|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 24, 2018 9:48:26 GMT
Whenever we have a BSS man they always make out that there's no money in it, yet we've had the same guy for donkeys years. When ours is due we always ask around to see if other boats need it doing. We usually end up making bookings for several boats on the same day thinking that it would cut costs. Last year we organised him to examine 5 boats on the same day. He came and did them in an afternoon. It cost us 110 quid each. He had been elsewhere before coming to us. Not a bad screw if you ask me. If I had my time again !!! A boat opposite me had theirs done, and just theirs, voila 110 quid. So much for doing a block booking to save costs. Mind you, £110 is a good price. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 9:52:23 GMT
Don't want to appear too dim, but it always concerns me that if the BSS is truly about safety, why is there STILL no requirements for carbon or smoke alarms.
Rog
|
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Jan 24, 2018 10:05:39 GMT
it was always a money making scheme from the start. Read third article down: "Why is the Boat Safety Scheme so expensive - and is it worth it?" www.thefloater.org/floater-october-2016.html Talking of CRT licences going up 7% "in line with inflation" I had a look at my salary: 2013 - 14.16 Euros/hour (£12.42) 2018 - 14.49 Euros/hour (£12.71) This is an increase of 2.33% Shows that 1) the union is fucking useless, 2) CRT make it up about 7% being "in line with inflation". If boaters feel the BSS scheme is a rip-off, how about doing something about it? I feel it's too expensive - there's not much needs checking other than the gas pipes, is there? I think a tenner for that is reasonable - I mean, that's a price of a bag of coal which will last you a week! I think a boat should be safe so that other boaters / the public around you won't get their heads blown off if the gas goes BANG! But otherwise, if you suffocate because of lack of ventilation, so what? Yes, the solid fuel stove could have a quick glance too, as the insurance company might be miffed if the boat catches fire and turns into a crispy hulk. Just thank your lucky stars that you don't work in the U.K. foxy, you'd be on the minimum wage, more or less, thanks to Browns barmy tax credits system. |
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 24, 2018 10:09:29 GMT
Don't want to appear too dim, but it always concerns me that if the BSS is truly about safety, why is there STILL no requirements for carbon or smoke alarms. Rog I think because the premis of the BSS is mostly about the safety of third parties - ie avoiding fire and explosion that might affect stuff outside the boat. But of course that is not rigorously applied as there is a requirement for adequate ventilation, which is clearly only relevant to occupants. It’s the same with RCDs - only recommended, not mandatory. But I think your fundamental problem is that you are trying to apply logic to a system that is not based on logic, evidence or reasonableness! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 10:19:20 GMT
Don't want to appear too dim, but it always concerns me that if the BSS is truly about safety, why is there STILL no requirements for carbon or smoke alarms. Rog I think because the premis of the BSS is mostly about the safety of third parties - ie avoiding fire and explosion that might affect stuff outside the boat. But of course that is not rigorously applied as there is a requirement for adequate ventilation, which is clearly only relevant to occupants. It’s the same with RCDs - only recommended, not mandatory. But I think your fundamental problem is that you are trying to apply logic to a system that is not based on logic, evidence or reasonableness! Your post is a little inaccurate. There is only advice and guidance for ventilation NOT a requirement for adequate ventilation. Many people, boat owners and BSS examiners alike mistakenly believe it is a requirement to pass. It isn't. The door on our 50 year old boat was vandalised by an idiot on the instruction of a BSS examiner. |
|
|
|
Post by kris on Jan 24, 2018 10:28:58 GMT
One of the biggest problems with the scheme is the variation between examiners.
|
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 24, 2018 10:37:49 GMT
I think because the premis of the BSS is mostly about the safety of third parties - ie avoiding fire and explosion that might affect stuff outside the boat. But of course that is not rigorously applied as there is a requirement for adequate ventilation, which is clearly only relevant to occupants. It’s the same with RCDs - only recommended, not mandatory. But I think your fundamental problem is that you are trying to apply logic to a system that is not based on logic, evidence or reasonableness! Your post is a little inaccurate. There is only advice and guidance for ventilation NOT a requirement for adequate ventilation. Many people, boat owners and BSS examiners alike mistakenly believe it is a requirement to pass. It isn't. The door on our 50 year old boat was vandalised by an idiot on the instruction of a BSS examiner. I think you are wrong. BSS para 8.9.1 seems pretty categoric. Can you explain your reasoning? The only time you don’t need any fixed ventilation is if there are absolutely no “burning” appliances (cookers, hobs, stoves etc) and I doubt many boats meet that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 10:38:38 GMT
Our 1993 Colecraft boat has ALWAYS had an advisory fail on high level ventilation, but of course safety certificates are issued.
I would have thought a smoke alarm, giving early warning of possible fire, would be beneficial to neighbouring boats, not just possible occupants.
Rog
|
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 24, 2018 10:40:10 GMT
One of the biggest problems with the scheme is the variation between examiners. Very true. Just like so many boat owners, they don’t actually read the requirements properly! Of course if owners were fully conversant with the regs (which are readily accessible) then BSS examiners applying their own random rules would get short shrift and a bad name and go out of business, especially in this internet age of communications. But unfortunately, incompetence is tolerated. |
|
|
|
Post by kris on Jan 24, 2018 10:43:51 GMT
One of the biggest problems with the scheme is the variation between examiners. Very true. Just like so many boat owners, they don’t actually read the requirements properly! Of course if owners were fully conversant with the regs (which are readily accessible) then BSS examiners applying their own random rules would get short shrift and a bad name and go out of business, especially in this internet age of communications. But unfortunately, incompetence is tolerated. i don't think its quite like you say. There is a power dynamic, the boater needs a bsc the examiner has the power over this and can cause the boater a lot of expense and inconvience. So most boatets won't question the examiner over anything. |
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 24, 2018 10:48:04 GMT
Our 1993 Colecraft boat has ALWAYS had an advisory fail on high level ventilation, but of course safety certificates are issued. I would have thought a smoke alarm, giving early warning of possible fire, would be beneficial to neighbouring boats, not just possible occupants. Rog How often does one hear an alarm sounding and totally ignore it because it’s not your house/car? Under ideal conditions yes you can hear an alarm in a nearby boat but not if you have the telly/music on, are asleep etc. Also bear in mind that an alarm is pointless if there is no-one to hear it and in fact despite the preponderance of liveaboards on here, most boats are empty for most of the time - even liveaboard ones are empty a lot if the owners work. Anyway I am not trying to play down the advisability of having alarms - we have both smoke and CO alarms - just trying to suggest possible reasons why the BSS is disinterested in them /playing devil’s advocate. |
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 24, 2018 10:50:19 GMT
Very true. Just like so many boat owners, they don’t actually read the requirements properly! Of course if owners were fully conversant with the regs (which are readily accessible) then BSS examiners applying their own random rules would get short shrift and a bad name and go out of business, especially in this internet age of communications. But unfortunately, incompetence is tolerated. i don't think its quite like you say. There is a power dynamic, the boater needs a bsc the examiner has the power over this and can cause the boater a lot of expense and inconvience. So most boatets won't question the examiner over anything. Yes I’m sure there is some truth in that, and it depends on your confidence and arrogance (so I do pretty well there!) but at the very least, surely if an examiner came up with a load of bollocks you wouldn’t go back to the same examiner 4 years later? And as with all “professionals” it’s best to select based on personal recommendation, rather just picking from a list / advert. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 10:50:36 GMT
Your post is a little inaccurate. There is only advice and guidance for ventilation NOT a requirement for adequate ventilation. Many people, boat owners and BSS examiners alike mistakenly believe it is a requirement to pass. It isn't. The door on our 50 year old boat was vandalised by an idiot on the instruction of a BSS examiner. I think you are wrong. BSS para 8.9.1 seems pretty categoric. Can you explain your reasoning? The only time you don’t need any fixed ventilation is if there are absolutely no “burning” appliances (cookers, hobs, stoves etc) and I doubt many boats meet that. When I get a minute I'll post the advisory about our fixed ventilation on our current BSS - it's an arse covering excersise plan and simple. |
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 24, 2018 10:55:26 GMT
We’ve only had 1 BSS on Telemachus so far. I asked around, got a recommendation (from the boat builder as it happens), the chap was entirely sensible and didn’t ask for payment in advance. Had he come up with a load of bollocks I’d have asked him to show me “where in the BSS it says that” and if he got all stroppy I simply would have declined payment, told him to sling his hook and found another examiner (there are plenty around!). But as I said, the guy was absolutely fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 24, 2018 10:58:10 GMT
I think you are wrong. BSS para 8.9.1 seems pretty categoric. Can you explain your reasoning? The only time you don’t need any fixed ventilation is if there are absolutely no “burning” appliances (cookers, hobs, stoves etc) and I doubt many boats meet that. When I get a minute I'll post the advisory about our fixed ventilation on our current BSS - it's an arse covering excersise plan and simple. Have a look at 8.9.1 and tell me where it implies it’s optional. I’m sure there is a sliding scale, ie minor shortfall you get an advisory, significant shortfall you get a fail, and if you only have 50% you get an unsafe notice (Appendix A). |
|
