That does indeed suck huge hairy plums and I feel for him and your family. Fingers crossed!!!!
My big point has been made several times. But you are avoiding it.
Hopefully my previous post will help a little.
Concerning CET recondition pcb's
- Thread starter Manlow
- Start date
That does indeed suck huge hairy plums and I feel for him and your family. Fingers crossed!!!!
My big point has been made several times. But you are avoiding it.
Hopefully my previous post will help a little.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Messages
- 1,076
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
All has nothing to do with manufacturer's declarations of conformity which Geoff is skirting - poorly.
Manufacturers declarations of conformity are nothing to do with me, the board ALREADY has a CE mark
But then he and I have been there before haven't we?.
He can test all he likes, but will he declare conformity?
why ? its not a new board it had a CE mark when manufactured
Repeatedly he says his replaced components are better... but who says?
like for like or better better means e.g. sealed bearings rather than shielded, capacitors rated at 105C rather than 85 C, resistor with higher power rating - the pcb still conforms to the original spec
My background is in military and space hardware - I understand these things which seem to be beyond you
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Messages
- 1,076
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
Your background is irrelevent.
The board was declared by the manufacturer as per their production specs. THe moment one of your people start changing bits it no longer conforms to what the manufacturer have declared.
You might buy a GS2-R-24 relay, but will you stand by the purchaser if that relay caused a board fault (for arguments sake a gas valve held open after the OH stat kicked in) which subsequently toasted the end user's kitchen?
The board was declared by the manufacturer as per their production specs. THe moment one of your people start changing bits it no longer conforms to what the manufacturer have declared.
You might buy a GS2-R-24 relay, but will you stand by the purchaser if that relay caused a board fault (for arguments sake a gas valve held open after the OH stat kicked in) which subsequently toasted the end user's kitchen?
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Messages
- 1,076
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
Dan_Robinson";p="3261470 said:
Colour blind are we?
eeerrrmmm???? Do they teleport themselves to the boiler housing?
Where is it implicit? Your T's and C's were written by a complete ******. They refer only to workmanship and not component failure. They mention nothing about replacing parts of the board and subsequent shifting of liabilities from the manufacturer to CET or the purchaser.
Cowboys.- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Messages
- 1,076
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
We'll take that as a no then?
Nighty night.
Nighty night.
Seeing as Radon's word of the evening is "implicit". In that last quoted line from his website, it is "implicit" that repairing and reconditioning are two difference things.
The site seems to be down at the minute (surprise?), but I am sure his price listings call EVERYTHING "refurbished", so that is four different processes
Seems CETltd.com has been taken down completely.
http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/www.cetltd.com
http://www.isitdownrightnow.com/cetltd.com.html
T's & C's:
Google cache can be a real barsteward when you have something to hide.
http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/www.cetltd.com
http://www.isitdownrightnow.com/cetltd.com.html
T's & C's:
Google cache can be a real barsteward when you have something to hide.
Dan
It sounds like you're implying that works or repairs should not be undertaken on assemblies unless by those working for or authorised by the manufacturer and using manufacturers parts, owing to risks of the type you've highlighted above?
If that was the case the repair of anything industry would not exist, car dealerships (say) would have extraordinary monopoly and all white good repairers have authorisations from each manufacturer.
This is regardless of background, qualification or understanding (collectively called competence) of those undertaking the repair.
No, I'm asking if Geoff will assume the liability.
If you put an aftermarket tuning box in your car, do you expect the manufacturer to honour the warranty on the injectors? Even though though the Tuning house claims it is better?
Nope.
If you put an aftermarket tuning box in your car, do you expect the manufacturer to honour the warranty on the injectors? Even though though the Tuning house claims it is better?
Nope.
I come from a different industry but I've just read this thread and believe the same principles apply here.... Here's how it works in my industry:
1) Manufacturer R&D's a new product (e.g. Boiler)
2) New product is sent to independent 3rd party lab for testing against all necessary EU standards e.g. LVD (2006/95/EC), Gas Appliances Directive (2009/142/EEC) etc etc
3) Responsible person at manufacturer uses results from 2) to give them the reassurance to sign a Declaration of Conformity (DoC).
NOTE: Where safety is concerned, the Responsible person in 3) above is PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE (hence the need to do 2) as it will be them, not the company who is ultimately hold to account, regardless if it's Ltd or Plc)
If a 3rd party was to repair / refurbish / modify the PCB in any way, it would have to go through 2) above to be approved by the manufacturer. IMHO there is no way that a manufacturer would accept liability for any 3rd party repair to OEM PCBs and no 3rd party can claim a modified PCB complies with the manufacturers DoC unless they have the reams of test results as carried out in 2) above.
Just my opinion on the topic from someone who has bought 1,000's of products to market which have PCBs in them!
The fact that a replacement component has the same markings on the outside has no bearing on if it complies with DoC. The supply chain of said components in not known to the manufacturer or likely to the 3rd party, just because it says "Abc" doesn't mean it really is "Abc" or built to the same standards as original "Abc"!
1) Manufacturer R&D's a new product (e.g. Boiler)
2) New product is sent to independent 3rd party lab for testing against all necessary EU standards e.g. LVD (2006/95/EC), Gas Appliances Directive (2009/142/EEC) etc etc
3) Responsible person at manufacturer uses results from 2) to give them the reassurance to sign a Declaration of Conformity (DoC).
NOTE: Where safety is concerned, the Responsible person in 3) above is PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE (hence the need to do 2) as it will be them, not the company who is ultimately hold to account, regardless if it's Ltd or Plc)
If a 3rd party was to repair / refurbish / modify the PCB in any way, it would have to go through 2) above to be approved by the manufacturer. IMHO there is no way that a manufacturer would accept liability for any 3rd party repair to OEM PCBs and no 3rd party can claim a modified PCB complies with the manufacturers DoC unless they have the reams of test results as carried out in 2) above.
Just my opinion on the topic from someone who has bought 1,000's of products to market which have PCBs in them!
The fact that a replacement component has the same markings on the outside has no bearing on if it complies with DoC. The supply chain of said components in not known to the manufacturer or likely to the 3rd party, just because it says "Abc" doesn't mean it really is "Abc" or built to the same standards as original "Abc"!
Exactly. . Yet the owner of CET is saying that he sources the same or better quality components and that is all that is necessary.
In truth I don't care if his wares are better or worse than the originals.
It is the trail of culpability should there be a problem that I am interested in.
In truth I don't care if his wares are better or worse than the originals.
It is the trail of culpability should there be a problem that I am interested in.
I'm no legal expert, however I would say that if a competent person knowingly fitted a 3rd party modified PCB (in whatever form that takes), they would be liable to the customer (I doubt you can legally disclaim against it either from a safety POV). The competent person would then make a case against the 3rd party that modified it, perhaps for negligence, false claims etc
Unless it can be proven that the same fault exists on a unmodified product, the manufacturer won't be liable.
Just my opinion....
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
