Hi Charlie,
On 2 Aug, 2014, at 4:00 am, Charlie Blackham <char...@sulisconsultants.com> wrote: > I'm not a lawyer, but (AIUI) the requirement on the authority to show that > the product is not compliant with the DIRECTIVE, it is not an offence to be > non-compliant with a Harmonised Standard - there is no offence in law for > that. > > If the product was tested to a standard that is still a Harmonised Standard, > then that standard (also) still gives a "presumption of conformity". > > It is only a "presumption", but unless there is a fundamental flaw in that > version, the product should still be safe and should be considered so. > > If the requirement of the new standard exceeds the requirement of the old > standard, then I'm sure that the standards body had a good reason for the > increase, but that does not necessarily mean the previous version was > deficient in determining compliance with the Directive. If it was then the > relevant standards body and the Commission should have addressed that through > a reduced (or indeed instant) DOCOPOCOSS when the newer version was listed in > the OJ. This approach has been used under the R&TTE directive where Radio > Spectrum issues were found with certain standards, so the process exists and > works. > Thanks for your good points! > Once a product has been banned (or even "voluntarily" withdrawn) from a > single country, it will quickly appear on RAPEX, and then it's basically > banned from Europe. http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/archive/safety/rapex/ > Yes, the impact is great. We do not want to upset the authorities but consider not to open this hole for more issues in the future. > Regards > Charlie > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org] > Sent: 01 August 2014 20:21 > To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > Subject: Re: [PSES] Definition of unsafe product > > Hi Scott: > > > The product (which was certified to the version of the standard that was in > effect at the time) was tested by a third-party laboratory (to a new > requirement in the current edition of the standard) and found non-compliant. > Somebody (either the laboratory or the authority) used the descriptive term > "unsafe" because it did not comply with a safety standard. > > (To a naive person, non-compliance with a safety standard makes an "unsafe" > product.) > > Since the third-party lab was engaged by the authority, you have no recourse > to the lab (except on a friendly basis). Re-test to the "old" version of the > standard can only be authorized by the authority (who has no interest in your > sales and trusts that the third-party lab is testing correctly, including > choice of standard). > > You can ask the authority to re-test to the "old" standard, but I guess that > they would rather you "fix" the non- compliance and then they will authorize > a re-test. The authority is naive as to whether or not the product is safe, > and will go by the word of the third-party lab. > > As much as it hurts, I suggest that your only remedy is to make the product > compliant to the latest version of the standard. > > > Good luck, > Rich > > > > On 7/31/2014 10:21 AM, Scott Xe wrote: >> Recently we received a sales ban from an authority. The authority took a >> sample from the market and appointed a 3rd party laboratory for verification >> of LVD conformity. 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. >> >> When our product was verified by the 3rd party test house, it complied with >> previous version of safety standard but was the latest version of the safety >> standard at time of testing. The new version was issued 2 months later and >> has an additional construction requirement. The DoW of previous version of >> safety standard is in 2016. We are at loss how come they consider our >> product unsafe with the latest version of the standard during this >> transitional period. Any previous experience to deal with such authority >> can be shared? It sounds ridiculous charge on our product. >> >> Thanks and regards, >> >> Scott >> >> > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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> > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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> - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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>
