Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Tim,
the model number is required, but also how old is the dryer and has it just started to do this? I’m curious as I’v ehad one or two do this on an intermitant basis (the engineers worst nightmare) and I’d like to solve the puzzle. It bugs me. 😉
K.
Re: UK Whitegoods Meeting 4 – Feb 05
So it’s late, nothing new there for me. Some of us work for a living you know! 😆
UKW4 will have a presentation by Proctor & Gamble on their products and some of the analysis of studies caried out on our industry, specifically independent repairers. I’ve had a preview of some of this stuff and trust me, it is incredibly interesting as well as directly related to what we do for a living. If nothing else it should be worth attending for this presentation alone.
For those of you that are not aware of who Proctor & Gamble are, they manufacture Ariel, Daz, Bold, Fairy, Fairy dishwasher products as well a whole heap of other stuff. Loads of product that relates to our little industry.
As yet to be confirmed there will also be a presentation by one of the companies leading the charge in the UK with regard to the WEEE Directive as well, more on that to follow. They will explain all about it and the implications of the directive.
If anyone knows anyone that can help us on the Part P issue then please let me know.
This promises to be the most informative meeting to date.
K.
Re: P&G
Mr Claus (which personally I think is an anagram of “calus” ;)) need not worry about bringing me any more pressies this year, fate has done enough thanks. 😆
I suppose I’d better start to build it up then….
K.
Re: Part P Or Not To Part P
Maybe it is untrue, I don’t knwo and that’s why I asked as the text used in the document is at best unclear. But I would point out that as yet no-one has yet come up with a, “no it doesn’t affect us”. 😕
It is crazy, but even just a quick scan tells you that the whole document is crazy, no wonder the sparkies are going mental about it.
K.
Laurence let me have a look in the morning as I may well have one you can have for a reasonable donation to UKW funds. 😉
Need to check it but I have quite a few of the older Smeg and Brandt ones knocking about.
K.
No Richard, I have been told that it affect “any fixed or portable appliance” and yes, I know it’s insane. I also spoke to one of the kitchen guys here this morning and they are under the impression that their sparks must comply to fit appliances to spur.
To be honest I really think it’s a bit of clarity that’s needed on this just so we all know where we stand on it.
My initial understanding of Part P was as yours is, that if you didn’t touch any of the wiring to the consumer unit, i.e. anything that’s in the wall, then it did not affect you. Doubt is now being cast on that assumption.
CORGI for electricity methinks. 🙁
K.
Email them to me Gerryo at kwatt@nwar.co.uk and I’ll deal with it.
K.
On most installations, if they are correct, a built in appliance should be on a switched spur with the isolation switch above the counter top so as the customer can isolate a faulty appliance without having to de-install the machine. Particularly useful when an oven, for example, blows trips with the power applied. I keep trying to tell builders this but the cost of that switch seems too much on £100,000 property to bear. 😕
However there are more than a few out there that are installed in such a manner, for example almost every single Wimpey Homes building would be installed like that, so almost all the appliances (up to 8 per house) are hard wired to a spur.
Often you’ll see both the hob and oven linked into the 30A cooker spur, of course a ceramic or induction hob requires this and all are therefore hard-wired.
And if you got to http://www.partp.co.uk/ and select the “who it affects” thing, direct link is this:
http://www.partp.co.uk/willit.asp
then select: 4.1 Installing a new circuit e.g. shower or cooker?
Tell it “Yes” and you will see that it does come under the remit of Part P.
Havve a nice day. 🙁
K.
Re: Part P Or Not To Part P
In all honesty, if this is correct then the manufacturers had better get clarification as well as it will mean that a repair to ANY appliance not on a plugtop is outlawed unless you are certified to test them. There is also no way on God’s green Earth that we’d get the training in time at this stage as the courses are already full of sparks wanting the qualifications.
It will also lead to something of a rate review within the industry, if you can even get a person qualified to repair it. I should also suspect that many an OEM service arm will be squirming about now.
That said, if it correct I may as well wind down the business as 60{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} or more of the appliances that we repair or install will be hard-wired to the mains! 🙁
So much for DASA keeping us abreast of current legislation! 🙄
K.
Oh yeah, I fully intend to give it a bit of room and see what pans out as the way in which this has been done is excellent since it’s very hard for anyone to argue our figures. I actually said to the Scottish rep that I would not prioritise De Dietrich punters as it was a money losing exercise, that didn’t go down too well and he’s off to moan at Manoj as well now. 😀
With enough pressure on them Brandt will have to come up with something and, even switching work provider will not solve the problem as the only other place they can go is CDSL. I doubt they’ve a hope in hell there as the network couldn’t handle it and they know the problems already with Brandt, plus CDSL will want to handle the spares which defeats the object of having Agora to some extent although they could get around that.
We’ll see how it pans out.
K.
Penguin45 wrote:It’s a fascinating thread – how should we SPEND the subscribers money? And we’re not – we’re working out ways to save us all money (which is brill!). Putting it in a rainy day slush fund is admirable – but we ain’t spending any!
It is indeed a facinating thread and, for now, there’s no immediate action that we have to take but I think it’s better being discussed and decided upon sooner rather than later. I mean right now there’s only a grand or so there, but what happens when there’s £20K or more there?
I just feel that we have to find direction with it and use it effectively.
Penguin45 wrote:If we are a bit ahead at the moment, I would suggest giving a decent chunk to the tech bods who keep us on-line and maybe buying yourself a decent evening out (You’re going to say no if I say “Stick it in your pocket – you deserve it”).
Not a chance! There’s NO WAY I want any of that money and neither do Dave or Kevin, nor does Trevor or Li so your not getting away with giving it away that easily! 😆
Penguin45 wrote:When you get down to it, the influence we are projecting doesn’t need actual cash – a bit in reserve is always handy – but it’s not really what it’s about.
Correct. However there are quite a few things that we can do, we just need a bit of time and a lot more support to get it doing. As was said earlier, the possibilities are endless really on what we can do.
Penguin45 wrote:If some of our “benefits” come about from this thread, nothing really changes. Our day to day work continues at the open forum level – free to all – and maybe we can encourage others to join us at this level.
I think that’s the way forward for now and, as we add more benefits to being a subscriber through time and we can demonstrate them in a tangible form then it will grow substantially. What we’re all doing for free is fantastic, look at the effects already both within the trade and with the general public.
I know I keep going on about this but, in 18 months, nearly 2 million page views, nearly 2000 members, God knows how many service calls done by those listed, ditto spares sold… not one single complaint! In fact, quite the opposite all we’ve had is praise for what we’re doing so, in my book, we’re doing something right and people like it.
Penguin45 wrote:Personally, I think a fiver a month is too cheap, but how do you justify change when we’re still not coming up with SPENDING options!!
I agree with that, it is not a lot but then when we set it up we were not antisipating the possible uses for such funding, now we are and it may have to change in time depending on what WE want to do with it. But it remains the subscribers money, not that of UKW Ltd and it will always be so, full stop.
I have always said that there are other ways to get funding for what’s being done and I stand by that statement, in time I’ll prove it. UKW Ltd and letting us get on with doing stuff for the troops as well as earning a living can be accomplished in a myriad of other ways, there’s no call to take money from those that can least afford to part with it.
K. (modern day Robin Hood ;))
Re: brandt
I don’t think it’s a case of ganging up at all Kev. Going to DAG with problem is a totally different proposition than say, NESN or JTM or owt like that as they do listen and try to act on the information.
What I do think we should do is press home the fact that we’re not making money on Brandt work or whatever else for that matter and allow them to resolve it as they sure as hell don’t get out of bed in the morning simply for the love of their jobs. Why should we?
DAG knows only too well that we do this for a living, to make money on it, not as a charitable concern, so they have to make it pay for us to do it otherwise it’s not worth doing. And let me ask you, why the hell should you pick up Brandt’s crap at cost anyway, as in why should you not profit on every call made, is that not what we’re in business to do? Also, what’s the admin time on Brandt (spares etc.) compared to others? I’d wager that like mine it’s disproportionate as it’s low volume, demanding punters and quite involving stuff.
K.
