This question was closed without grading. Reason: No acceptable answer
Jul 26, 2013 13:54
10 yrs ago
3 viewers *
French term

rebut à la reprise de retouche

French to English Tech/Engineering Manufacturing light and sound-based warning systems for vehicles
I'm really hoping someone is going to tell me that I'm segmenting this sentence wrongly, but I have looked at this for so long now I can't see the wood for the trees!

It's from the Guarantee clause of a contract for the supply of light and sound warning equipment for emergency vehicles.

..."[name of company] se réserve le droit de facturer à [name of supplier], après consultation et accord entre les deux parties:

- les frais de stockage afférent aux Produits refusés,
- les frais de transport occasionnés à l'occasion de la mise en jeu de la garantie,
- une participation aux frais de retouche ou de tri en cas de rebut à la reprise de retouche ou d'obligation de tri au-dessous un certain pourcentage,
..."

I am currently working along the lines of "a contribution to the modification and recycling costs if rejected products require further modification or the volume of products recycled exceeds a certain percentage."

I am unsure whether I have correctly segmented this sentence, and also am confused as to how the company can invoice the supplier for modification work, or indeed "further" modification work. Surely the supplier would have carried out any modification work?

I feel I'm missing something with "reprise de retouche", particularly being prefaced by "rebut".

Any ideas very gratefully received, as deadline is fast approaching!

Discussion

Vicky James (asker) Jul 29, 2013:
Hmm Thank you all very much for your input. However, I do feel that there is an ambiguity about this sentence that no one has managed to address, given the variations in suggestions and explanations. I am going to put a translators' note and request clarification. I'll update if I get an answer.
mchd Jul 26, 2013:
Nulle part dans cet extrait, il est fait mention d'un produit modifié. On peut penser que l'acheteur se protège, parce qu'il n'est pas certain de la qualité qu'il va recevoir. D'ailleurs, il est mentionné que cet acheteur facture au fournisseur le stockage des produits refusés. Mais cette phrase est claire, sans équivoque !
Vicky James (asker) Jul 26, 2013:
but why would the company ask the supplier for a contribution ONLY if the modified products were scrapped (the "rebut" bit). Surely they'd want refunding for the modifications regardless of whether the products were eventually scrapped or not!
Daryo Jul 26, 2013:
On rereading, there might be an option that makes sense: if the "retouche" is not done by the Supplier, but by a third party, then the Supplier could be rightly charged for items that had to be scrapped. Any indication of a third party being involved?
Vicky James (asker) Jul 26, 2013:
thanks Daryo, but the very first line makes it clear that it is the supplier who is being charged, not the other way round. This is exactly my point! I feel there is something bizarre about the way this is phrased, it doesn't seem to make sense.
mchd Jul 26, 2013:
reprise de la retouche reprise de la retouche = rehearing of salvage rework
Le fournisseur peut être amené à supporter des frais de reprise de retouche, si la reprise n'a pas été bien faite, si le produit n'a pas été remis à niveau selon les normes/spécifications les plus récentes.
Daryo Jul 26, 2013:
this is not about "repair" it's more some updating/modification rework.
The ST is from the viewpoint of the Supplier, thus "reprise" means the Supplier taking back this equipment for modification. The equipment is not brand new, and a fraction of the lot taken back would have to be scrapped and replaced by brand new items.
What this clause is saying is that is the proportion of equipment to be scrapped and replaced by new (instead of being reworked/modified) is above certain limit, the Supplier will start charging for the rework.
Vicky James (asker) Jul 26, 2013:
and is "reprise" here meant in the sense of "taking back" the repaired products or in the sense of "redoing the repairs"?
Vicky James (asker) Jul 26, 2013:
thanks for the suggestions. But... I am still unclear as to why the company would expect the supplier to contribute to the cost of repairing these products, because surely it was the supplier who repaired them in the first place?

Proposed translations

35 mins

scrap during salvage rework

Something went wrong...
41 mins
French term (edited): en cas de rebut à la reprise de retouche

if items taken back for alteration had to be scrapped

une participation aux frais de retouche [ou de tri] en cas de rebut à la reprise de retouche [ou d'obligation de tri] au-dessous un certain pourcentage,

"... if/in case items taken back for alteration/repair had to be scrapped ..."

"retouche" is not exactly "repair" it's more "maintenance" / "alteration" / "updating with latest improvements"

Something went wrong...
9 mins

repair rejects

*

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 13 minutes (2013-07-26 14:07:36 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

i.e. unreparable or repair failures

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 heure (2013-07-26 15:28:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

So, it's modification rejects.
Something went wrong...
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search