Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By holmezy
Company A buys a machine from Company B (UK agent) who imports it, and installs it, from Italian Company C. Company B is responsible for all safety aspects etc and installation to Company C footprint. That bits easy!!
What if;
Company A buys direct from Company C but Company B installs to Company A request, which may or may not be to Company C footprint. Is Company B responsible for safety features or incorrect siting? (me thinks not on the guards etc but possibly so, on siting).
In this scenario, we are Company C, acting as agents/importers and suppliers of Italian Company A machines. Very often Customers will but direct from Italy, who seem to show little or no regards for where the machine is to be sited, then we get a call to go and install it, and find out thatwhere the customer wants to put it is totally inappropriate due to access constraints, not able to set up light guards correctly, can't operate from safe position etc etc etc. We usually end up installing it "as best we can" but I am concerned about who the buck stops with.
Any help gratefully recieved.
Holmezy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tony Brunskill
Holmezy,
In your outline Company C carries a degree od responsibility under the 74 Act as Suppliers and Installers. There is a definite corelation between the company and potential liability. Particular concer would be where, through space constraints, safety features were removed or modified. Where this is the case, you may be assuming the responsibility and liability as the manufacturer too, depending on the scope of the modification.
To my mind:
Company C - Liable for manufacturing issues (Ex Modifications that are not authorised) - Supply of Machinery Safety Regulations
Company B - Liable for installation and may be liable for some manufacturing issues depending on modifications - Suppply of Machinery Safety Regulations/HSWA 74
Company A - Provisions and Use (of Work Equipment Regulations 1998) and Employers duties under the 74 Act.
In addition Company B could be vicariously liable for the acts of its employees where a modification leads to the injury of a third party.
Obviously I have just hit the big ones here and a number of other issues arise in terms of product quality and contract. I would advise taking specific legal advice if your concerns are significant. I AM NOT A LAWYER. But sometimes they can add value!!
Regards
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Holmzey
I think you are mixing Bs and Cs in your scenario.
The key here is the duties on the installer for safe use. If you cannot install the equipment such that it is safe to operate the simple but difficult answer is not to install it. If you elect to install the equipment in a manner that "makes do" and even worse has no evidence of clear advice to the contrary you leave yourself wide open to regulatory action. If Company A buys direct they become the importer supplier not yourself and it would be best to leave them with their problem. Depends which they value more - the warranty or a capital saving.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mitch
We import, export and supply used textile machinery. We also install new machinery in the UK for our German parent company. The CE marking requirements involve the installation process, if we cannot complete this satisfactorily we do not commission the machine and issue the CE certification! The responsibilty to use or ensure the correct installation is with the customer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.