Blagdon Powersafe Outdoor Wall Socket Kit

[ban-all-sheds]

quod erat demonstrandum

Fine - so having acted like a complete jerk you find you dislike the fact that I treat you like a jerk.

Does that mean that you intend to carry on falsely telling me I am wrong in what I say because you don't like how I say it?

Does that mean that you are going to carry on avoiding answering straightforward questions, and are going to carry on writing b****cks like saying the ASA won't investigate complaints about claims made in a brochure because they say they won't investigate complaints relating to credit advertising in non-broadcast advertisements, data protection and freedom of information issues other than the use of personal data for marketing by mail, fax and some e-mail as well as the content of advertising that uses those media, too much direct mail, telemarketing calls and fax marketing, discrimination on the grounds of race, sex, age or disability, editorial content, financial advertising not on TV & Radio, fly Posting, in-Store advertising, medicines, phone-paid services, political advertising, products, services and contractual disputes, shop window displays or TV and radio programme sponsorships?

Old enough to stand up to bully's.

Ah - so it's OK for you to stand up to bully's (sic), but it's not OK for me to stand up to people who think I'm going to accept obviously and ridiculously incorrect explanations of why I'm wrong?

Is it that you are unable to explain why a cable cleated to a wall is not a fixed electrical cable, or you think that refusing to is standing up to a bully?

Is it that you are unable to explain where non-notifiable and non-permanent electrical installations are exempt from the provisions of Part P, or you think that refusing to is standing up to a bully?

Is it that you are unable to explain how a 25mA RCD will always trip before a 30mA one, or you think that refusing to is standing up to a bully?

Is it that you are unable to explain why false and misleading claims made in brochures available on a company's website are not within the remit of the ASA to investigate, despite the ASA saying that they are, or you think that refusing to is standing up to a bully?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

This is a quote from the approved document P 2006 edition which I think could be helpful

Page 9

k. The installation of prefabricated, “modular” systems (for example kitchen lighting systems and armoured garden cabling) linked by plug and socket connectors is not notifiable, provided that products are CE-marked and that any final connections in kitchens and special locations are made to existing connection units or points (possibly a 13A socket outlet).

That does not support their claim that installing their products does not fall within the scope of Part P.

Neither does this, from the same document:

NOTES

Examples of application of Part P

Part P applies to electrical installations in or attached to buildings or parts of buildings comprising:

• dwelling houses and flats;
  
  
• dwellings and business premises that have a common supply – for example shops and public houses with a flat above;
  
  
• common access areas in blocks of flats such as corridors and staircases;
  
  
• shared amenities of blocks of flats such as laundries and gymnasiums.

Part P applies also to parts of the above electrical installations:

• in or on land associated with the buildings –
  for example Part P applies to fixed lighting and pond pumps in gardens;
  
  
• in outbuildings such as sheds, detached garages and greenhouses.

Definitions

0.4 The following meanings apply throughout this document:

Electrical installation is defined in the Building Regulations as fixed electrical cables or fixed electrical equipment located on the consumer’s side of the electricity supply meter.

 

[riveralt]

Fine - so having acted like a complete jerk you find you dislike the fact that I treat you like a jerk.

In your eyes anyone who challenges you, offers a different perspective or even offers advice that differs from what you say is a Jerk .

Definition of a bully: a blustering, quarrelsome, overbearing person who habitually badgers and intimidates smaller and weaker people...

Despite your long diatribe with its foul and explitive ridden repeatiative responses my advice remains the same. This is not a matter for the ASA - as outlined on their website.

Given you previous responses I assume you will ignore this advice so I look forward to reading your ASA online complaint.

 

[Grizzly]

Seems to me that a few people in this thread are having difficulty understanding the difference between being 'in the scope of Part P' and being 'notifiable'.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

In your eyes anyone who challenges you, offers a different perspective or even offers advice that differs from what you say is a Jerk .

No - people who call me silly but refuse to show why believing what the law says is silly, people who to tell me I'm wrong to believe that the ASA will not consider something which they explicitly say is within their remit and try to justify their position by quoting a list of ASA exemptions, none of which apply, and which obviously do not apply, people who refuse to answer straightforward questions just because doing so would confirm that I'm right and they can't have that because they don't like me being right - they are jerks.

Definition of a bully: a blustering, quarrelsome, overbearing person who habitually badgers and intimidates smaller and weaker people...

Don't you dare call me quarrelsome when you are the one entirely responsible for the quarrel which you started when you ignored perfectly reasonable questions because you didn't like the answers you would have to give and when you behaved as if I was daft enough to accept the ludicrous suggestion that when the ASA said that they did not investigate a list of things, none of which were relevant, that meant that they would not investigate something which they explicitly say they do.

Despite your long diatribe with its foul and explitive ridden repeatiative responses my advice remains the same.

So in other words you still refuse to explain why a cable cleated to a wall is not a fixed electrical cable, despite calling me silly for believing that.

You still refuse to explain where non-notifiable and non-permanent electrical installations are exempted from the provisions of Part P.

You still refuse to explain how a 25mA RCD will always trip before a 30mA one.

This is not a matter for the ASA - as outlined on their website.

Where does it outline on their website that false and misleading claims made in brochures available on a company's website are not within their remit to investigate?

You can't try the list here again as it's plain to see that that list does not exclude advertising claims made in brochures, leaflets, and on company websites.

The lists here:

http://www.asa.org.uk/Regulation-Explained/What-we-cover.aspx

http://www.asa.org.uk/Regulation-Explained/Online-remit.aspx

on the other hand, make it equally plain to see that advertising claims made in brochures, leaflets, and on company websites are things that they will investigate.

So just where does their website support your assertion. I can, and have, shown you where it supports mine, but you have failed to show where it supports yours.

You tried the list here, but that does not say that they won't investigate advertising claims made in brochures, leaflets, and on company websites.

You've tried homing in on Products, services and contractual disputes
Companies' trading practices, contractual matters, the quality of goods and services, claims on packaging and trade names are all dealt with by trading standards. , despite the fact that I'm not complaining about any of those things.

So just where does it outline on their website that false and misleading claims made in brochures available on a company's website are not within their remit to investigate?

Given you previous responses I assume you will ignore this advice so I look forward to reading your ASA online complaint.

You haven't given any advice which is fit for anything except being ignored.

I have explained to you, quite clearly, why I believe that the claims made by Blagdon about the installation of their products not being within the scope of Part P are false.

You have not even tried to explain why you think their claims are accurate.

They make those claims in a brochure available on their website, and I have explained to you, quite clearly, why I believe that that puts it within the remit of the ASA to investigate.

You have tried to explain why I'm wrong in that belief, but so far you have failed to put forward a convincing explanation because all you've done is to link to a list of things the ASA won't investigate despite my complaint not relating to any of the things on that list.

So - come up with some credible advice and I will give it credence.

Carry on writing b****cks and I will carry on ignoring it.

Simples.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Seems to me that a few people in this thread are having difficulty understanding the difference between being 'in the scope of Part P' and being 'notifiable'.

Oh come on - how could anybody have such a poor grasp of what Part P says?

 

[Grizzly]

Oh come on - how could anybody have such a poor grasp of what Part P says?

I know. It seems strange, doesn't it?

 

[riveralt]

Okay BAS I tried to convince you but I give up.....

Here is the link to making your complaint to the ASA.

http://www.asa.org.uk/Complaints/How-to-complain/Online-Form/Step1.aspx

I look forward to reading your reply.

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Okay BAS I tried to convince you

Not very hard.

You didn't, for example, manage to come up with anything on the ASA website which supported your assertion.

You didn't manage to come up with anything on the ASA website which said that they aren't actually telling the truth on the pages where they say that they will investigate advertising claims made in brochures and on websites.

Did you really think I was so feeble that I'd let you get away with writing b****cks instead of facts?

You complain that I'm a bully - I'm the one who set out my case with facts:

Fact 1 - the Building Regulations do define "electrical installation" as including fixed cables.

Fact 2 - The wording of Part P does not exempt non-notifiable or non-permanent from its scope.

Fact 3 - A 25mA RCD is not guaranteed to discriminate against a 30mA one.

Fact 4 - Blagdon do make false and misleading claims in a brochure - you can download it here: http://www.blagdonthepondmasters.co.uk/objects/pdf/Blagdon_2007_powersafe.pdf

Fact 5 - The ASA do regulate brochures - you can read that in the 5th bullet here: http://www.asa.org.uk/Regulation-Explained/What-we-cover.aspx

And then all I've done is to stand by those, and to ask you, repeatedly, to put forward reasoned and logical explanations of why I'm wrong.

All you've done is to either ignore my requests or to put forward a list from the ASA website which clearly does not apply in this case, and then accuse me of being a bully because I won't bow to your will and I continue to demand that if you want to show that I'm wrong you should do so with reasoned and logical arguments.

It is not bullying to demand that if, on a public forum, you accuse someone of being wrong that you actually produce some proof of it.

but I give up.....

Fair enough, but if ever you lose your fear of explaining why a cable cleated to the wall is not a fixed electrical cable, or if you ever find an exemption from Part P for non-notifiable or non-permanent work, or if you ever find test results which show that a 25mA RCD is guaranteed to discriminate against a 30mA one, or if you ever find anything on the ASA website which says that they do not regulate brochures and company websites, feel free to have another go.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I don't think the bullying whinger needs any advise on how to complain.

Interesting, isn't it, how refusing to simply accept the word of someone who refuses to prove an assertion that I am wrong, and to stand by my position, has become categorised as bullying.

If I'd given up, and let riveralt get away with saying I was wrong even though he failed miserably to prove the truth of that, if I'd let him get away with calling me silly even though he refused to mount a logical argument to justify it, if I'd abandoned sticking up for what I believe for fear of being called a quarrelsome bully, just who would then have been the victim of bullying?

It is not bullying to demand that if, on a public forum, you accuse someone of being wrong that you actually produce some proof of it.

 

[ricicle]

Please, please can we have a seperate section for law and regulation debates and then post the results back in the relevant sections when the outcome (if any) has been decided.
Anything to stop this endless, pointless bickering and attempts at semantic one-upmanship.....

 

[riveralt]

Please, please can we have a seperate section for law and regulation debates and then post the results back in the relevant sections when the outcome (if any) has been decided.
Anything to stop this endless, pointless bickering and attempts at semantic one-upmanship.....

Couldn't agree more.

If BAS posts his ASA complaint number here we will all be able to monitor the progress and result of the complaint via the adjudications page on the ASA website.

I have an account with the ASA and have been following their working practices and adjudications for years. I will be very interested to see the result of his complaint.

 

[JohnW2]

Please, please can we have a seperate section for law and regulation debates and then post the results back in the relevant sections when the outcome (if any) has been decided.
Anything to stop this endless, pointless bickering and attempts at semantic one-upmanship.....

Amen. I'm rather surprised that the moderators tolerate this sort of nonsense (and those perpetrating it), since it simply serves to tarnish the reputation and usefulness of what is otherwise a valuable forum. A newcomer to the forum who sees all this is likely to run and not turn back - which is a pity.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[securespark]

This is a quote from the approved document P 2006 edition which I think could be helpful

Page 9

k. The installation of prefabricated, “modular” systems (for example kitchen lighting systems and armoured garden cabling) linked by plug and socket connectors is not notifiable, provided that products are CE-marked and that any final connections in kitchens and special locations are made to existing connection units or points (possibly a 13A socket outlet).

Who was it who said that if the connection was made via a connection unit, it would become notifiable??