FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Technical Advice => Topic started by: Wiz on July 04, 2009, 06:32:59 PM
-
There have been many comments on this forum over the years complaining that British Standards are too expensive.
People appear to be particularly annoyed that amendments to existing BSs' can only be bought by purchasing another copy of the full BS that incorporates the amendment(s)
Does anyone agree with my suggestion that copies of any 'guidance' document acceptable in a court of law as evidence, should be available to anyone at basically no charge? this would mean any Law, regulation, recommendation, code of practice etc. etc. If it is not available at no charge it can never be used as evidence in a court of law.
When I say basically no charge, I mean that you would still have to pay for the cost of printing and distribution for 'hard copies' but all other costs (committees, discussions, research & writing) would be met by the Government or the EU.
Any comments?
-
I agree whole heartedly. It should be as per the RRO guides and the Approved Documents - Free to download, or pay to purchase a hard copy.
-
I ate out tonight at the local. As I have to eat, I think its a disgrace that I had to pay for the staff, the lease on the property, heating, gas, etc. I think I should only have paid for the ingrdients- a nice bit of turbot that cost me £15 but could be bought in the supermarket for a fiver. I think that the govt-which means all of you- and the EU-which means all of you plus a load of johnny foreigners- should have paid the rest for me.
-
This issue is world wide, something works in one way system only. It must be some other ways to make the code of practice more affordable to every body, other wise let's consider BS institution as one of the institutions developing code of practices and not the only one, give then chance to competition to drop down the price.
By the way, in Algeria i.e. the regulations printout costs half the monthly salary of an engineer, it's even worse.
They want you to do things by the book, mean while they make the process even very expansive. ???
What's the difference between the hard jobs of some one who published his own book at the unit price of £30, and the BS developers of code of practices which cost 10 times the normal price? is't really the content? the quality of paper? the time taken to do the job? the number of people involved?...
-
I don't think anybody really resents paying a fee for the standards... the point is that the fee seems to be unreasonable.
£200 ish for pt 1 of the standard alone, there's around 20,000 NICEIC companies that need it, and let's say the same amount of fire companies... even if you said half of that lot bought legit copies, thats £4,000,000 minimum in revenue.... nice work if you can get it....!
It wouldn't be so bad if having bought a legit copy of a standard, you shouldn't have to pay for amendments because someone has spotted a few spelling mistakes and the odd "should" instead of "shall".
-
The number of standards that I need to refer to is phenomenal, and were I to purchase each one then I wouldn't be able to eat out - ever. However I do subscribe to an on-line technical library which meets almost all of my needs in relation to fire safety and the built environment. I therefore don't need to starve my children in order to work, and neither do the authors of the various books. I'd recommend it.
Paul
-
Why are BS standards so much more expensive that the RRO guides and the Approved Documents? Are the BSI saying that more work goes into the production of a typical BS than the Approved Documents? Perhaps it's because the organisations behind the publication of the RRO guides and Approved Documents are non profit making organisations who's main focus is promoting best practice rather than lining their pockets.
CT says he went to a restaurant last night. I suspect when it comes to Mr & Mrs CT deciding on were to go, they have more than one restaurant to pick from. So they pick an appropriate restaurant having regard for the type of food they want, quality of service, quality of food and the price. When it comes to the purchase of BSI's we don't have a choice. I'm sure CT would have ended up spending far far more for his meal last night if the restaurant he went to was the only restaurant in the UK.
-
Why are BS standards so much more expensive that the RRO guides and the Approved Documents? Are the BSI saying that more work goes into the production of a typical BS than the Approved Documents? Perhaps it's because the organisations behind the publication of the RRO guides and Approved Documents are non profit making organisations who's main focus is promoting best practice rather than lining their pockets.
CT says he went to a restaurant last night. I suspect when it comes to Mr & Mrs CT deciding on were to go, they have more than one restaurant to pick from. So they pick an appropriate restaurant having regard for the type of food they want, quality of service, quality of food and the price. When it comes to the purchase of BSI's we don't have a choice. I'm sure CT would have ended up spending far far more for his meal last night if the restaurant he went to was the only restaurant in the UK.
Great Post S Hood!
-
I ate out tonight at the local. As I have to eat, I think its a disgrace that I had to pay for the staff, the lease on the property, heating, gas, etc. I think I should only have paid for the ingrdients- a nice bit of turbot that cost me £15 but could be bought in the supermarket for a fiver. I think that the govt-which means all of you- and the EU-which means all of you plus a load of johnny foreigners- should have paid the rest for me.
Colin, I believe the explanations of laws rules and regulations should be available to everyone, not just those that can afford them.
This is particularly true when it relates to recommendations that explain best practice in respect of anything that provides everyone with a safer living and working environment.
If these recommendation documents were paid through taxation like everything else that is meant to be equally available to the whole population i.e health care & education then we wouldn't have the situation where a self-employed worker does not have the financial resources to get access to every document that he requires.
I'm surprised that you brought Johnny Foreigner into the discussion. I only mentioned the EU. There are no Johnny Foreigners in the EU, only our European brothers! But we are in the EU now, and many of the documents in question are meant to be European-wide standards, in which case, I suggested that they might, therefore, be funded by the EU.
I've note that other posts are arguing that the BSs' are not value for money. I personally have never really thought this to be the case (except in the case of having to pay for a full new standard after just a couple of amendments!) I just wondered if the cost for them (other than printing and distribution) should be borne by the Government.
Obviously the Government might want to see some value for what they are paying for and this might change things somewhat for the BSI if they are not providing value for money at present
-
"Colin, I believe the explanations of laws rules and regulations should be available to everyone, not just those that can afford them."
Are they not Wiz?
It's the many guides and codes of practice, containing the life saving advice, which has ownership of the commercial aspects. To my mind if it has a price then it has no place as a public safety document.
-
You complain about standards for Fire Alarms, sheesh you should check out the Intruder sector.
Standards where superseeded before they were in print yet we still have to buy them to keep up with the SSAIB requirements.
What has made a huge difference is the annual subscription to BS, gives you online access to all the relevant standards, its good for us as we have to pay the SSAIB several hundred £ to be a member and the extra charge for the BS scheme is a fraction in comparision.
They come with your company name embedded so before you ask for illegal copies the answers no ;D
-
David, none of the amendments were to change should to shall, not least for the reason that you cant have a shall in a code of practice. The amendments were to take account of user comments and things people WANTED changed.
-
BSI is not a profit making organization, but it lost a lot of govt funding over the years, and it seems fair enough as I do not particularly want my 40% of salary going to the manufacturers of condoms and installers of intruder alarm systems, so they can buy standards cheap. I never said I took Mrs CT to the restaurant, but if there were only one in the world I would still go there as I never cook meals. I would be happy to pay their prices if I was satisfied they were not making any profit. If you work in a profession, you need the tools to do the job. Thats life I am afraid.
-
BSI is not a profit making organization, but it lost a lot of govt funding over the years, and it seems fair enough as I do not particularly want my 40% of salary going to the manufacturers of condoms and installers of intruder alarm systems, so they can buy standards cheap. I never said I took Mrs CT to the restaurant, but if there were only one in the world I would still go there as I never cook meals. I would be happy to pay their prices if I was satisfied they were not making any profit. If you work in a profession, you need the tools to do the job. Thats life I am afraid.
Sorry Colin but I totally disagree. These are just the sort of things I want my Government to be spending my money on.
If we have to have 'rules' in this world then the explanation of those 'rules' should be freely and cheaply available so that everyone has equal chance of understanding them.
I want to ensure my condom manufacturer produces a safe and reliable product based on standards experts have decreed is necessary.
And I want these standards to be available to anyone who wants to manufacture condoms in a way that allows a proper free market economy to operate.
I certainly don't want a new prospective player in the condom manufacturing industry to be restricted by excessive start-up or operating costs due to the cost of 'information'. Especially information that has been 'created' by the existing players in the condom manufacturing industry.
I want my Government to fund an organisation like British Standards to ensure this. But preferably one organisation and one standard.
That's my opinion and I know that others share it.
I don't expect everyone to agree with us because people have their own reasons for supporting their own opinions.
-
David, none of the amendments were to change should to shall, not least for the reason that you cant have a shall in a code of practice. The amendments were to take account of user comments and things people WANTED changed.
12.2.1 4) reduction of the battery voltage to less than the voltage specified in BS EN 54-4 at which a fault
warning shall be given (within 30 min of occurrence).
Best we have another amendment then......!!! ;)
I still don't see why amendments could not be free, if the BSI are not for profit they must be sitting on a nice little pension fund...!
Apparently they are a Royal Charter organisation and don't have to publish their accounts... can we use the freedom of info act ??
-
DAVID, If you read what you have written, you will see no amendment is necessary. BS 5839-1 is quoting from BS EN 54-7 which IS a standard and so contains all shalls and not shoulds. So it is the voltage that under the EN a warning SHALL be given. BS 5839-1 is not recommending the warning, it is defining a voltage at which, for compiance with the EN it shall/must be given. it is a way of referencing a voltage. However, BS makes recommendations about the warning, correctly using the verb SHOULD.
-
Although it would be nice to live in a world where everything is free, Sorry I have to agree with Colin.
If you look more into this where would this government funding stop!.
Bit of a silly example, but you will get the idea.
We all get our free fire alarm standards, we then tell Mr customer because of these standards he has to upgrade his hotels fire alarm to meet these standards and also we need a fire risk assessment doing, Mr customer gets on the phone to the magical money hotline who because this is all government forced standards on him they then give him the £10k he needs to sort it out.
Next day Mr Plumbing and heating man calls after reading his free copy of the tap the boiler and replace standards he tells mr customer the whole system does not meet standards and you are going to need a new system "sorry mate , it’s not me it’s the rules". Mr customer gets back on to the magical money hot line and orders £30k for the hotel heating system.
In the mean time Fire risk assessment man looks in his 20 different free standards ( he has to look at everything doors windows, walls, ceilings, electrics, furnishings etc so he needs loads of free standards) any way after 10 mins he comes back with your electrics need checking, fire doors are no good, you need to build some protected stairways, no fire extinguisher, you need some emergency lights the list went on. After reading his list he said " don’t worry Mr. customer I know all these trades people who all get free Standards and training and then you will be able to claim it all back from the magical money helpline because it’s the governments fault that you have to pay this money out.
Unfortunately everyone has their own hoops to jump through buying standards are one of ours, don't get me wrong I think BS5839-1 is way over priced when compared to BS7671 which comes as a proper book for half the money, but does anyone really think the government is going to subsidise all the British Standards, they turn over something like £250million a year and pay around £6 million in tax. I cannot see this being a vote winner for the political parties “ We are going to give free Standards away to all the trades people so they can make more money off Mr Customer, and Mr Public is going to pay for it”.
Nice thought but its not going to happen.
-
Amendments should be free - if not a greatly reduced price if you've already shelled out for the original. But isn't there some argument for paying a little? Presumably somebody does just a little bit of work to produce these things(!) and lets face it - most people who want them are in business so should factor the cost in as part of their overheads. I have to comply with all sorts of legal and financial rubbish - the guidance on how to do that isn't free either, so why should these standards be?
The alternative to British Standards? Maybe we could rely on Wikepedia!? Who ever said the best things in life are free - clearly wasn't thinking about British Standards!
Ot there's always subscription to Barbour or technical indexes (if it still exists ) for those who need 100's of them.
BTW - I've got a fair few of them - so if anyone ever wants a quote or two from them - ask me!
-
DAVID, If you read what you have written, you will see no amendment is necessary. BS 5839-1 is quoting from BS EN 54-7 which IS a standard and so contains all shalls and not shoulds. So it is the voltage that under the EN a warning SHALL be given. BS 5839-1 is not recommending the warning, it is defining a voltage at which, for compiance with the EN it shall/must be given. it is a way of referencing a voltage. However, BS makes recommendations about the warning, correctly using the verb SHOULD.
...err no, it says "SHALL"
....not least for the reason that you cant have a shall in a code of practice.
5839 - a Code of Practice .... it says "Shall"
12.2.1 4) reduction of the battery voltage to less than the voltage specified in BS EN 54-4 at which a fault
warning shall be given (within 30 min of occurrence).
-
Although it would be nice to live in a world where everything is free, Sorry I have to agree with Colin.
If you look more into this where would this government funding stop!.
Bit of a silly example, but you will get the idea.
We all get our free fire alarm standards, we then tell Mr customer because of these standards he has to upgrade his hotels fire alarm to meet these standards and also we need a fire risk assessment doing, Mr customer gets on the phone to the magical money hotline who because this is all government forced standards on him they then give him the £10k he needs to sort it out.
Next day Mr Plumbing and heating man calls after reading his free copy of the tap the boiler and replace standards he tells mr customer the whole system does not meet standards and you are going to need a new system "sorry mate , it’s not me it’s the rules". Mr customer gets back on to the magical money hot line and orders £30k for the hotel heating system.
In the mean time Fire risk assessment man looks in his 20 different free standards ( he has to look at everything doors windows, walls, ceilings, electrics, furnishings etc so he needs loads of free standards) any way after 10 mins he comes back with your electrics need checking, fire doors are no good, you need to build some protected stairways, no fire extinguisher, you need some emergency lights the list went on. After reading his list he said " don’t worry Mr. customer I know all these trades people who all get free Standards and training and then you will be able to claim it all back from the magical money helpline because it’s the governments fault that you have to pay this money out.
Unfortunately everyone has their own hoops to jump through buying standards are one of ours, don't get me wrong I think BS5839-1 is way over priced when compared to BS7671 which comes as a proper book for half the money, but does anyone really think the government is going to subsidise all the British Standards, they turn over something like £250million a year and pay around £6 million in tax. I cannot see this being a vote winner for the political parties “ We are going to give free Standards away to all the trades people so they can make more money off Mr Customer, and Mr Public is going to pay for it”.
Nice thought but its not going to happen.
I'm not 100% on where you're coming from with that Thomas.If you are saying that once all the trades people are familar with the standards they are going to recommend all the recommendations contained within the current relevant standard I say fine -they should (if they are not a cowboy "I can throw a ***** system in (substitute relevant product in here)" type of company) be making the customer/client aware that their current system isn't up to the current recommendations/standards anyway as either (i) a duty under the standard or (ii) as a business opportunity.
In fact,if they were free/reduced it might make a lot of the less scrupulous more aware what they need to be doing and deter them from doing the work because they couldn't afford to do it right.
-
David, you have just done it again. Read what you wrote: its a list of things, one of which is the voltage at which BS EN 54-2 says a fault warning SHALL, now listen carefully SHALL, yes SHALL be given. At that voltage a fault warning SHOULD yes SHOULD, are you hearing me SHOULD I say it again SHOULD be given.
Here is the exact text:
A fault indication SHOULD be given, within the times indicated below, in the event of any of the
following:
1) failure of the main power supply to any part of the system (within 30 min of occurrence);
2) failure of the standby power supply (within 15 min of occurrence);
3) failure of the battery charger (within 30 min of occurrence);
4) reduction of the battery voltage to less than the voltage specified in BS EN 54-4 at which a fault
warning SHALL be given (within 30 min of occurrence).
-
Although it would be nice to live in a world where everything is free, Sorry I have to agree with Colin.
If you look more into this where would this government funding stop!.
Bit of a silly example, but you will get the idea.
We all get our free fire alarm standards, we then tell Mr customer because of these standards he has to upgrade his hotels fire alarm to meet these standards and also we need a fire risk assessment doing, Mr customer gets on the phone to the magical money hotline who because this is all government forced standards on him they then give him the £10k he needs to sort it out.
Next day Mr Plumbing and heating man calls after reading his free copy of the tap the boiler and replace standards he tells mr customer the whole system does not meet standards and you are going to need a new system "sorry mate , it’s not me it’s the rules". Mr customer gets back on to the magical money hot line and orders £30k for the hotel heating system.
In the mean time Fire risk assessment man looks in his 20 different free standards ( he has to look at everything doors windows, walls, ceilings, electrics, furnishings etc so he needs loads of free standards) any way after 10 mins he comes back with your electrics need checking, fire doors are no good, you need to build some protected stairways, no fire extinguisher, you need some emergency lights the list went on. After reading his list he said " don’t worry Mr. customer I know all these trades people who all get free Standards and training and then you will be able to claim it all back from the magical money helpline because it’s the governments fault that you have to pay this money out.
Unfortunately everyone has their own hoops to jump through buying standards are one of ours, don't get me wrong I think BS5839-1 is way over priced when compared to BS7671 which comes as a proper book for half the money, but does anyone really think the government is going to subsidise all the British Standards, they turn over something like £250million a year and pay around £6 million in tax. I cannot see this being a vote winner for the political parties “ We are going to give free Standards away to all the trades people so they can make more money off Mr Customer, and Mr Public is going to pay for it”.
Nice thought but its not going to happen.
Thomas, I agree that the Government are not likely to want to fund such things. As CT says they have even reduced their previous contribution to help fund BSI (or something like that) so you can see they are already using their time-honoured tradition of making business fund their ideas by indirect taxation of the population (through sales and services). This also has the secondary benefit for the Government of making it look like it is business creating the extra costs for everything and not the Government!
I find your analogy quite funny. It seems to be saying that the general population is currently saving money because trademen can't afford copies of the Standards and are therefore unaware of everything they should be doing and charging for! :)
-
David, you have just done it again. Read what you wrote: its a list of things, one of which is the voltage at which BS EN 54-2 says a fault warning SHALL, now listen carefully SHALL, yes SHALL be given. At that voltage a fault warning SHOULD yes SHOULD, are you hearing me SHOULD I say it again SHOULD be given.
Here is the exact text:
A fault indication SHOULD be given, within the times indicated below, in the event of any of the
following:
1) failure of the main power supply to any part of the system (within 30 min of occurrence);
2) failure of the standby power supply (within 15 min of occurrence);
3) failure of the battery charger (within 30 min of occurrence);
4) reduction of the battery voltage to less than the voltage specified in BS EN 54-4 at which a fault
warning SHALL be given (within 30 min of occurrence).
Oh well that explains it explains it then.....
-
I am not saying that Mr Customer is saving money by his tradesman not having Standards, I am a strong believer in that Fire Alarm Installers/Designers/ maintainers etc SHOULD be Qualified & Regulated (something like Corgi system).
When I am quoting for alarm work and I find out that they are getting bodge it and scarper to quote as well I always tell the customer to ask to see a copy of their BS5839-1-2002 and advise that if they do not have a copy how can they install it to the correct standard.
My story is just to demonstrate that if the Government is to fund such things where would it stop.
If we all want cheaper Standards we need competition to BSI, until then BSI are a rule to their selfs.
-
David, you have just done it again. Read what you wrote: its a list of things, one of which is the voltage at which BS EN 54-2 says a fault warning SHALL, now listen carefully SHALL, yes SHALL be given. At that voltage a fault warning SHOULD yes SHOULD, are you hearing me SHOULD I say it again SHOULD be given.
Here is the exact text:
A fault indication SHOULD be given, within the times indicated below, in the event of any of the
following:
1) failure of the main power supply to any part of the system (within 30 min of occurrence);
2) failure of the standby power supply (within 15 min of occurrence);
3) failure of the battery charger (within 30 min of occurrence);
4) reduction of the battery voltage to less than the voltage specified in BS EN 54-4 at which a fault
warning SHALL be given (within 30 min of occurrence).
Oh well that explains it explains it then.....
David, I hear what you are saying! It is certainly doing my own Mcdonalds milkshake 'in'
Can anyone explain it better?
I would if I could, I can't so I shan't. But I will try, if you won't, so it will have to do, even if it don't!
That gives you an idea of my own grasp of the English language!
But I think it is the nuances and subtleties of the English language that is the problem here.
I haven't been following this sub-thread properly (been busy with 7273-4!) so I don't know the background to this and I can't be bothered to look, but I'm assuming it is explaining why 'shall' is used in clause d) when 'should' is used elsewhere.
If I was to re-write clause d) in a way that I would understand, my own interpretation of it would be:
A fault indication should be given, within 30 minutes of occurance, in the event of
a reduction of the battery voltage to less than that particular specific voltage specified in BS EN 54-4 at which a fault warning is meant to be given by the circuit provided to monitor such a fault specified in BS EN 54-4.
I realise that the above is long-winded and possibly not grammatically correct, but it is my explanation of my interpretation of what is written (and I accept that I could be wrong with my interpretation as well!) but it does away with the 'shall' that I think is the crux of the confusion with the original.
-
If you are a student the standards are free to use.
If you are a business and you need these "tools" to make your business work and make money then you should have to pay for them. I'm not paying more taxes because the business world are unwilling to invest in the tools they need to do a job for me!
You don't get carpenters complaining about paying for saws, why would we complain about having to pay for our tools?
-
If you are a student the standards are free to use.
If you are a business and you need these "tools" to make your business work and make money then you should have to pay for them. I'm not paying more taxes because the business world are unwilling to invest in the tools they need to do a job for me!
You don't get carpenters complaining about paying for saws, why would we complain about having to pay for our tools?
Fire alarm engineers also pay for their own tools and are quite happy to do so. But if you think the tools analogy is the one most people understand, then how about the following scenario:
A carpenters buys a saw and also has to buy a set of instructions on how to use the saw in the way which 'one body of people' suggests is necessary. These instructions cost £200. Well worth the money if they are valid, for say, ten years and they are the definitive instructions.
The carpenter is then told just a year or two later that the instructions have been amended and now he will have to buy those as well. However, he can't pay for just the ammendments he has to pay for everything all over again.
The carpenter then finds there is 'another body of people' who come up with further instructions that he is also expected to know about.
The carpenter then finds there is a 'further body of people' who think of something 'worth' adding to the instructions.
The carpenter then finds that all the instructions he has relates only to his saw and he also needs to buy further instructions for his hammer, plane, screwdrivers, bradawl etc etc.!!!!
My dream is of one body setting one set of rules and recommendations paid for out of taxpayer's money and available to those thet need them at production and distribution cost only.
This would apply equally to electricians, plumbers, builders, accountants, solicitors, waste disposal operatives etc etc. In fact, anyone who is expected to adhere to a set of rules and recommendations.
This system would ensure that there would never be any superfluous rules and recommendations and the costs would be kept at a minimum for everyone.
You must appreciate that these costs are currently being borne by every customer anyway. Who do you think ends up paying for all the guidance, instructions, training courses, third party inspections anyway? The government would like things to stay like this, because it appears that these costs are being levied by the service provider instead of the government. You tell a householder that a tradesman costs £40 an hour they gulp. They don't appreciate that 'overheads' swallows over 60% of this charge!
Obviously the tradesman who is paying for all the necessary guidance, standards, training courses and thirds party inspections has to pass the cost on to someone. Furthermore, he can't therefore be competitive in relation to those that don't! This means the government is complicit in the widespread nature of poor standards in many areas.
I know my dream will never happen, but we have to keep making sure people know about how the real world works and how they are paying through the nose for much that could be streamlined. In fact the government encourages it because it 'stimulates' the economy and produces tax income. The last thing they want is for people to have saved enough money to retire. The government policy is to 'make most of the population earn, pay taxes and then spend the rest ,until they die'!
All trades suffer from a plethora of costly rules and recommendations. Read what 'mike the boilerman' has to put up with:
www.miketheboilerman.com/newboilercost.htm
-
BS7273-4 Costs £168 (member = £84)
That was published in 2007, so to date that has cost you £6.22 a month.
How many jobs have you done since April 2007? Im sure by putting a few pence extra on each job (inflation!) you can cover the costs of the new guides.
If the taxpayer were to pay for EVERY industry's guides the majority of people would not be too happy.
Yes we need to keep up to date and that costs money, but you've got to spend to earn.
Im sure alot of people going off to university would like the taxpayer to pay for their education which is ultimately going to benefit the general public but thats not going to happen. Think about all the young Doctors in training, their education must cost thousands and one day they may save the life of someone near and dear to you. They pay their own fees.
I think in the grand scheme of things its not alot to ask.
In all honesty how much have you spent on British Standards in the last 10 years? Its not alot to ask that you keep up to date, especially as you're making money off of that gained knowledge
-
BS7273-4 Costs £168 (member = £84)
That was published in 2007, so to date that has cost you £6.22 a month.
How many jobs have you done since April 2007? Im sure by putting a few pence extra on each job (inflation!) you can cover the costs of the new guides.
If the taxpayer were to pay for EVERY industry's guides the majority of people would not be too happy.
Yes we need to keep up to date and that costs money, but you've got to spend to earn.
Im sure alot of people going off to university would like the taxpayer to pay for their education which is ultimately going to benefit the general public but thats not going to happen. Think about all the young Doctors in training, their education must cost thousands and one day they may save the life of someone near and dear to you. They pay their own fees.
I think in the grand scheme of things its not alot to ask.
In all honesty how much have you spent on British Standards in the last 10 years? Its not alot to ask that you keep up to date, especially as you're making money off of that gained knowledge
Piglet everyone is entitled to their own opinion - no matter how ******* stupid it is! :)
You have your opinion and I have mine.
£6.22 per month certainly sounds cheap - but only if I needed the one standard and if it was the definitive guide and recommendation. Why do building regs, DDA huggers, and the assistant deputy chief fire officer of the Isle of Nowhere also get the opportunity to produce recommendations in variance with my £6.22 (and falling until it is amended) per month BS?
I also understand that University education and medical school is currently subsidised somewhat for UK students. Just check how much overseas students have to pay for the same courses. These used to be totally free of charge to UK students and they even gave them living expenses!!!! This was before the government made further education a way to keep youngsters off the unemployment figures. The problem now is that the system has produced thousands of people with degrees that employers consider are worthless. So these kids are now on unemployment benefits at 21-25 instead of 16. You're right! Why should we all pay anything towards this sort of thing. Let them pay to just delay joining the dole queue all themselves!
Since you asked, I would estimate that in the last ten years the cost to me of buying British standards, learning them, discussing them on forums, answering my customer's questions about them, to be in the region of £4,350,324.35 (approximately) at my current charge out rates! Add to that the swimming pool of tears shed, sleepless nights pondering 'shalls' and 'shoulds' is it any wonder that I am old, broken down and poor!
I won't even mention the impact of the cost of my son's own university education. (he's still there after 7 years!) that I added to all my customer's invoices. As I previously said someone has to pay for it, and if we are not going to share it, then just a few have to pay more!
I don't expect you to agree with my opinion but I reserve the right to hold it.
Nothing you have said yet convinces me to give up my dream. ;)
-
You're debating skills are very argumentitive, "no matter how ******** stupid it is" That makes me not want to read the rest of your post and i thought this forum was about sharing ideas not trying to bully yours into being the best! So im not going to continue with this post ( :P) but i will say........
My dream is having a nice big house, lots of money, lots of laughs and a healthy happy life.
If your dream is cheaper British Standards you need to take a break ;D
-
You're debating skills are very argumentitive, "no matter how ******** stupid it is" That makes me not want to read the rest of your post and i thought this forum was about sharing ideas not trying to bully yours into being the best! So im not going to continue with this post ( :P) but i will say........
My dream is having a nice big house, lots of money, lots of laughs and a healthy happy life.
If your dream is cheaper British Standards you need to take a break ;D
Well Piglet, I was actually talking about my own opinions in what I hoped was a light-hearted way !!!
You now say "i thought this forum was about sharing ideas not trying to bully yours into being the best!"
Do you know what? - Well so did I!
-
BS7273-4 Costs £168 (member = £84)
That was published in 2007, so to date that has cost you £6.22 a month.
How many jobs have you done since April 2007? Im sure by putting a few pence extra on each job (inflation!) you can cover the costs of the new guides.
You make some valid point Piglet but the actual cost to my business could run into thousands and thousands simply because there are those few amongst us who try and follow all the rules to the best of our ability, and there is everybody else be they jack of all electricians or large national fire companies that ignore the likes of 7273-4.
I think its generally accepted (ish) that presently there may be one addressable loop powered I/O unit that will meet the failsafe criteria for a Cat A door.
The only other way this can be achieved to comply with 7273-4 that I can see is by running separate cables back to the control panel.
This is additional cost, this loses me jobs. Does the customer care ... No.
Yes he should care, yes he may end up in prison, but he probably doesn't even know the Standard exists or the risks because my 15 page quote and specification doesn't make it passed the electrical contractor I'm quoting to because he gets a cheaper quote from dodgy git inc.
-
Where is this restaurant that keeps on being mentioned. It must be good. I'd like to try it !!!!!
-
I think its generally accepted (ish) that presently there may be one addressable loop powered I/O unit that will meet the failsafe criteria for a Cat A door.
Which one is that David?
The only other way this can be achieved to comply with 7273-4 that I can see is by running separate cables back to the control panel.
David, In the 7273-4 thread I've only just posted that it appears that Ampac Firefinder appears suitable for the 'seperate wires' method. Which other panels do you know have the 'disablement' relay or where disablements operate the fault relay?
-
I think its generally accepted (ish) that presently there may be one addressable loop powered I/O unit that will meet the failsafe criteria for a Cat A door.
Which one is that David?
The secret one that no one will talk about.....!!!
The only other way this can be achieved to comply with 7273-4 that I can see is by running separate cables back to the control panel.
David, In the 7273-4 thread I've only just posted that it appears that Ampac Firefinder appears suitable for the 'seperate wires' method. Which other panels do you know have the 'disablement' relay or where disablements operate the fault relay?
Just replied to that as well.... Syncro does it......