DJE
Well-known member
Did he go there from "Slough Grammar"?
CE marking.
- Thread starter Allan
- Start date
Did he go there from "Slough Grammar"?
AntarcticPilot
Well-known member
Oxford graduates think they own the world. Cambridge graduates don't give a damn who owns the world.
ShinyShoe
Well-known member
Au contraire...
There were a load of US Imported Icoms plus others (Cobra kack), when Amazon first hit the big internet sales, being imported in that didn't have M1 M2 on them. So while they work on CH16, Mr Icom UK got a fair number of these sent back as "faulty" ...
Some of the Cobra kack was being sold as "water proof" when it was IPx5 at best.
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
Wasn't CCAT the model for the college in Tom Sharpe's "Wilt" books?
This role was fulfilled in Oxford by the "Ox and Cow" (Oxford and County Secretarial College) which supplied twinsetted young ladies for the public school old boys with estates. For everyone else there was Dorset House school of Occupational Therapy, the John Radcliffe Hospital nurses' home, and the Poly Dollies from what now presents itself as Oxford Brookes University.
<wafts away on a haze of reminiscence>
What? What? Where were we? What's happening?
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
This is all getting a bit off topic for a boating forum, so ...
Why do you lot stand on the wrong end of punts?
snowleopard
Active member
Clearly another example of Chinese counterfeiting. I speak as one who found his iPad was from the same stable.
snowleopard
Active member
I suppose I could say that I went to a college in East Anglia, but Cambridge graduates don't much care what people think of them
I at one time had "M.A. (Cantab)" on my c.v. I changed it after one interviewer said 'So you went to Canterbury'.
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
My MA (Oxon) makes me sound like a vet. Who can't spell.
D
Deleted member 36384
Guest
The forum reaches a new level tedium. Up next, watching paint dry, will my boot top dry faster than my antifouling.
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
Still better than "A weekend on the Solent #627" in the mag ...
solent clown
RIP
YO YO YO, don't be Dissin' da Solent, blood. Innit
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
It's not the Solent as much as the four hundred and nineteenth article telling us about the unspoiled charm of Yarmouth as long as you get there before 4pm because otherwise all two hundred visitor berths are full.
DJE
Well-known member
4pm? Luxury. We used to dream of getting a berth at 4pm.....
Tranona
Well-known member
Not sure whether you actually read the mag (YM, that is) as from reading every issue for more years than I dare think about, that is not my impression.
So I checked 10 issues, 5 most recent and 5 from 2013/4 - convenience sample. The articles I defined were those where the location was the focus (rather than a passage to/from or an incident). some are the detailed destination guides that appear in most issues, the rest mostly readers' contributions.
South coast 6 (2 Solent, neither Yarmouth)
South west 7
West 4
East coast 5
Scotland 6
Europe 21 (France 4, Spain 3, Greece 3, Sweden 3)
Rest of the world 7
Perhaps when you have time you can go through your back numbers and identify the 418 articles (or even mentions) of Yarmouth!
weustace
Member
I thoroughly agree—and I wasn't suggesting for a moment that self-certification of compliance should be stopped or was necessarily undesirable. As one who dabbles in electronics, and has looked into the cost of bringing any device requiring Notified Body involvement to market, it seems a job and a half (making the matter of actually developing and marketing such a product look rather trivial by comparison). As somebody said recently to me, "We don't do it because it's easy, we do it because we thought it would be easy!"
My point was that one cannot assume that, just because an import is CE marked (even if from a retailer—I have my doubts about the thoroughness of their investigations in some cases) does not mean it conforms to all of the standards this might imply, but merely that the manufacturers are willing to mark it compliant. This applies even more if buying on eBay from a non-EU country, when you are the importer and therefore responsible for standards compliance.
Apologies for de-drifting the thread...temporarily I'm sure. EDIT: I suppose that should be "salvaging"—I felt that might be unduly harsh!
cliveshelton
Member
Thanks for “de-drifting” at last. I used to own and run a notified body (not R&TTE though). This is, in my opinion, a “non story”. I am not aware of a competing / alternative CE mark meaning “Chinese Export”. The use of this (slightly wrong) mark on Chinese products is probably simply because someone, somewhere has told a Chinese exporter that products supplied in the EU need to bear the mark. He has used the wrong format without understanding the rules behind the “new approach” EU Directives. Nothing more. I’m willing to be corrected of course but I don’t see this as “scandalous”.
weustace
Member
I have certainly seen the "China Export" mark on various products—interestingly the only think I could find on my desk with such a marking was a genuine (Chinese-made) Microsoft brand mouse. I haven't measured it, but I believe it is the "China Export" branding—probably because somebody used the wrong graphic resource and nobody noticed. The mouse must be 10 years old at least...works a treat. I agree there is almost certainly no set of standards under this name—just an appropriation of CEN.
The costs I referred to were not so much for "Technical Construction File" based certification but for R&TTE testing—if external RF testing is required I would imagine this is a sizeable cost of business for any small electronics firm (not ever having run one or generated a technical file/Declaration of Conformity for CEN).
zikzik
Member
As suggested. There is no China Export mark. If a producer anywhere wants to cheat, there is ready access to the correct mark. Its a myth or fake story.
No producer outside of the EU can be prosecuted by the EU for failure to comply with EU norms - which the CE mark signifies compliance - bacause responsibility to conform lies solely with the producer, only if inside the EU, or the first importer to the EU. That could be a retailer, if they source direct from, say, China. Or you if you buy a widget from HK through ebay (assuming it comes from there and not from a UK warehouse. In which case of course it is whoever imported it to there).
These are long standing rules. My business has been dealing with this and importing stuff for more than 20 years. The stories keep resurfacing though. Probably because fake product is illegally made and imported. Mostly from China.
No producer outside of the EU can be prosecuted by the EU for failure to comply with EU norms - which the CE mark signifies compliance - bacause responsibility to conform lies solely with the producer, only if inside the EU, or the first importer to the EU. That could be a retailer, if they source direct from, say, China. Or you if you buy a widget from HK through ebay (assuming it comes from there and not from a UK warehouse. In which case of course it is whoever imported it to there).
These are long standing rules. My business has been dealing with this and importing stuff for more than 20 years. The stories keep resurfacing though. Probably because fake product is illegally made and imported. Mostly from China.
DJE
Well-known member
It has taken a long time and considerable expense to assure us and our customers that our products should not be CE marked. They are used extensively during the construction phase of tall buildings but do not form a permanent part of the building. So in the meaning of the Construction Products Directive they are not construction products.
If they meet the definition then it is illegal not to mark them but if they don't then it is illegal to mark them. When I initially contacted BSI for help with the definition they told me "Only the courts can decide that". We have a written opinion from an expert in the field but ultimately you can't prove a negative. Perhaps the system could have been better designed.
If they meet the definition then it is illegal not to mark them but if they don't then it is illegal to mark them. When I initially contacted BSI for help with the definition they told me "Only the courts can decide that". We have a written opinion from an expert in the field but ultimately you can't prove a negative. Perhaps the system could have been better designed.
st599
Well-known member
Doesn't that just cost £10 and a clean police record?
