Hypothetical Situation

[Midland Retty]

This is, I guess, mainly aimed at the enforcers and consultants out there.

Hypothetical Situation:-

You are an enforcer or consultant and you request the installation of a fire warning and detection system to BS 5839 Part 1 at "such and such" a premises.

After a month you revisit and find the system has been installed, looks to be of the correct standard, no indication it has been incorrectly installed etc.

You are happy with the system but clearly would like the design, installation and commissioning certs to cover your back. The contractor states he has forgotten the certification.
You say he can forward it onto you by post / email / fax etc

Two weeks go by still no certificates, you chase it and chase it but nothing comes, and the contractor stops taking your calls.

What action would you take ?.

Discuss>

[nearlythere]

This is, I guess, mainly aimed at the enforcers and consultants out there.

Hypothetical Situation:-

You are an enforcer or consultant and you request the installation of a fire warning and detection system to BS 5839 Part 1 at "such and such" a premises.

After a month you revisit and find the system has been installed, looks to be of the correct standard, no indication it has been incorrectly installed etc.

You are happy with the system but clearly would like the design, installation and commissioning certs to cover your back. The contractor states he has forgotten the certification.
You say he can forward it onto you by post / email / fax etc

Two weeks go by still no certificates, you chase it and chase it but nothing comes, and the contractor stops taking your calls.

What action would you take ?.

Discuss>

Why is it necessary for the consultant to cover his/her back? Is the matter of getting certification not the RPs problem?
From the enforcers point of view I would suggest it is not to BS5839 unless the certs are provided to say so.

[Golden]

The consultant may have been responsible for specifying and project managing on behalf of the client in which case there would be a problem. The installer shouldn't have been paid until they provided the certificates - unless of course this wasn't covered in the specification in which case the installer may want more money.

A solicitors letter may help if persistence gets you nowhere.

[kurnal]

Who was the contract for the supply and installation between? I bet it wasn't the consultant. Its a common scenario. I just take revenge by finding the inevitable breaches of 5839 - and bringing them to the attention of whoever footed the bull. The more they stall the closer I look.

If after a good look at the wiring, (especially the cable routings and fixings) the choice and siting of the detectors,, the sounders and the panel and thorough cause and effect testing I can find nothing wrong then theres nothing much to worry about and I just recommend the client pursues the installer for the certs.  But generally there are many variations (or more likely deviations) and so you can use that as a lever especially if they are Bafe or LPC accredited. If they are not then trading standards is also a useful threat.

[colin todd]

Retters, not a simple one. Give me a ring if you want to discuss.

[David Rooney]

The installer shouldn't have been paid until they provided the certificates - unless of course this wasn't covered in the specification in which case the installer may want more money.

A lot of installers won't supply certificates until they get paid in full.

A lot of client's tend to make up any excuse they can at the end of a job not to pay or to reduce the final account.

And it's still the case that 9.5 out of 10 end users have no idea what documentation they should be receiving following completion hence all these years on there is still no meaningful regulation of installers.

This means it doesn't matter if you're crap you just get your money and ride off into the sunset.....

[Golden]

The installer shouldn't have been paid until they provided the certificates - unless of course this wasn't covered in the specification in which case the installer may want more money.

A lot of installers won't supply certificates until they get paid in full.

The first time I came across this situation was carrying out a FRA where the builders who had sub-contracted the FA installers had gone bust so there were no certificates, etc. - when I was still waiting to get paid nine months later I understood why they had gone bust!!

It is a chicken/egg situation but I wouldn't pay in full until the job was complete which means having the correct certification; I didn't pay the builders on my recent extension until I had the BC seal of approval - how can you be sure the system is fully tested and compliant - I suppose its down to ensuring you get the right installer in the first place and trusting their professionalism.

[Midland Retty]

Thanks for the replies so far folks.

I normally pursue the same route as Kurnal, and just wondered how others tackled the issue

In particular I was wondering how our dear fire inspectors dealt with this. Is it worth their while chasing bits of paper? If it came to it what type enforcement action would they use (if any)?

[AnthonyB]

Although the bits of paper are important, i would be more bothered with the actual physical standard of work.

I've seen jobs without the certificate that are more than adequate and compliant, whilst seen those with certificates that make you wonder if the certifying engineer had actually been anywhere near the site!