Paul. Giles Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 What would the rest do in this situation: Panel changed by subby 5/6 days ago. Client triggers it accidently and it goes confirm, no probs, cancels within seconds. They go to reset it at 2am but cant. Ring our engineer, its not set up for RR so we had to attend. Subby did not programme the RR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew.brough Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 If that was one of our subbys, they would be covering the cost of the callout. In our subbys agreements, they agree to covering the costs of rectifying things they do wrong. If possible we always give them the chance to go and fix the issue themselves in their time but for something where we are forced to act immediately like you faced, we'd dock he cost from their invoices. www.securitywarehouse.co.uk/catalog/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jb-eye Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Wouldnt happen here. It would have been: panel programmed by the office. Commissioned by the engieer. IMO its your job to check your systems and this one wasnt commissioined. So you can do as Matt suggested and just because your controlling the purse strings dosent mean your right. The subby should not be liable for the correct design and commission of the system only the instal. So i think to deduct is unfair. deduction is tantermount to bullying Customers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew.brough Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Wouldnt happen here. It would have been: panel programmed by the office. Commissioned by the engieer. IMO its your job to check your systems and this one wasnt commissioined. So you can do as Matt suggested and just because your controlling the purse strings dosent mean your right. The subby should not be liable for the correct design and commission of the system only the instal. So i think to deduct is unfair. deduction is tantermount to bullying We do the same, the guys on site don't touch programming but is it unfair to make subbies correct their mistakes? After all when our engineers screw up its us that picks up the tab. www.securitywarehouse.co.uk/catalog/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyDukeWRS Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 In principal I agree with Matthew, subbies should correct their mistakes, but is this truly the subbies mistake? Surely he should have just fitted the panel ensured it was set-up for remote connection and the rest is up to the guys back in the office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul. Giles Posted January 3, 2013 Author Share Posted January 3, 2013 Well he is not the standard "subby" as in just sent to install etc he does do servicing etc for us and does more than just fit to spec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 IF and i mean IF we use a subby they only install they do not commision. I doubt you can deduct it will have to come out of the margin in the job. Tell him what has happened etc but i wouldnt dwell on it. But you could use udl and ensure this is setup before the job is classed as 'commisioned' Well he is not the standard "subby" as in just sent to install etc he does do servicing etc for us and does more than just fit to spec. Didnt know you could sub out service? securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cubit Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Wouldnt happen here. It would have been:panel programmed by the office. Commissioned by the engieer. IMO its your job to check your systems and this one wasnt commissioined. So you can do as Matt suggested and just because your controlling the purse strings dosent mean your right. The subby should not be liable for the correct design and commission of the system only the instal. So i think to deduct is unfair. deduction is tantermount to bullying So i think to deduct is unfair. deduction is tantermount to bullying Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul. Giles Posted January 3, 2013 Author Share Posted January 3, 2013 Yes, we were not overly worried about it as we all get on very well. Was just inquiring as to what the general opinion would be. As for subbing out service, of course you can as many installers do for the nationals etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 we still do a lot of subbing, sometimes we commission & signalling sometimes not. if we'd done the install and not the commissioning (as a minimum we would change time/date, eng code, banner, text circuits and prove circuits working) but we didn't commission then i would we were not responsible for the RR problem as we were not contracted to do anything other than the basic install. That said, even sometimes when we are only contracted to "basic install" we will also commission/signalling if we have time. this had made me think though - if we were to commission (when we're not contracted to do so) and there was an issue later on we've made ourselves liable!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.