SEE ANY SPAM? PLEASE REPORT IT, TO KEEP OUR COMMUNITY CLEAN.


Author Topic: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two  (Read 15629 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Thunderhead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 341
  • Karma: +37/-3
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #15 on: September 24, 2012, 10:11:29 PM »
where does it say this badger..i would like to know for my own information...cheers

Offline Badger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
  • Karma: +220/-151
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #16 on: September 25, 2012, 10:39:38 PM »
1.1    1.1.3.   2.1  3.2   of NZ5261, think there are others....only part one is mandatory, of more like its performance, everything else is down to interpretation, but no one will comment until after you use it.....then they go you.

Apparently according to Bickers at tonight's meeting when I asked why can't we ask the auditors for advise (because the Board base their persecutions on these peoples opinions) it is because there isn't any money in it for them.....which is quite telling because they make a good living out of going after people after the fact......and the Board is here to prevent problems? and enforce safety??
You can't choose who you are.....but you are the sum of your choices.......

Offline Thunderhead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 341
  • Karma: +37/-3
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #17 on: September 26, 2012, 11:56:55 AM »
ok i see it now 1.1.1 scope and application... part 1 is a mandatory part and part 2,3 is only a means of compliance with part 1...so your british standards should be ok as long as they comply with part 1 its as simple as that so you should be able to use other standards as a means of installiation as long as it complies with the performance critera set out in part one. and there should not be a damb thing the pgdb can do about it as long as it complies with part one.

Thinking back now i remember my tutor at tech running us through this as well and stating that part 2,3 were open to interpatoin as it is NOT a binding doucument and that these codes were only written by a group of gasfitters and agreed to as the best code of conduct AT THE TIME! and now many years later we know more and have many more new items on the market and as the stupid board has not kept cpd on the codes the codes themselvs are starting to lagg behind the times.

Offline Badger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
  • Karma: +220/-151
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #18 on: September 26, 2012, 07:41:54 PM »
AND MATE,  AFTER 3 YEARS PERSECUTION....IT IS ALL THEY HAVE ON ME........

but the supposedly neutral ESS, won't give me an answer or ruling........total corruption mate.

Offline Badger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
  • Karma: +220/-151
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #19 on: September 26, 2012, 08:04:58 PM »
Someone asked Bickers last night... where do we go for help in applying the NZ 5261?

There is no where and he seemed happy to confirm that.(all the Boards replays not recorded, only what the tradesman said, no minuets taken, hmmmm funny that. :-X

So asked him why we can't ask the auditors for clarification (as they are the people that the Board listen to on prosecutions) and he said and I quote.....they don't BEACUSE THERE IS NO MONEY IN IT FOR THEM!!!!!!

But there is money in it for them after application.... persecuting tradesman......wouldn't it be better for the public's safety to PREVENT the misapplication of NZ 5261, when a well meaning tradesman rings to clarify, wouldn't it be better to tell him.......but there is no money in it for them!!!!

Imagine the money the Board could save on prosecutions, as they are there for the publics safety ::) ::) ::) ::)

Ambulance at the bottom of the cliff....more a kin to a hearse, tossers. A load of bollox.

Offline gordyplum

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Karma: +7/-0
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #20 on: September 26, 2012, 09:03:52 PM »
No money in it ? We pay a lot of money, i diddn't realise charities were supposed to make money :P

Offline bowtieboy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 244
  • Karma: +30/-0
  • craftsman and proud of it
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #21 on: September 26, 2012, 09:05:04 PM »
badger, i agree with you. this is not good enough.
i agree with thunder and i was told by the board we CAN use other standards to comply with part one of nzs 5261.
so why the hell doesn't the board acknowledge this and stop their case against you....what it going to take?
today i herd of another tradesman that has been contacted by the board and has been told there has been a complaint made about him.....the board wont give the tradesman the details of who it is (who has made the complaint)and thats not right.watch this space! >:( >:( >:(
I believe in doing a job once and right. !

Offline Badger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
  • Karma: +220/-151
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #22 on: September 27, 2012, 06:24:02 AM »
I too have been told, the author of the letter below shares the same name as one of the authours of NZ 5261 (see inside cover), so after 3 years I have been proven to have done nothing wrong, now the Board on the other hand............

Max (Pederson)
Please can you tell me where and when I might be able to do the course that is my punishment for using a British Standard for the positioning of a califont, and when must I do this by.
Also please can you let me know if I can use the attached British Standard, especially page 42 and 43, in light of an email below.
It is very confusing, please can you clarify, thank you.
Paul Gee


Paul and Emma,
Please find below a brief overview of gasfitting in New Zealand.
   “Gasfitting” is a defined term in the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Act 2006
   In order to do gasfitting you have to be licensed by the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board
   Gas work (gasfitting) must comply with the Gas Regulations and be certified by the gasfitter as complying with NZS 5261: 2003, part 1 which is the Performance based design and installation criteria
   Part 2 of NZS 5261 gives one way of complying with Part 1, but other ways of complying with part 1 can be used. Relevant Australian or British standards may be used if the gasfitter can demonstrate compliance with NZS 5261, Part1
As I understand it this differs from the UK where home owners are able to do their own gas work.
Other sources of information can be obtained from the Energy Safety Service (www.ess.govt.nz) and the Plumbers, Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board (www.pgdb.co.nz)
Please telephone if you wish to discuss
Kind regards
Bruce
Bruce Klein
Senior Advisor Building Standards

Department of Building and Housing
Te Tari Kaupapa Whare
DDI: (04) 8174812
Level 6, 86 Customhouse Quay
PO Box 10729, Wellington 6143, New Zealand
Web: http://www.dbh.govt.nz

Offline Badger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
  • Karma: +220/-151
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #23 on: October 02, 2012, 09:17:12 AM »
Robbo it does....IT IS ACTUALLY IN THE CODE.... but the Board are so corrupt and vindictive that they are holding tight to this last charge.....I mean it wouldn't look good if they spent all that money to pursue someone....that is then proven to have done nothing wrong, and in reality shows that the Board didn't listen to his warnings for 6 years and accepted incomplete certs that later resulted in an explosion, that they then tried to cover up......

Real stalwarts of the industry......LOL :-[

Offline Jaxcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
  • Karma: +40/-4
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #24 on: October 02, 2012, 05:45:27 PM »
Hi Badger

Is the problem with the fact that you used the British Standard, or the fact that at the disciplinary hearing the British Standard did not come up and so can't be used as part of the appeal?  I think is important to understand this as it does have a bearing for others going forward.  It doesn't assist you at all, but is an education for others in a similar position as it will make them think about what they say when interviewed by either the Board or an auditor for either a disciplinary hearing or an audit.  From all the reading I have done I have grasped that the problem is more it wasn't introduced as evidence at the initial hearing.  This must be it becasue the letter from ESS is reasonably clear and any part of the code that is able to be interpreted presumably needs the gasfitter to justify why they took the action they did and which part of the code or standard they are relying on.

Appendix O is a great tool for this and all gasfitters should use it and attach it to their gas certificates and file it - it will show the steps that have been gone through for installation and commissioning and would be very hard evidence to dispute.

Have you learned lessons only of those who admired you, and were tender with you, and stood aside for you?  Have you not learned great lessons from those who braced themselves against you, and disputed the passage with you?  (Walt Whitman 1819-1891)  American Poet

Offline The Hoff

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +8/-2
  • Im new @ Plumbers NZ!
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #25 on: October 02, 2012, 08:19:50 PM »
Badger, did you do the initial install ss per the British Standard or was it a mistake that you've since found meets the British Standard?

Offline Badger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
  • Karma: +220/-151
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #26 on: October 03, 2012, 03:30:04 PM »
I knew the BS standard (I am originally from the UK) AND used a rinnai document when I did the install. When it came to the hearing this one charge (out of 44 TRUMPED UP CHARGES) was the easiest to answer so I didn't do any work on it and because I have been shut down, even threatened, in the past for saying "back in the UK" by prominent people in the NZ plumbing industry I went with the rinnai document only, not to mention the only other certifying gasfitter on the Board's panel, even actually the only other one in the room was British.

But all this is semantics and word play......is it dangerous or not?....and it is not, as testified by the occupier, 65 million people in the UK and even the Building and Housing say you can use a British standard.....but the Board put all their faith in a very involved and corrupt investigator....I drew diagrams showing how I knew the fumes would act.

We have a mandatory performance part one, part two isn't manditory.... it is stated as an "acceptable solution", the NZ 5261 also states that part two isn't the only way to do it and other means can be used. I used another method, which has not been proven by the Board to be unsafe, unyet I have to prove it is safe....and I have beyond a shadow of a doubt.......is this worth loosing your home, business, reputation and 18 months with my 5 and 7 year old sons.....no it is not and it is not fair.

WHY AM I GULITY BEFORE I AM PROVEN INNOCENT? AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING!!!!

We are practical people, not lawyers or politicians.....is it dangerous or not? that is all that should come into it. The Board claim to be a professional Board with well informed people, this is bullshit, they are corrupt and vindictive.

Offline Jaxcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
  • Karma: +40/-4
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #27 on: October 03, 2012, 05:50:20 PM »
Fair enough Badget, but what I was trying to establish for others to learn by is that right from the start we need to be very measured in what we say and how we approached the job.  As you say you never paid much heed to this particular one as it was the easiest to disprove and yet it is the one they have hung their hook on.  Acceptable solutions are just that - acceptable - but it does seem a requirement to prove your self innocent rather than them prove guilt.  And I also don't disagree at all around the key question - is it dangerous.  The legal bit does come in with the court of appeal and the rules around submission of new vs old evidence and this is why you probably had no joy there.  I am stumped as to what avenues are left open to you, however you have done a good job educating a number of practitioners on this forum as to the hooks involved in various parts of gasfitting and providing a defence when charged with various particulars.

Offline Jaxcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
  • Karma: +40/-4
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #28 on: October 03, 2012, 05:51:10 PM »
**Sorry Badger, hit the wrong key!

Offline Badger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
  • Karma: +220/-151
Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two
« Reply #29 on: October 03, 2012, 07:37:19 PM »
All good Jax.....Badget, thats my missis......

I am firstly going to try every legal, fairminded way using protocol and proceedure.........but if these dicks think I am going to loose what I have and not have my pound of flesh...........well..........


Share via digg Share via facebook Share via linkedin Share via twitter

Similar Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies / Views Last post
xx
Possible new standard for gas Audit

Started by aboutgas

0 Replies
1503 Views
Last post June 26, 2011, 09:42:43 PM
by aboutgas
xx
British tapware compatability

Started by Sonnyboy

3 Replies
1243 Views
Last post April 11, 2013, 09:33:07 AM
by Enn
clip
Alternative firefighting water supply SNZ PAS 4509:2008

Started by Enn

0 Replies
447 Views
Last post November 22, 2014, 03:49:59 PM
by Enn
question
The apprentice days are over! Carrying licence cards legally mandatory

Started by newguy

7 Replies
3177 Views
Last post November 08, 2010, 06:34:09 PM
by Thunderhead
 
Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)