RYA warns that CE mark is not to be relied upon for safety!

sadcatowner

sadcatowner

Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
40
Visit site
Hubby is a qualified RYA powerboat instructor.
He got an email this morning from the RYA urgently warning instructors to be careful with own boat tuition courses.

A recent PB2 course was into its second day on a client's brand new powerboat, when the console fell off!!!

I have more details in my blog which is in my signature.

This is just so worrying. Just like our brand new Powercat 525, the boat warned about in the RYA email was marked with the CE mark which should mean it was compliant with the Recreational Craft Directive.

I may be new to boat ownership, but surely a lot of the problem is because builders self certificate certain classes and sizes of vessel?

Not so sure that is the best way to ensure the safety of the powerboating public.

Is the CE mark worth anything in the boating industry?
 
Self-certification is often criticised by consumer organisations and MEPs, who all insist that all products should be certified by the governement/third parties. The reason for self-certification are the following:
Suppose you want to stop the inflow of drugs into the country. You could check every passenger, check their paperwork, open each piece of luggage, and have every passenger strip while you put on the rubber glove. Consequences:
a) nobody will come and visit your country
b) passing through customs will take longer than your flight
c) you would have to recruit half the population as customs officials
and
d) people who want to smugle drugs into the country will still be able to bring drugs into the country.

So the old system, where products were submitted to pre-market controll, doesn't work any more in our current world: too many different products on the market, marketing windows get smaller and smaller (last months phone is already outdated on the playground), products develop faster and faster.

What you propose is not workable, would be expensive and would bring manufacturing and marketing to a standstill. And Chinese manufacturers would still dump crappy electrical christmas decorations on our market.

The New Approach (incl. CE marking) relies for some categories of products on self-certification. Most reputable manufacturers will take their responsibility seriously. The irresponsable ones will put their bad product on the market regardless of the consequences, whatever the system (self certification or not). Example: the Erika oil tanker was operating in an environment where every production unit (every tanker) was certified, even re-certification during operation.

I have another nice fact for you, if you like. In case of a defective product, the product recall is also under the responsability of the manufacturer.

The main value of CE-marking in the case of a bad product, is the declaration of conformity, which identifies the responsable party, and the product liability that goes with it.

But inwardly I agree. Every product, before it is put on the market should be individually certified. It will be a bit more expensive (between 2-6%, depending on the number of units produced), but god know, CE-consultants like me could use the business. Then I wouldn't have to go sailing in June.

And I am sure that manufacturers, like your employer, would love the return of the nanny state, which tells them when and where they can sell their products.

I'm afraid the in the case sited, the problem is not the CE-system, but rather the individual manufacturer not knowing how to apply the standards, or even worse, taking short cuts.
 
Yes, I too saw the 'E'

It confused Me a bit.

I think the Story was posted on here a couple of Months ago.
R.I.B in Solent.
One of our Forum members involved.
Or is this another incident?

The one reported on here showed pictures of the poor assembly of the seat Pods etc.
IE small self tapping type screws.
Poor adhesive preperation and sodden ply due to the effect of seepage and the aforementioned poor fixings.

However as the Memory is dim, perhaps I,m wrong.
I thought the previous report alluded to the said vessel being on safety boat duties , not a PB2 excersize.

I was hoping this was the same incident.
Purely because, multiple stuff like this , We don't need.

CE marked.
Well maybe the vessels inspected for said Mark were up to Standard.
Even the type You have purchased.

It seems however, that the standards required by the Builders are not consistant.
Your purchase unfortunately seems to bear this out.
I read your Post.
Have read Your Blog.

Unbelievable!
 
Think it was another one,Al's a bit busy at the mo'
This one was an Instuctor doing some "own Boat" training
If I had a rib with a centre consol I'd check mine now

cheers Joe
 
[ QUOTE ]

I think the Story was posted on here a couple of Months ago.
R.I.B in Solent.
One of our Forum members involved.
Or is this another incident?



[/ QUOTE ]

Different one.
 
Hey!
Less of the 'Lakesailoring'

Never actually quite come to terms with the delicate intricusieswhatsits of said format or phenomenon, phenomenon, du der de di da , phenomenon, du der di did dida dida dida du dida du dat dat did er day, phenomenon----- /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
 
Beer all over the bloody keyboard !!!you fool /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

similair incidents not sure of the make.

cheers Joe
 
Beer?
Oh well I suppose it's ok.
Taint lager after all.

After 22.00 One should begin to enjoy a Fine Spirit.
Decent Havana.
Retire to a room unencombered by distraction (Ie swmbo watching soaps and other stuff) and the shopping channels, Blimey does She buy some crap!

Focus on Serious stuff on ere.
But Beer?
Tut Tut.
"Borrocks"
"Just spilt Tescos finest Whiskey on mine (£7 .96) a Go"
Now what?
Thread Drift, Sailoring,?

"Similar incidents not sure of the make"

What, of the Beer or the keyboard?
 
[ QUOTE ]
phenomenon, phenomenon, du der de di da , phenomenon, du der di did dida dida dida du dida du dat dat did er day, phenomenon----- /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Blox.........You want shooting, im not gonna be able to sleep for that tune wazzing round my head.
 
[ QUOTE ]

Beer all over the bloody keyboard !!!you fool

[/ QUOTE ] Beer!? More like oil. The man was arse up in his bowt yesterday giving Briza her weekly oil and filter change.

Harrods, sorry I mean Dickies, were run off their feet relaying supplies to the marina to keep up with the owel fellah.

His neighbours says it is like living next door to an oil refinery.
 
They say "He's a slick [--word removed--]" /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

cheers Joe
 
I am not talking about taking away self certification from ALL products. I am talking about whether it is wise to allow builders of boats which are stand alone 'life support' in an often hostile environment to police their own safety standards?

If a hairdyer totally fails due to electrical problems then the hairdryer fuses and there should be protection circuits on the house wiring for safety. the worst that can happen is wet hair that dries naturally.

If a boat fails you, then you are in the sea and good luck with getting out of it alive. If anyone is in any doubt at how quickly a problem can turn critical they only have to look at the Marine Accident Investigation Board reports.

I just think that if you are going to rely on something to keep you alive you should be able to rely on it at least conforming to the standards that the boat builder has signed it off on.

If you can't trust the boat builder to sign it off correctly then you should be able to expect someone else in authority to take that function over.

There also seems to be some misunderstanding about what the CE mark means on a boat. Every single boat is supposed to be built according to approved plans and every single boat is supposed to have detailed quality control processes with DOCUMENTED checks off as each point is properly made and tested.

Obviously every single hull doesn't necessarily have to be tested for wave stability once the generic design is checked. But every hull should be made properly and checked over to ensure that it complies with the design and that it has been properly finished etc.

Also every electrical part in every boat should be tested out and ticked off on a check list to ensure that all wiring etc is working properly, and work should be checked over before it is handed over to a client.

The CE mark and the signing of a compliance directive on an individual boat is a statement of fact made to a purchaser which means that the boat builder is certifying that the specific boat sold is safe according to the standards - which are very clear and specify minimum safety standards.

It is a criminal offence to sign off a boat and affix a CE mark to it if it does not comply.

It bothers me that the boating community seems to have an 'oh well what do you expect?' kind of attitude to this.

Maybe I'm wrong but if purchasers act as though this kind of thing is to be expected even if tutted against then why wouldn't builders carry on behaving this way?

If cars were being sold to the UK public which had their steering wheels come off while at 70 miles an hour on the motorway there would understandably be an outcry.

Why is it ok to be sold shoddy boats which put lives at risk?
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but CE marking and RCD compliance are not at all the same thing as QA checks in manufacture.

CE and RCD are about design compliance and safety and do not guarantee that any individual product will be free of defects, or that every production worker will always follow a specified routine.

My car is CE marked, but it still broke down on Sunday afternoon.
 
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31994L0025:EN:HTML

Here's a link to the full RCD 94/25/CE

As you will see the RCD and Ce marking are part and parcel of the same process.

Section 4.2 is specifically related to the quality control process and lays out how a manufacturer should organise and report on this in order to fulfil the directive.

I don't understand how you can say the CE is about compliance and safety and yet expect it NOT to mean it is free from defects when bought brand new.

If the defects are dangerous ones and are specifically warned against in the directive and are design defects then they are per se safety issues anyway.

When you bought your car would you have been philosophical about driving it away from the showroom and then putting your foot on the brake to discover the manufacturer had not filled the hydraulic with brake fluid?

Because that is fairly close analogy to what happened with our new boat.

CE IS about quality control and standards of safety - which means free of dangerous defects.

I am not talking about the wrong colur trim here I am talking about stuff that could mean the difference between a live boat owner and a dead one.

When someone buys a product in general they are entitled to expect that it is free from defects at purchase according to general European Conusmer Law.

A CE marked boat is supposed to safe and fit for purpose.
 
Correct. The CE mark only means that the product design, as assessed (which may or may not mean testing) on a submitted sample, meets the requirements of whatever EU Directives are applicable to that kind of product. Those Directives are not marked anywhere on the product itself. You would have to go to the original certification documents to discover what was assessed and how.

CE tells nothing about the quality of the product outside of the Directive requirements or about the consistency of the production quality. Those come under specific Quality schemes such as ISO9001.

-steve-
 
Here's a quote from Annexe 1 of the EC Directive 94/25/CE

" 5.3. Electrical system

Electrical systems shall be designed and installed so as to ensure proper operation of the craft under normal conditions of use and shall be such as to minimize risk of fire and electric shock.

Attention shall be paid to the provision of overload and short-circuit protection of all circuits, except engine starting circuits, supplied from batteries.

Ventilation shall be provided to prevent the accumulation of gases which might be emitted from batteries. Batteries shall be firmly secured and protected from ingress of water. "


This shows that the directive is very clear about certain aspects of manufacture and what is expected of manufacturers.

If they affix the CE mark to their craft and they do not comply with such statutory conditions - then they have broken the law, pure and simple.

ISO Standards are an organisational structure to pull together all the Standards which are to be then used within the CE structure.

The declaration of conformity to Directive 94/25/CE that came with our boat stated that the craft complied with

"the following EC Regulations and Standards:

ISO 12217
ISO 14946
ISO 14945
ISO 10087
ISO 10240
ISO 11591 "

It is difficult to get hold of the individual ISO standards to see if a boat complies (but the Department of Fair Trade and Trading Standards have copies and can check for themselves as the body charged with ensuring safety and fair trading) but it is not difficult to read the Directive in full and compare the state of a craft against the clear requirements laid down in it.

I still don't understand why so many people seem to think it is ok to sell dangerous boats and for CE marks to be wrongly affixed and certified?

Edited to add - note that the quote from the Directive includes the words 'designed AND INSTALLED' - my caps for emphasis. So it does refer to individual installations and not just generic designs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top