Jump to content
Security Installer Community

UK referendum and EU Norms


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, PeterJames said:

Things do change,sometimes for better sometimes for worse, and it was already not perfect but it was never unworkable, which was my point.  

If it (EN regs) was never unworkable, why did the UK have to add a PD 6662 to it? Oh that's right it wouldn't work in the UK so we had to change it.

look over the water to the same EN in name our neighbours are using, its a much smaller and simpler document. Which BTW makes a joke out of the word standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO yes PD6662 was definetly required in the early days, some think its time is (was) coming to an end.

But one issue we have in the uk is should/shall normative/informative. Everywhere else only enforces the normative parts. We don't due to NSI, SSAIB interpretation etc. 

securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse

Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, PeterJames said:

So your saying that adding PD6662 was what made it workable ?

What I'm saying is we should Never have been forced into using an EN in the first place. Europe dictated we comply with things alien to our shores. BS4737 should have been allowed to evolve with the way the UK work. The EN never worked in the UK and therefore required amendment making it by default a poor document. 

PD 6662 is a sticking plaster to that document. We now have the opportunity to write a proper engineering standard SPECIFICALY for the home market representing what we actually do. If we work over the water we should do as the locals require. It's us and them because Us (Europeans) don't exist other than some dictatorship ideal and no matter how much sugar coating or brainwashing is applied.

Leaving the EU doesn't close the door many including myself like to visit. But it is a visit and when I see my neighbours do something interesting and different I'm happy to adopt their recipes but only if the locals here have the taste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I wouldn't get too worked up as what we will undoubtedly end up with to keep all sides happy is EUlite, basically trade and access as-was but without the other benefits and at a slightly greater per-capita cost.

 

This will, I am without doubt, include the full retention of the EN as a working UK standard, since it will be the BSIA / NSI / SSIAB / Insurers who call the shots on what's 'approved'.

 

I cannot see the appetite from any side, most especially the manufacturers, for writing a whole new standard just for Little Britain, which would undoubtedly be out of date and out of touch by the time the commissioning of the draft was even approved. There wasn't the energy even in the boom years and presence of several large profitable multinationals to keep the BS updated, so in these times of cutbacks I can't see anyone having the time or patience within a cut-down industry to devote unpaid and unthanked time to help develop it from scratch now.

Edited by datadiffusion

So, I've decided to take my work back underground.... to stop it falling into the wrong hands

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alarmcom said:

What I'm saying is we should Never have been forced into using an EN in the first place. Europe dictated we comply with things alien to our shores. BS4737 should have been allowed to evolve with the way the UK work. The EN never worked in the UK and therefore required amendment making it by default a poor document. 

PD 6662 is a sticking plaster to that document. We now have the opportunity to write a proper engineering standard SPECIFICALY for the home market representing what we actually do. If we work over the water we should do as the locals require. It's us and them because Us (Europeans) don't exist other than some dictatorship ideal and no matter how much sugar coating or brainwashing is applied.

Leaving the EU doesn't close the door many including myself like to visit. But it is a visit and when I see my neighbours do something interesting and different I'm happy to adopt their recipes but only if the locals here have the taste.

Why so angry??

Now I see it completely different from you EN50131 was not that far off 4737, The Grading was an improvement, alarm confirmation was an improvement, yes there were many things wrong with 50131 PD6662 made it workable (which again brings me back to my point) but you could say the same about 4737. 50131 did mean that I could employ French German and Polish engineers without having to provide to much training as they were already familiar with 50131 and that the purpose of having a EN standard end of the day.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, datadiffusion said:

Insurers who call the shots on what's 'approved'.

 

Everybody says its down to the insurance company's, they don't have that much input on the standards they copy and paste from BSIA guidelines, and they nearly always spec grade 4 signalling as its the only thing they know.

 

All the insurance company's i have dealt recently, quote Redcare or dualcom, when asked which redcare or dualcom as there are different versions they just come back with silence.

  • Upvote 1

www.nova-security.co.uk

www.nsiapproved.co.uk

No PMs please unless i know you or you are using this board with your proper name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nova-Security said:

 

Everybody says its down to the insurance company's, they don't have that much input on the standards they copy and paste from BSIA guidelines, and they nearly always spec grade 4 signalling as its the only thing they know.

 

All the insurance company's i have dealt recently, quote Redcare or dualcom, when asked which redcare or dualcom as there are different versions they just come back with silence.

Do you remember when insurance companies had never heard of Dual Com? It is true that the grading was supposed to help, insurance companies were supposed to choose the grade but they dont have a scooby in most cases. But thats not really the standards fault is it? 

 

On another note how many times have you gone to quote a Fire Alarm and the customer hasnt had a FRA or worse the FRA doesnt give the grade of system required?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PeterJames said:

 But thats not really the standards fault is it? 

 

On another note how many times have you gone to quote a Fire Alarm and the customer hasnt had a FRA or worse the FRA doesnt give the grade of system required?

 

Both points valid, but the standards state a system has to be installed to a grade and they insurance companies know little about the grades of systems and i as the designer have to carry out a risk assessment  which i have no formal quals for and the insurance company accepts the spec.

 

Shouldn't the insurance companies be doing the risk assessments and passing what they require to us?

 

Should have put, as per Pete's post.

Edited by Nova-Security

www.nova-security.co.uk

www.nsiapproved.co.uk

No PMs please unless i know you or you are using this board with your proper name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, PeterJames said:

Why so angry??

Now I see it completely different from you EN50131 was not that far off 4737, The Grading was an improvement, alarm confirmation was an improvement, yes there were many things wrong with 50131 PD6662 made it workable (which again brings me back to my point) but you could say the same about 4737. 50131 did mean that I could employ French German and Polish engineers without having to provide to much training as they were already familiar with 50131 and that the purpose of having a EN standard end of the day.

 

Where did you pick up I was angry? I'm not. BTW confirmation predates EN introduction by more than 10 years in some cases. 

Your international mix of engineers should require zero changes in regard to standards if they were a true standard. Do I need to post a smiley?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, alarmcom said:

 BTW confirmation predates EN introduction by more than 10 years in some cases. 

 

 

We was using confirmation a long time ago before EN on abacus panels, even the old gardtec 800 had alarm B on it. What really annoyed me was our main panel at the time was the abacus which used pin 5 on the plug on, then for EN somebody decided it should be pin 7. The plug on pins where a industry standard format by Scantronic and other panel manufactures adopted the same foot print which in them days the pins were not programmable so a move from 5 to 7 was a PITA. 

www.nova-security.co.uk

www.nsiapproved.co.uk

No PMs please unless i know you or you are using this board with your proper name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Nova-Security said:

 

Everybody says its down to the insurance company's, they don't have that much input on the standards they copy and paste from BSIA guidelines,

 

I know they know feck all, just really making the point that it's ultimatley down to them to say what we have to do, rather than the other way round.

So, I've decided to take my work back underground.... to stop it falling into the wrong hands

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.