Guest anguscanplay Posted June 7, 2008 Posted June 7, 2008 Devils advocate here - is claiming to be a member of an SSAIB not different to claiming to do work to SSAIB standards?All your saying is that you are doing the work to the standard required by the relevant organization. nah mate - its fraudulant, SSAIB or NSI dont "issue....." standards they INSPECT your working to an agreed standard so to claim your working to THEIR standards is an impossible claim .........................see? Angus (now I`ve woken up - LOL)
luggsey Posted June 7, 2008 Posted June 7, 2008 nah mate - its fraudulant, SSAIB or NSI dont "issue....." standards they INSPECT your working to an agreed standard so to claim your working to THEIR standards is an impossible claim .........................see?Angus (now I`ve woken up - LOL) Hmmm, I can see both points but I think both are correct in a way...I can claim to work to a standard of my choosing and it would be up to a third party to prove otherwise....in this case SSAIB would have to prove that the claim was false...If the service provided was to the same standard as SSAIB expected of it's installers then the claim would be valid? A bit murky to go down the line of claiming to reach a standard which is not indepently checked methinks... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Life is like a box of chocolates, some bugger always gets the nice ones! My Amateur Radio Forum
Chorlton Posted June 7, 2008 Posted June 7, 2008 Hmmm, I can see both points but I think both are correct in a way...I can claim to work to a standard of my choosing and it would be up to a third party to prove otherwise....in this case SSAIB would have to prove that the claim was false...If the service provided was to the same standard as SSAIB expected of it's installers then the claim would be valid?A bit murky to go down the line of claiming to reach a standard which is not indepently checked methinks... I completely see your POV Luggsey but I believe the new trading laws make it the other way round. i.e. - If you make a claim you have to back it up. It's no longer innocent till proven guilty on that front nor up to others to prove you wrong. Rodger posted about it a short while back - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7416809.stm Chris.
j.paul Posted June 7, 2008 Posted June 7, 2008 Hmmm, I can see both points but I think both are correct in a way...I can claim to work to a standard of my choosing and it would be up to a third party to prove otherwise....in this case SSAIB would have to prove that the claim was false...If the service provided was to the same standard as SSAIB expected of it's installers then the claim would be valid?A bit murky to go down the line of claiming to reach a standard which is not indepently checked methinks... Think you can claim to work to a "Standard" eg EN50131:2004 (if you owned a copy of it) but as Angus says: SSAIB or NSI dont "issue....." standards they INSPECT your working to an agreed standard so to claim your working to THEIR standards is an impossible claim There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
billythebellbox Posted June 7, 2008 Posted June 7, 2008 Hmmm, I can see both points but I think both are correct in a way...I can claim to work to a standard of my choosing and it would be up to a third party to prove otherwise....in this case SSAIB would have to prove that the claim was false piece of pish their standard requires you to issue one of there certs De Do Do Do, De Da Da Da. De Do Do Do, De Da Da Da
Guest Thunderfingers Posted June 7, 2008 Posted June 7, 2008 nah mate - its fraudulant, SSAIB or NSI dont "issue....." standards they INSPECT your working to an agreed standard so to claim your working to THEIR standards is an impossible claim .........................see?Angus (now I`ve woken up - LOL) Fair enough then!
antinode Posted June 7, 2008 Posted June 7, 2008 Local idiot had "NACOSS Applied For" in his Yellow Pages ad for ages, till they found out about it and kicked off. He's SSAIB now Trade Member
arfur mo Posted June 7, 2008 Posted June 7, 2008 for my 2p worth, 1st off i hate this kind of advertising, but lets not get hysterical and all bowel bound and break it down a bit. the new act means you have to trade fairly, if a complaint is made against you then the OFT will come into the play, they may decide either way on validity. but lets say they agree with the complaint, if the offender is unhappy a court case may well ensue and this is new legislation, so i'm sure it will be tested rigorously in this way. if someone claims to be working towards either or both the inspectorates standards and we all know that it's EN they inspect to so that is what is implied. eventually that will mean them issuing a cert by one or both of them - but thats EVENTUALLY as implied by the term "working towards", i.e no time limit is promised so they are not deceiving anyone legally (if moraly) imho. in our trade we have to remember we amongst ourselves over how the standards are applied and their interpretation, so what chance the OFT poor souls? don't shoot me please, i'm just trying to work out what is likely to happen in the real world, and in that one the law is still an ass. regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!!
Chorlton Posted June 7, 2008 Posted June 7, 2008 for my 2p worth,1st off i hate this kind of advertising, but lets not get hysterical and all bowel bound and break it down a bit. the new act means you have to trade fairly, if a complaint is made against you then the OFT will come into the play, they may decide either way on validity. but lets say they agree with the complaint, if the offender is unhappy a court case may well ensue and this is new legislation, so i'm sure it will be tested rigorously in this way. if someone claims to be working towards either or both the inspectorates standards and we all know that it's EN they inspect to so that is what is implied. eventually that will mean them issuing a cert by one or both of them - but thats EVENTUALLY as implied by the term "working towards", i.e no time limit is promised so they are not deceiving anyone legally (if moraly) imho. in our trade we have to remember we amongst ourselves over how the standards are applied and their interpretation, so what chance the OFT poor souls? don't shoot me please, i'm just trying to work out what is likely to happen in the real world, and in that one the law is still an ass. regs alan arfur I think "working towards" implies a timescale and you could not state "working towards" meaning infinity. A timescale is implied and should be stuck too. Chris.
billythebellbox Posted June 7, 2008 Posted June 7, 2008 if someone claims to be working towards either or both the inspectorates standards and we all know that it's EN they inspect to so that is what is implied. I'am sure 50131 does not state what insurance the firm should hold? eventually that will mean them issuing a cert by one or both of them ebut thats EVENTUALLY as implied by the term "working towards", i.e no time limit is promised so they are not deceiving anyone legally (if moraly) imho. working towards would leave a trail of modest improvements? which in turn would leave a paper trail to porve so "shady security" could well be asked to prove they had been "working towards" to prove there claim? De Do Do Do, De Da Da Da. De Do Do Do, De Da Da Da
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.