The Principal Concern
The Principal Concern
It is alleged that manufacturer non-compliance has occurred and a formal approach has been made to the HSE on the matter. Full details on the website but essentially concerns the existence of two technically different gas fires with precisely the same name and GC Number. In addition only one MI is published though two very different MI are known to exist. An unacceptable situation.
Website Published Information
To answer a question, the manufacturers could easily have posted both MI online. In addition of course, details of the means to enable people to determine which MI is appropriate to which download. That could easily be established by way of serial numbers. I have no doubt the manufacturers hold that data. And yes, I know this is patently obvious. Which begs the question, why did the manufacturers not do this.
The big snag is that this would advertise to the world (including competitors) that there are two different MI for very different appliances bearing precisely the same name and precisely the same GC Number. To advertise both would increase the risk of being discovered by the authorities because they know this is not compliant.
It can not be compliant.
The big snag is that this would advertise to the world (including competitors) that there are two different MI for very different appliances bearing precisely the same name and precisely the same GC Number. To advertise both would increase the risk of being discovered by the authorities because they know this is not compliant.
It can not be compliant.
Why not change the appliance
To answer another lay question I can only speculated. The question asked is why the manufacturer does not simply declare a new model of gas fire, for example a MKII version of the same gas fire with its own MI.
Done correctly this could not later cause any confusion. However a new GC Number would be required and that would subject the appliance (and the MI I imagine), to the scrutiny of an approved ‘Notified Body’.
The latter I am sure would cost real money for what I accept is for the most part the same appliance. That said, the speculated alteration must have a profound impact on the performance of the gas fire.
The manufacturer has no doubt like most people been impacted by the horrors of £ovid 19 but that is no excuse for circumventing compliance issues.
Done correctly this could not later cause any confusion. However a new GC Number would be required and that would subject the appliance (and the MI I imagine), to the scrutiny of an approved ‘Notified Body’.
The latter I am sure would cost real money for what I accept is for the most part the same appliance. That said, the speculated alteration must have a profound impact on the performance of the gas fire.
The manufacturer has no doubt like most people been impacted by the horrors of £ovid 19 but that is no excuse for circumventing compliance issues.