The end of the extinguisher servicing industry?

[Tom Sutton]

I now have a price list for extinguishers from NFRS (Trading) Ltd and the top price is around fifty pounds for class A extinguishers but the manufacturers are not shown. Therefore at those prices I would assume they do not stock fireworld.

[nearlythere]

I now have a price list for extinguishers from NFRS (Trading) Ltd and the top price is around fifty pounds for class A extinguishers but the manufacturers are not shown. Therefore at those prices I would assume they do not stock fireworld.

£50? Time I plied my wares over there.

[AnthonyB]

Possibly Jewel Saffire now as they were using Saffire just before they sold out.

£50 is about right for a decent mark up but as there is no money in the industry any more (& why standards have slipped) it can be undercut. Depending which make I put in I will charge less.

[AnthonyB]

Back to the OP I made, my regular trawl of manufacturer's has revealed that despite all the hoo-ha about the P50 range being maintenance free, in fact it only doesn't need a 5 year extended service but still needs an annual basic service by a competent person in addition to user checks, so much for 'no service required'........

[alwaysright]

Anthony reference your comments on the P50 fire extinguisher, I am not sure where you are getting your information from ?

May I suggest you actually visit Britannia Fire and we can go through the benefits - or quite simply you can continue to comment via hear say.

Please either drop me an email andy.spence@britannia-fire.co.uk or call me on 01508 488416

[lancsfirepro]

Regardless of whether these highly expensive extinguisher do or do not need annual maintenance by a competent person, part of the annual extinguisher service is to keep an eye on whether the cover is the correct type for the risks and sufficient in quantity.  You may argue that the fire risk assessment reviews should monitor this but in my experience this does not usually happen.
I cannot see a use for these extinguishers.  They were very quickly filed alongside the water mist extinguisher in my mind.

[Tom Sutton]

I cannot see a use for these extinguishers.  They were very quickly filed alongside the water mist extinguisher in my mind.

Check out Safelincs answer to your statement. http://www.safelincs-forum.co.uk/topic/697-maintenance-free-extinguishers/?hl=britannia#entry1164

[AnthonyB]

Anthony reference your comments on the P50 fire extinguisher, I am not sure where you are getting your information from ?

May I suggest you actually visit Britannia Fire and we can go through the benefits - or quite simply you can continue to comment via hear say.

Please either drop me an email andy.spence@britannia-fire.co.uk or call me on 01508 488416

The information is from your own latest brochure, I quote:

MAINTENANCE INSPECTION
The extinguisher maintenance programme is a simple
two step process which staff members can carry out on a
monthly basis.
-Visually check for damage
-Check the gauges are showing operational
pressure in green segment

"Yearly inspection by trained personnel or a Britannia
appointed distributor (giving third party qualification).
- Visually check for damage
-Check the gauges are showing operational
pressure using a magnet to zero - on removal the
gauge will show it is operational. If the pressure is in
the red segment refill under the 10 year
maintenance instructions
-Check the base for damage and
check the manufactured indicator is
within the 10 year life span
-Record inspection detail on the back of the
extinguisher (using a permanent marker) and in the
company log book"

Now I thought that the great idea behind the P50 wasn't just the use of a corrosion proof body, but the initial press suggested it was maintenance free and the double gauge was to allow the user to check without the danger from seized needles.

Yet your latest literature implies an annual service inspection is still required and for most customers who won't be training in house staff this will usually entail the cost of a service visit. I have read the linked forum that says the user gets trained and gauge magnets issued on purchase though - if this is the case, then I can see how it is still an attractive option.

But if I read your brochure alone it doesn't make it clear If I bought one I'd be able to do the service.

So it's great for marine use and places with in house trained staff (which should be all?) and 10 years between extended service is a definite cost saver not seen since Nu Swift's factory sealed powders.

I have suggested a few sites where these would be great, I'm not totally anti them, just a little confused (not by hear say but by official literature).

Now if you bring out a CO2 as well you will be on to something (I always thought you couldn't put a gauge on a CO2 but I have seen it done by a reputable and innovative Indian manufacturer).

[lancsfirepro]

I cannot see a use for these extinguishers.  They were very quickly filed alongside the water mist extinguisher in my mind.

Check out Safelincs answer to your statement. http://www.safelincs-forum.co.uk/topic/697-maintenance-free-extinguishers/?hl=britannia#entry1164

That link has no relevance to my previous post.

[Tom Sutton]

I cannot see a use for these extinguishers.  They were very quickly filed alongside the water mist extinguisher in my mind.

Check out Safelincs answer to your statement. http://www.safelincs-forum.co.uk/topic/697-maintenance-free-extinguishers/?hl=britannia#entry1164

That link has no relevance to my previous post.

You say "I cannot see a use for these extinguishers" but the link shows they are cost effective over the ten years which is a good reason for the RP to use them.

[lancsfirepro]

You missed my point, but for the record, they might be cost effective over Safelincs extremely high service prices, but not necessarily over everyone else's.  The example is based on a premises having one of these extinguishers - should there be a requirement for a higher quantity then the service cost per 'standard' unit would drop.  They also picked a powder extinguisher for the example which is most costly to maintain discharge wise.
Now, if you read what I was actually saying, my dismissing these extinguishers wasn't based on cost (that's an easy argument) but an ongoing check that the level of cover is correct.

[alwaysright]

The exinguisher is proving a huge success and solving a whole host of problems that the industry has had since the arrival of cheap chinese products.

We are a British Manufacturer and proud of what we have developed, we are all aware of the corrosion problems with extinguishers and we are all aware of issues in the Industry - the main one being, there are an awful lot of people out there servicing (allegedly) extinguishers for such a small amount of money it beggars belief, that they are indeed servicing the units correctly.

When we launched the P50 some people said that they wanted the option of a third party carrying out a compliance check and we indeed reacted and we published a new brochure.

Ps My offer of a visit still stands !

Pps the hear say quote, this was put because you said you had done your rounds !
 

[lancsfirepro]

Although it pains me to admit it, the quality of some of more expensive Chinese manufactured kit is way and above that of some of the UK manufactured product.  It's a shame but I can honestly say that as of this moment in time I have no interest in any available UK manufactured extinguishers based on 1) Price, 2) Quality, and in the case of your standard offering, appearance.

When we launched the P50 some people said that they wanted the option of a third party carrying out a compliance check and we indeed reacted and we published a new brochure.

So what you're saying is that you manufactured an expensive maintenance-free extinguisher, sold it to the end user and then they said to you that they need to have it maintained by a third party?  Seems like an expensive mistake.  So they need to have it maintained then.  To what, BS5306-3? - unfortunately that standard doesn't apply to plastic bodied extinguishers.

[AnthonyB]

I'd love to visit actually. For a while in the late 90's I would supply your extinguishers and only really stopped on their cost, yet continue to use Britannia cartridge water's and foams for training as they withstand the constant discharging, stripping and recharging and being thrown around (I mean appropriately transported! ) by our trainers.

Lancspro is correct that the once great UK industry isn't what it once was - one UK manufacturer has gone offshore in recent years and others have some QC issues, trying to find an extinguisher that lasts is difficult, Amerex is still there, your product (when I come across it, which is sadly rare since the demise of the original FPS, Broton Fire and Peterlee's switch to Zhejiang Winner) hasn't failed me, there isn't much else that stands out, although UTC's move back to the EU with Chubb and now for the trade TG Product's new ranges may change this.

Some of your customer's say they need third party servicing - did they say who told them - insurers or fire officers? Certainly as long as by following your user instructions for checks you would state a customer is following a "suitable system of maintenance" and the P50 is thus "maintained in an efficient state, in efficient working order and in good repair" there should be no need for annual external servicing as the requirements of the Fire Safety Order are met.

BS5306-3 does frown on non metal extinguishers, although to be fair in the UK previously only plastic extinguishers were in widespread use, mainly the small cartridge powders by Fireward that everyone from Betterware to Angus Fire in the 60's,70's and 80's (Although an experimental cartridge water was made in the 1970's for the MoD, one of the rarer extinguishers I have). The problem with these, like with plastic headcaps, is assessing stability of the shell against UV decay or damage that could result in rupture when pressurising.

However the P50 isn't a plastic extinguisher, it's a double shell, the inner kevlar composite pressure bearing part being protected by the outer polyethylene shell - so UV can't hurt it where it would be a risk. And for impact to be enough to even potentially threaten the inner shell it would have to be so substantial that the outer shell would be visually damaged/deformed.

BS5306-3 would need to be amended to account for this new technology - as they allowed for Nu Swift's exclusive product design then they could accomodate this.

You should do a water mist one and then you can rival Jewel (Class A,B,F) & SFFECO's (Class A,B,C,D,F) latest ideas....

The concept is growing on me!

[alwaysright]

Anthony, your reply is encouraging...lets set up a visit ASAP you will be amazed how good this product is compared to normal extinguishers.

And yes you are right this is not a plastic extinguisher ....this extinguisher is for the record twice as strong as steel !

Also for  the record we do a 12,000 cycle test on this unit , that means it is filled on a rig and holds pressure (25 bar) for 3 seconds then released 12,000 times it takes 3.5 days ........ thenm it is crushed then it is burts - max pressure and it exceeds 80 bar consistently ...the standrad for metal is 55 bar