ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area Re: Lost UL complience

I installed one of these from interlockkit.com last month on a GE panel. I was apprehensive that it would be a cheesy set-up. It was actually nicely done. The steel was heavy guage, nicely tooled and engraved. The kit came with the proper drill bit, lock-tite, etc. It was a nice fit. I will put in more of them. They are expensive, but a cheaper overall install alternative to a separate transfer switch.

Greg, John,

I know that I could use a 90-4 and as long as the piece of equipment looked safe, I wouldn't have a problem with it. If it was listed my liability would be lessened but if anything goes wrong, we will all be in court. From the manufacture to the installer and everyone in between. You know how that works.

Let's clear up a few things about the legal system and liability. I'm tired of the same old canards being passed around, like a Christmas fruitcake gone bad.

As desirable as a predictable legal system may be, ours is less predictable by the day. Not only can someone be sued for anything, they often are- and there are enough goofy judgements out there that the outcome is never certain.

UL gets sued all the time ... and it's pretty rare for them to remain on the suit after the first exchange of motions. UL's listing, UL will happily assert, doesn't mean a damn thing for any specific widget, and they quite happily assert they have absolutely no responsibility for anything. Instead, UL will claim that the UL mark only means that the manufacturer submitted a sample that probably passed testing and was thought to comply with their standards on that particular day, by folks who might have erred.

A little different from what UL's marketing makes you think. Remember this: advertising claims have zero meaning.

All the UL sticker does is give the AHJ an excuse to be lazy, to avoid doing his job. In effect, the AHJ says "well, someone else thought about this, so i can be lazy and just assume they guessed right." It doesn't change that the AHJ is still the AHJ.

We find this concept perverted every code cycle, where the various lobbyists show up in the AHJ's office and say 'how dare you modify / amend / edit our wonderful model code, when the real experts have just decided that this is how it should be? You'll be liable ...'

Well, here's a news flash - you're liable, no matter what. That's who the AHJ is. That's his job. The NFPA isn't going to pay the judgement.

Not that there's much liability; AHJ's already have legislation protecting them from any personal responsibility. I build a house that burns down, I'm the guy who gets bankrupted and ridiculed and loses his means of earning a living (license). You inspect and the place falls down, YOU say "oh well" and the government you work for takes things from there.

Your only role is to point at a stack of papers and insist to your fellow government dweebs that your tail is covered, it was someone else's fault. That UL label is the first thing you hide behind.

Which is really ironic, since the other impulse of government is to get ever more involved in ever more minute details. Absolute authority, zero accountability.

Reno:
You say...

"Not that there's much liability; AHJ's already have legislation protecting them from any personal responsibility. I build a house that burns down, I'm the guy who gets bankrupted and ridiculed and loses his means of earning a living (license). You inspect and the place falls down, YOU say "oh well" and the government you work for takes things from there."

I believe that the 'government' that I work for will suspend (minimum) or revoke my licenses, and can also go after a revocation of my contractors licenses for negligence. The "oh well" you reference would be "oh ...."

John is right that Sovereign Immunity may keep you out of court but it will not save your career from termination and administrative actions against your license.

You actually have fewer protections in an administrative hearing than you have in criminal or even civil court.

In all my days, I've never heard of ONE case where an AHJ was even wrist-slapped by the court system.

What motivates all of them is pride: no-one wants to look stupid -- particularly among peers.

As for career termination: that happens because one's bids blow up. Not in all my days have I heard of an EC going under because of UL issues -- or any other national testing lab.

Under no circumstances should any repair oriented electrical contractor ever step-up and offer quality assurance for materials not installed by his firm.

That's the insurance business -- and you're not even licensed for it. Some such boiler plate needs to be in your service contract -- yesterday.

All system verification certifications must be written with enough wriggle room to leave you off the hook.

If the other party wants that level of financial protection -- they have to buy an insurance policy backed by a financially responsible party that can and will be there when the bad stuff happens.

I would always have some phrase stippulating that inspection services do NOT constitute any measure of insurance -- since pre-existing conditions are un-inspectable in as much as they are buried within walls or underfoot.

Further, that Grandfathered elements may pose hazards (missing grounding conductors, etc.) even as they remain functional, and lawful.

John and Greg, thank you for your replies. I deliberately made my post as absolute as I could, to highlight the issues.

Tesla, you're quite right .... I can't ever recall hearing even a rumor of a city inspector suffering because the 'customers' were unhappy, or simple incompetence. Instead, I see action taken ONLY when:
-They back the wrong side in an internal 'office politics' situation;
-A separate government actually arrests and prosecutes them; or,
-They offend some special-interest group.

When there is a misfit - be it ego, attitude, or ineptitude- the person always seems to get promoted.

For all the jabber of 'administative actions,' we don't see the ranks being culled at anything like the enthusiasm we see in the 'private sector.'

I tend to agree with Reno that the only time I have heard of inspectors being sanctioned was if they falsified inspection reports. (like not even driving by).
If they could say they made a good faith effort and they just missed something I doubt anything would happen unless it was a regular thing. They they would just be "given the chance to seek other opportunities"
We have had a few who were prosecuted for bribery but that is a whole 'nother thing and it was egregious cases.

NJ has a division of the DCA called Regulatory Affairs. Part of their responsibility is to provide oversight/discipline for all State licensed construction inspectors.

Discipline can and does range from one-on-one conferences to mandatory continuing ed, to suspensions, to $$ fines,to revocations.
I have seen all of the above happen, and I have personally only had a 1-on-1.

Our contractors license boards basically follow the same.

The procedures of the contractors boards are considered public info, and are available at the Board websites, listed within the agendas and/or minutes. To my knowledge, I do not know if the Reg Affairs info is public or confidential.

Harold may have some input.

John,

I guess it must just be our state that cares, because I too have had a 1 on 1 with the DCA and it isn't pretty. I know of several AHJ's who lost their license for a month, or two or three depending on the severity of the "Crime" (or mistake) I have seen AHJ's lose their lic. and their contractors Lic. as well.