Mike Martin, how many peolple have been prosecuted

[Heckler]

for using grey import radios from the usa? as per the previous ebay posts
stu

<hr width=100% size=1>http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk

 

[jimbouy]

sounds like none!


I have no intention of risking it myself, but find the situation perplexing.

Jimbouy

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bedouin]

I can't answer - but a Radio imported from US is probably not a Grey Import - it is probably illegal.

The phrase grey import is usually used to refer to legal equipment brought in other than by the main manufacturer's distribution channel. Thus a CE marked radio imported directly from the US would be a grey import. Without the CE it is illegal

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[poggy]

If you use it in an emergency to summon help, then I doubt you can be prosecuted as it would be considered essential use. It would not be illegal to own a US radio only to use it.

Poggy

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bedouin]

No - technically it is illegal to "install" it whether you use it or not.

I don't quite know how this applies to Handhelds - the French would probably interpret any HH carried on the boat as installed - the British are probably more relaxed about it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[trev]

I don't understand the drift of this - I must have missed something. Does it mean that a US vessel in UK waters can use a US VHF, but a vessel flying a UK flag cannot use the same bit of kit? Seems a bit daft to me considering the hundreds of US made VHFs in use in the North Sea Oil sector, especially hand helds (Motorola etc.) mostly used by people with no license.

<hr width=100% size=1>Trev

 

[KeithH]

One aspect of this line of questioning (along with the long thread with ICOM) is beginning to concern me. Whilst I can understand the desire to get to the main issues, I do wonder if this aggressive stance with contributors from companies and "officials" will simply stop them contributing.

I was vey concerned over a previous thead when people were called "liars" - that is not helpful, and will result in these folks simply not joining in the debate.

So this is a plea for more decorum in the forum.

<hr width=100% size=1>KeithH

 

[chas]

Agree. I Know what my response would be if I was MM!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[andyball]

quite right

Yep...that seems to be the size of it.

As well as keeping us the right side of the law (?) there have been
suggestions that US stuff has much lower standards & might not be as safe(!)

It may rank alongside home-taping & showing it to your friends as one of the offences you're least likely to be prosecuted for, but who knows? the record companies have gone after some individuals for making music available online, tho' they notionally have money to lose.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[AndrewB]

Yes, agree, moreover ...

... I think it is a mistake for anyone to enter open forums like this wearing a company hat. Far too often it creates rancour, specially if they are not sufficiently savvy to appreciate the dangers in responding off-the-cuff to a loaded question like this.

But if he can spare the time, Mike Martin would be a very good person for Kim to persuade to take part in another 'moderated session' like we had with Rod Carr, at which issues like this could be pursued in a more balanced way.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bedouin]

It may sound crazy - but that's correct.

There is no problem using US made sets in UK - but they have to be "CE" marked (along with almost everything in EU , boats included). So often you will be able to buy "identical" sets in UK and US - one is legal the other isn't, just because of a bit of paper.

In fact this is quite reasonable - faulty Radio equipment could have a dire effect so I have no problem with the EU insisting that it passes a certain standard.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[JonBrooks]

I am sure Mike will reply in his own good time.
I know his is a busy bunny and there is a lot going on at his end at the moment.

Thank you for your comments Keith.
Mike and I post on here because we want to help and have an interest in the industry, not just for the commercial aspect.
We are both keen boaters in our spare time.
We are affected by the same rule and regs as you all.

The comment can be hurtful, even more so as our intention and morals are being called into question by people who don't even know us and are assuming.
We all know that to assume is to make an ASS out of U and ME!

Yes we are in the line of fire because of our jobs.
We could post as Joe Bloggs and Fred Knowone but we choose to do it as we do to hopefully give more credibilty to our answers.

We don't know all the answers, those we don't we will always do our best to find out.
Yes some of our comment get taken the wrong way, that's life I guess but neither of us are liars, neither of us would mislead by choice.

It would be very easy to walk away.
Please think before you rip into the company men or the officials.
We are human to, no honest we are!

I will get off my soap box now.

Regards

<hr width=100% size=1>Jon Brooks Icom UK Ltd. 01227 741741

 

[Peppermint]

Re: Wearing a company hat

all be it a tin one, is not such a problem. Discord offers opportunity and provided your honest and on your game offers persuasion/ sales potential.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[chriscallender]

I should imagine it makes a lot more sense to go after those who import and sell US spec radios in EU rather than ordinary joe public users, given the cost and limited resources that are available to investiagate and prosecute cases.

So I'd be very surprised if anyone has or ever will be prosecuted just for using one. But perhaps some shipments have been stopped on the way into the country.

Chris

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[DavidTocher]

See


http://www.radio.gov.uk/topics/enforcement/prosecution.htm

{Create Date: May-22-2003 15:36}

marine; 2 were procesuted with 10 official warnings. About £550 in expenses and fines. Do some sums and calculate the licence fees received.

Why not go the FCC route and do away with the paperwork except for people who go foreign?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Jools_of_Top_Cat]

To be fair Jon, although the question sounds a little harsh, the crux is still the same. We have been told that it is illegal to install a US import on our vessels, Stu is only at the end of the day asking what the RAA are doing about it. He could have dressed it up in mollycoddles, but he didn't, it does not make a great deal of difference to the answer.

My last correspondence with the RAA was a final demand, pay up within 7 days or else, yet I received this one month before my existing license ran out, or thereabouts. I am not upset by these things, I have far to many other things to worry about; but don't lecture us about hurtful and morals.

I actually would like to hear an answer to this question too.


<hr width=100% size=1>Julian

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.topcatsail.co.uk/TC_IrishCruise_2003_00.html>Irish Cruise</A>

 

[Talbot]

I, for one really appreciate your willingness to place head above the parapet. Information is always suspect unless the source is known, and your input into the forum provides very valuable confirmation of information. Please ignore the one or two who don't appreciate what a whally they make of themselves by slanging off anyone who seems to be a target.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Birdseye]

Isnt the heading of this post almost an invitation to the RA to stir themselves up and prosecute some sinners. Bit like prodding a sleeping guard dog with a stick!

Much better to keep a low profile and not prod the authorities into action, surely.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

Particularly when the poster acknowledges what a smart and clever chap he is by choosing to ignore rules and regulations he doesnt approve ofm by purchasing, installing and then operating illegal equipment. It must serve to reinforce the image of a succesful entrepeneur.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bigmart]

I wonder if it will work.

Poetic Justice Iwould say.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>