flyer from Ecolo/groen that lists over 40 candidates in their party which corresponds for every position. But about ¼ of the names are highlighted and have a green checkmark next to them. What does that mean? Does it mean that only ~25% are actually with the green party and the other 75% are other candidates who are merely endorsed by the green party?

Another ecolo/groen flyer lists only a dozen or so names, some matching the checked names on the other flyer and some not. It’s quite confusing to work out what going on here.

I wonder if I did not vote at all for some positions. I just don’t get it.

This is really a shitshow. The federal ombudsman is simply ignoring complaints -- not even giving people a case number or status. Because of that, many complaints are about the fed ombudsman itself, from people asking what’s going on with their complaint.

My question: who is above the federal ombudsman on the food chain?

The fed ombudsman should only be getting complaints about other Belgian federal agencies. So the fact that the fed ombudsman is swamped with over 10,000 complaints means that other federal agencies are failing in their duties at a high rate. From the report:

“That clearly shows that citizens are having difficulties exercising their rights and that they risk losing trust in public service.”

The report also says:

“In 2023, the Federal Ombudsman obtained a positive result in 75%”

Of course that’s only 75% of the ~~44%~~48% it cherry picked to work on. So really only 36% of complaints are getting results. Thus roughly 7000 people were disserviced by a federal agency and could not get a remedy from the federal ombudsman. (edit: of the 48%, 44% are trivial complaints merely about delays; thus apparently only about 15% are getting meaningful results on a significant matter)

Who do we complain to about mismanagement at the federal ombudsman?

Got a flyer from a political candidate saying he opposes:

• Good Move
• Parking Brussels
• Aux taxes et aux impôts abusifs

I had to look up the 1st two items. Couple goals of good move is:

• Reduce the need for private cars by offering a set of attractive options addressing the different needs for travel;

• prioritising off-street parking, adapting tariffs per sector, reducing the number of places in public spaces

Seems to be a success. I found this: One year Good Move in Brussels city: 25% less car-traffic and 36% more bicycles.

Less car traffic is also good for car drivers because they have fewer other cars in their way. So it’s unclear what the guy’s problem is.

I also had to look up Parking Brussels to work out what his issue may be. Goals of that project:

• Make it easier for residents to park in their neighbourhood
• Encourage short-stay parking
• Discourage long-stay on-street parking

That’s wise. It’s a bad idea for public parking to be used for long-term parking. My street is always clusterfucked with cars that fill the public parking so there is no way to have visitors or deliveries. I’m not sure why Good Move and Parking Brussels have failed to solve the problem for my street, but canceling them would seem to just make that problem less likely to be solved.

Obviously it makes sense to vote against the incumbents in this case. Though still a question of who the challengers are.

I find it despicable enough that government administered public services put a link to their Facebook account on their public website. A higher level of injustice and exclusion has been demonstrated by the Telecom Mediation Service, who actually directs the public to a Facebook page for content.

Yikes!

So because I do not have a Facebook account, I am denied access to public information from a public office financed with public money. They also have LinkedIn links which block me. To add to the embarrassment, this is the agency in charge of telecom justice in Belgium. WTF. This is abhorrent.

This is probably a bit oddly specific, but I’d like to find shot glasses with the shape of Guiness pint glasses. For serving Baby Guinesses.

Is there a bar supply shop that would likely have this sort of thing?

It’s obviously wasteful to use just ¼ of a bag for waste food and put it out for collection every week. I have only seen these bags sold in 30l sizes. I suppose I could cut them in half and heat seal them.. but would be more convenient to just get a smaller size if they exist.

(update) only one size is produced. Maybe I’ll end up filling the orange sacks with several smaller bags.

I’d like to buy windowed envelopes that have a simple cut-out with no plastic added, for A4 paper (C6/5 ISO). I suppose they may not exist in Europe since I have never received any in the mail.

I tried the stationary shops Ava and Club. Are there any others I might try?

It used to be that you could take a new loyalty card at grocery stores, use it right away, and never register it. So you have an anonymous account and you still got discounts. I wondered if loyalty programs survived the emergence of the GDPR for that reason. But in fact the anonymous option seems to be dead.

• Delhaize is the sneakiest and least tolerant. You can use an unregistered card all you want for countless months with no indication of rejection. Card is accepted silently and receipts show the card was used. I thought I was racking up discounts and points or something. Then one day I tried to exploit a promo that should have instantly had effect at the register. The register again accepted the card but silently charged the full amount. This time I was paying attention and complained. Delhaize told me my card is basically an impotent placebo because it’s not registered to a name and address. The cashiers are not flexible either. At some grocery stores cashiers will pull out their personal card and do you a favor but not Delhaize.

• Intermarché loyalty cards are also impotent unless you register them.

• Colruyt has a pushover loyalty program, which is good for us. If you don’t have a card they scan a code that is taped to the register. But you have to pay attention and ask for the promo.

Under the GDPR, the loyalty programs work under the legal basis of “legitimate interest” (not contract, which is what you might otherwise expect). That enables them to legally collect data but it does not exempt them from data minimisation. This seems to suggest Delhaize and Intermarché are non-compliant when the force disclosure of birthdate and address. Otherwise I do not see how they are GDPR compliant.

Colruyt is still doing something dodgy with prices. They have the electronic price tags so they can electronically instantly update prices. The shelf prices are not in sync with the cash register.. wtf? You would only expect pricing to be out of sync if the prices were printed on paper. So pay attention to the price on the shelf. I saw something ring up ~25% more. On another visit that same item range up for ~6% more.

A proprietary valve on a Vaillant boiler started leaking. This is just outside the boiler often called the “trim” which connects directly to the boiler’s proprietary union joint. Europe does not seem to have standard generic flared fittings.

When I asked Vaillant sellers for a replacement valve (which you might expect to be under €10), they say the valve is not sold separately; must be bought in a kit that facq charges €92 for and some shops charge ~€65 for.

The right to repair requires parts to be affordable IIUC, so the old trick of bundling parts together to make the price unreasonable for a simple valve probably does not comply. But has the right to repair taken effect yet? That article just says that a majority voted for it. I’ve not heard that it is in force yet.

Is Moneytrans the only vendor of prepaid credit cards?

The meter reading folks rarely show up to witness a gas and electric reading. Sibelga sent me a blank form so I can give the figures myself. Then either Sibelga ignored my figures, or communication broke down between Sibelga and my supplier.

So I received a huge bill. I would not care about overestimated consumption if prices were increasing (because then I would be paying a lower price per kWh). But it’s the other way around. Prices dropped. So the energy supplier is overpricing my consumption by overestimating the consumption before a price drop.

They did not look at my meter before the decompté settlement invoice and also did not check it on the day of the price drop. I took photos but I don’t think they will be trusted because I cannot prove when the photos were taken.

Is there any recourse?

I have always wondered what is the real difference between priority mail (“prior”) and non-priority (“non-prior”) mail in Belgium. Apparently the meaning became quite pronounced four years ago when bPost decided to only deliver non-prior mail twice per week.

I have noticed that mail has slowed down but I did not attribute it to anything. I’ve noticed that it usually takes at least 1 week for a letter to travel from Brussels to Brussels. Well this article has the answer.

Recently a letter arrived to me from a public service with “non-prior” rubber-stamped on it. I wondered what is the point? Why stamp non-prior when that is likely the default service anyway. It’s as if the sender wants to say: “please ensure this letter doesn’t move too quick”.

The costly EU postage stamps I complained about have “prior” integrated into the stamp and the domestic stamps I have do not. I guess I will see if I can find non-prior EU stamps to save money.

Another mystery: the election mail that arrived very late (a week after the election) was delivered on Saturday. Seems weird that non-priority mail would get Saturday delivery, but perhaps extreme tardiness changes things.

Anyway, this is the English translation of the linked article:

From March 2020, bpost will limit the delivery of letters franked with a normal stamp to twice a week, according to the columns of "La Dernière Heure" on Tuesday. However, "prior" stamped mail, parcels and newspapers will continue to be delivered daily.

On Tuesday morning, bpost CEO Koen Van Gerven stated on radio 1 that the delivery of letters franked with a normal stamp should take place on Mondays and Wednesdays.

This measure is justified because while in 2011, 12 million letters were still delivered per day, this figure had fallen to barely 7.7 million in 2018, the public company indicates. In addition, only one in two homes receives mail every day. "While the costs of this round remain the same", emphasizes Keon Van Gerven.

This summer, bpost will test the system in a few offices. "Customers won't notice anything for now. It's just a discreet survey to understand how we organize the rounds, how the mail is delivered."

In order to "ensure the viability of correspondence in the long term", bpost will group non-urgent mail together from March and post it twice a week, in response to customer expectations. "Today, 80% of the stamps sold are not 'prior' and 20% are. The customer's signal is therefore clear: we want a fifth of the mail urgently", the CEO further emphasizes.

You will have to pay more to benefit from a fast service

Urgent mail, however, will continue to be delivered every day: parcels, newspapers, registered letters, death notices and "prior" letters.

The decision to no longer deliver non-urgent mail on a daily basis was taken in July last year and was normally due to be implemented in 2021. However, the implementation was brought forward to 2020, due to the faster-than-expected decline in mail.

The unions will monitor the project closely. "We must of course evolve, but citizens have the right to maintain full access to the postal service. What we see is that they will have to pay more to benefit from a fast service. And the staff must also maintain their status".

The unions are arguing in particular for mail and parcel deliveries to be kept grouped together. "Otherwise, management will soon create a separate company that will only handle parcels and for which staff will be hired with precarious contracts".

The disappearance of the daily postman's visit is a very sensitive point since it is an obligation that is included in bpost's management contract. However, other countries have already experimented with the future Belgian system. In Italy and the Netherlands, mail delivery has been limited. And in Denmark, non-urgent mail is only delivered once a week.

Surely the tax law must be reachable in other forms like Moniteur Belge publications which are openly public. But it’s still alarming that any public service would operate exclusively. I’m not sure what FisconetPlus is exactly and if it uniquely gives access to any information.

If FisconetPlus is entirely redundant, then it can be scrapped¹. If it’s not entirely redundant, then it’s an injustice that it’s exclusive. People excluded by FisconetPlus probably do not get out of their tax obligation.

¹ Redundancy is good for security reasons, but in the event of an outtage of other services it would be an injustice if FisconetPlus were the sole means of access which is then exclusive. It violates human rights (Universal Declaration of Human Rights art.21¶2).

That article is in French but here is the English machine translation:

PTB demands that FPS Finance stop submitting to Microsoft and protect privacy

Federal MP Marco Van Hees (PTB) believes that FPS Finance should take back the keys to its tax database FisconetPlus. This is in fact in the hands of the multinational Microsoft, which is abusing this situation, as indicated by the Data Protection Authority. "The use of private subcontracting has led to blind submission to a multinational that imposes the violation of privacy for its own interests", denounces Marco Van Hees.

At the beginning of 2018, Marco Van Hees undertook, as he had done for years, to consult FisconetPlus, the tax legislation database of FPS Finance. He then noticed that it was no longer possible to access it without first having opened an account with Microsoft. Initially, the site even mentioned the obligation to have an address from the American multinational: "You will have to enter a Microsoft email address.”

On 28 March 2018, the parliamentarian questioned former Finance Minister Johan Van Overtveldt (N-VA) in the House Finance Committee. He responded that the requirement to enter a Microsoft email address to register was the result of clumsy wording and that "the current homepage, which could be confusing, is currently being rewritten to this effect."

However, he fully justifies the requirement to open an account (regardless of the email address used to do so) with Microsoft in order to access FisconetPlus: "Access to this platform requires the creation of an account. Microsoft prohibits anonymous access to its platform. Creating an account is easy and free.” And the minister adds: "The obligation to create an account is legal"

Spying on users for commercial purposes
No, it is not legal, the Data Protection Authority (the former Commission for the Protection of Privacy) ruled today. In its recommendation 01/2019 of 2 February 2019, the Authority analyses the FisconetPlus procedure in detail by comparing it with the rules on respect for privacy.

It points out that "if the proposed application only concerns the provision of public information that does not contain personal data (such as a database containing legislation), the requirement to create an account to access this information, involving the processing of personal data, is contrary to the principles of data protection by design and data protection by default defined in the GDPR. »

The Authority thus notes that, by default, the multinational applies this setting which demonstrates spying on users: "To display ads better suited to your interests, we will use your browsing, search and other online activity data associated with your Microsoft account. Ads may be less relevant if you deactivate this setting."

After ten pages of analysis, the conclusion of the Data Protection Authority is clear: "The imposition, by public authorities, of the use of a Microsoft account to access an application that only makes public information available and not personal data is contrary to the GDPR."

The Authority adds: "Public services must always guarantee free access to official sources of legislation, without attaching any condition that constitutes an interference with privacy and/or involves risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons concerned. ”

« The excesses of an increasing recourse to private subcontracting by public services »
For Marco Van Hees, « this situation shows the excesses of an increasing recourse to private subcontracting by public services. In the present case, this policy has led to blind submission to a multinational imposing the violation of privacy for its own interests. »

The MP believes in any case that the FPS Finance must comply with this recommendation from the Data Protection Authority as quickly as possible by removing any procedure for registering for a Microsoft account for future users and by deleting Microsoft accounts for those who are already registered. Marco Van Hees will call on the new Minister of Finance, Alexander De Croo, to act in this regard.

During the “legal guarantee” period (which has a default of 2 years in the EU), if an electronic appliance dies or stops conforming to spec consumers have a right to return it to the shop or the manufacturer. That is the consumer’s choice. Shops have an obligation to deal with the defective item on behalf of the consumer.

This is sensible since the shop has a business relationship and communication channel with the supplier. This approach rightfully gets consumers off the hook for shipping costs.

Aldi has a 60 day return policy, which is fine. If you are outside of that (in the range 60 days .. 2 years) you are still legally entitled to return something that breaks. But Aldi simply refuses. The staff are trained and conditioned to refuse any returns older than 60 days.

Just a heads up.. don’t buy anything from Aldi that will bother you if it breaks after 60 days unless you’re fine with tracking down manufacturers (who often ignore consumers in my experience). Consumer protection doesn’t really work in Belgium.

BTW, Aldi is split into 2 companies: Aldi North and Alidi South. IIRC some kind of falling out among owners caused it to split. All Aldi stores in Belgium are Aldi North (the same Aldi that folks should boycott anyway due to Israel ties and shenanigans with concealing the source of food from Israel). It’s quite possible that Aldi South respects EU law in case anyone is reading this from outside Belgium.

I was given some legal advice at one point which basically goes like this (paraphrasing):

You should of course read everything before you sign. But that’s not always possible or convenient and you may at times for various reasons end up signing something on-the-fly without reading it first. You should always make sure you get a copy of what you sign so that in the very least you can later review whatever you are on the hook for.

I adhere to the /keep a copy/ advice to a much greater extent than the /read before you sign/ advice. It’s about knowing your rights and responsibilities. So a bank once demanded that I sign something in order to keep using their service. It was long and in a language I did not know. They basically said I had to sign on the spot and I could not go home with it and bring it back later. I said, okay, but will you make a copy of this for me? Answer (paraphrasing): no, you do not get a copy. That is not our process. He also acted like I was weird for expecting a copy.

So I signed but pulled out phone and started to digitally image it. The banker snatched it away from me faster than I could get it in focus.

My mistake was not photographing first, then signing, then rephotographing with the sig if possible.

That actually happened pre-GDPR. The GDPR possibly accidentally solves this problem because your signature is personal data. OTOH, a clever bank could technically respond to an access request with just the signature portion of the doc and not the rest of the doc because the rest of the doc is not personal data -- correct?

I don’t know if I will encounter this again but I would like to know if there any laws that prevent the bank’s non-transparent practice of blocking people from knowing what they agreed to. Banks often want on-the-spot signatures but I guess I should try to insist on bringing such docs home and returning later.

It’s quite inconvenient though because you can no longer just show up at a bank and get service. Banks have very narrow open hours on just 1-2 days out of the week. Lines to talk to someone are quite long, which makes appointments popular. So popular, that appointments are schedule a month out. So things are organised to exert pressure on people to quickly sign and bounce.

Registered letters have become extortionately costly in Belgium (around €10). So to save money I make hand-deliveries and request recipients sign for it. I have no idea if this ad hoc proof of delivery would meet courtroom standards of evidence. But I’m fine with the risk.

The recipients are not natural people. It’s always companies, orgs, and gov agencies. It mostly works as far as getting the signature. Most receptions treat me like bPost.

But there are exceptions. A gov agency refused to sign for a letter. Since I was not wearing bPost swag, they were alienated and said “we don’t do that… that is not how we work… send an e-mail”. I said “what if I send this by bPost registered letter? Would you accept it or refuse it?” They said they would accept that because I have to pay bPost. That’s bizarre, is it not?

I realise some people are like robots. They want every task to be in their job description. They want everything scripted. And if an unfamiliar request or situation arises, they’re like “nope, can’t do it… that job is not on my list so I cannot handle it”. Because of this, I sometimes have to go through a few people. But in the case at hand 3 different staff independently confidently refused to sign for the letter.

So the question is, is this legal? The sketchy legal theory I am envisioning is that this is kind of like bundling. That is, they are imposing a 3rd-party purchase on their otherwise free reception service. I wonder if anti-competition law can be stretched in this way. So I also wonder if there are any more direct laws that require gov offices and companies to sign for deliveries when asked.