In message <04b801cfacf0$22a263f0$67e72bd0$@acbcert.com>, dated Thu, 31
Jul 2014, Michael Derby <micha...@acbcert.com> writes:
So, maybe it was unsafe?
The OP wrote:
They found a non conformance on construction according to the latest
version of safety standard and concluded the product is unsafe. The
requirement is new in the latest version and did not appear in the
previous version.
It is exceedingly unlikely that the previous version of the standard is
so defective as to allow an unsafe product to pass. The LV Directive
says that a product that passes a relevant current harmonized standard
ought not to be impeded in marketing by the authorities (see Articles 4
and 12).
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Quid faciamus nisi sit?
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion
list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used
formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <emcp...@radiusnorth.net>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>
