james.wilson Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 What's the thoughts on this regarding products we use. we offer 3rd party certification as service providers, yet many of us rely on the manufacturer to be honest on if their product complies. what due diligence on non 3rd party certed products you use do you do? bear in mind the service provider is legally responsible for proving compliance as per the certificate we issue. do you prefer a 3rd party certified product or are you happy with a non inspected manufacturer claiming compliance. how do you test self certified products are actually compliant? 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...
AdrianMealing Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Distinct lack of input here James, so i will throw a bomb in and see what pops out. PD6662:2010 Clause 4.1 states "The alarm company should be able to provide evidence that all components used are suitable for the security grade of the installed system and for the environment in which they are installed." Now, i do not see how any installer can achieve this unless their chosen manufacturer has got their product third party tested, approved and certified. So lets take a potential issue. You install a system, client suffers a loss, does not actually matter how that happens, system was set, loads of gear gone, alarm did go off. Insurance company are looking for someone to blame. Inspectorate is out, see above it says alarm company, that is you. So you are in court being sued for the £100,000 loss. Some smart ass lawyer for the insurance co has read all of the required documents, and points you to the above clause and asks a simple question. "how can you prove that the gear you installed was suitable?" you reply "the manufacturer told me and put a label on the product" lawyer "that does not really sound like evidence, it would appear you trusted your supplier" you "i did" judge "case closed, please pay the £100,000 and all the costs" Does that seem unreasonable? I don't think so, trust me, this will happen, ask yourself the question, do you trust your supplier? can they PROVE their products do what they say on the box? in some cases I know for sure they cannot. amealing@texe.com Head of Industry Affairs Visit Our Website Texecom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lwillis Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 If what Adrian is saying is true, when why are insurers asking for dualcom, and how is it able to be on the uk market without complying to the regs? With pd6662 saying at it does, the only product we can use is webway and texecom panels? Is redcare 3rd party certified? How about digi's? Galaxy ? ATS? HKC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted May 23, 2013 Author Share Posted May 23, 2013 Better put Adrian than i could. But seems noone is fussed, or they all use 3rd party tested equipment Insurers ask for nacoss redcare mostly. Nowt wrong with it, well not nacoss as its 3rd party tested redcare is not. We assume its compliant cos they say it is. Have you tested it to the regs? 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...
AdrianMealing Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Better put Adrian than i could. But seems noone is fussed, or they all use 3rd party tested equipment Insurers ask for nacoss redcare mostly. Nowt wrong with it, well not nacoss as its 3rd party tested redcare is not. We assume its compliant cos they say it is. Have you tested it to the regs? What he said, this train is rolling and we are on it, times are changing and it's about time the game was upped, truth is unless your supplier has done the work and spent the money YOU are the one that will be liable, not them. amealing@texe.com Head of Industry Affairs Visit Our Website Texecom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cubit Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 And what of the insurers who state Grade 3 required but then accept grade 2 when the see the prmiums ready to walk off to anoth insurer? Inspectorates who state one thing but openly preach and practice the opposite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianMealing Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Insurers don't give a toss until there is a claim, then they will be all over it like a rash, inspectorates are not liable so why would they care. The installer is the only one at risk here. amealing@texe.com Head of Industry Affairs Visit Our Website Texecom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lwillis Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 If we have the paper work from Honeywell saying their kit is grade whatever compliant and is suitable for use on systems copying to etc to. That's evidence and if it's wrong then it's down to Honeywell. How can an installer prove otherwise? So is there any other ATE that's 3rd party certified ? Texecom and webway is that it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianMealing Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 If the piece of paper is a self declaration, then IMHO it means nothing, if it comes from an independent test house certified to test to the required standard and inspected by a third party themselves, then all is well. Let me give you another scenario. You own your own company. You are approached by a company you are aware of, who has a real slick website, great sales pitch, and tells you he has 5000 monitired contracts all on 5 year terms. He wants to sell, so do you A. Believe him and write the cheque to buy his company B. Do some due diligence and check out what he is saying is true. If you choose A carry on using what you are using. If you choose B you will have the proper paperwork from an independent source that backs up his claim. This may seem fairly simplistic, but it is the same. amealing@texe.com Head of Industry Affairs Visit Our Website Texecom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cubit Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Insurers don't give a toss until there is a claim, then they will be all over it like a rash, inspectorates are not liable so why would they care. The installer is the only one at risk here. Merely pointing out some of the double standards and the lack of consistency Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.