CE marking

[Tim Mackey]

You see this is where it remains a muddy issue.

Ioan has "high end" branded receivers which bear no such mark - perhaps he should sell them on to someone quickly -  no wait, he cant do that can he as this would be illegal.

He can continue to use them, but not pass them to anyone else.

Its all very clear now...clear as mud.

As far as buying and selling stuff to and from each other, I am afraid I take the rather old fashioned and ( IMO ) sensible approach of "buyer beware", and accept responsibility for your own actions.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Andy wrote:

 

"AFAIK if you buy a non-CE-marked RX unit and use it you are not breaking the law, if you then give/sell/gift it to another club member then you are!"

 

I totally agree with your point on selling/trading nonCE marked stuff in the EU being illegal - but I don't think your comment above is completely correct Andy. If you buy and use a nonCE marked item you are not necessarily breaking the law - but if it turns out to be non-compliant you are! What is more the rsponsibility will be entirely yours if you are deemed to have brought it into the EU.

 

I've checked this out with the legal bods in our Business Development Unit - I didn't tell them why I wanted to know . They confirm that their understanding is as I outlined in a post above.

 

A CE Mark is your assurance that the item meets the relavant standards. It transfers the legal onus onto the supplier or manufacturer from you. You are seen in law to have taken reasonable measures to ensure your kit is compliant.

 

If its not CE marked then you are legally responsible for it being compliant - this would especially be the case if you were the agent who imported it into the EU. If it is compliant - you have no problem and you can use it with immunity. The problem is of course - how do you know?

 

BEB

[Andy Harris]

@BEB

 

  I'm making a distinction between RX devices and TX devices.  TX devices fall under a range of laws for which I'm unfamiliar.

 

  I'm also keeping my comments to just what I know about CE marking, I reckon I'll have to look up the definition of 'agent' in the book, however as previously stated the book can induce near fatal levels of boredom.  I'll have to see how committed I am to this great forum before I go to the room where the book is!

 

Andy

[kc]

We are making a simple situation too complex!   It seems to be that this Rx is not CE marked even though it seems to work OK.  Therefore its not proven compliant so we should not be using in in Britain according to the BMFA handbook. 

As most of us rely on BMFA insurance we need to fly in accordance with BMFA  recommendations  or we might be to blame if there is an accident.

 

Further anyone who uses cheapjack illegal equipment might lose model flying for everyone if there is a serious but uninsured problem.  People are looking for excuses to ban model flying, so we must be perfectly legal and correct.  ( see what happened in Spain where displays are banned it seems )

 

Edited By kc on 17/09/2010 12:44:40

[Tom Foreman]

Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but the CE marking will probably be in relation to whether the electronic equipment in question interferes with other electronic equipment. e.g. your Non-CE marked RX might swamp a CE marked RX as it flies past.

 

The CE mark won't ensure that your RX is any good or not but you would hope that it is fit for purpose, but nothing more it can still fail in flight as RX's tend to do from time to time for all hosts of reasons (bad installation, battery failure, design fault etc..)

 

Cheers

 

Tom

Edited By Tom Foreman on 17/09/2010 12:48:22

[Ed Darter]

has anyone approached HK (and similar companies) to ask if the equipment is CE approved, though I guess they'll not be too bothered while we are buying the kit anyway !

[Vecchio Austriaco]

I totally agree to Eric Brays comment further up - th CE mark has been developed as a trade barrier for goods coming into the european community. Most EU regulations are rather weak - so is the CE mark. To get a CE mark a self declaration of the manufacturer or the importer is enough. I know from some product groups under the directive that a marking on the packaging is enough - it is not necessary to mark the product itself.

[Tim Mackey]

In that case whats to stop people who have bought and are using this gear to simply say the CE mark was on the packaging /leaflet, and they no longer have it.

I do think its a bit unrealistic to think that all the hundreds or thousands of people who have some non CE marked R/C gear are going to suddenly just stop using it!

Hands up all those who have absolutely nothing in their collection without a CE marking.

[Steve Hargreaves - Moderator]

Its a good point Tim.....or you could just buy some CE stickers from the stationers & apply them to all your kit....plead it was there when you bought it...good faith & all that...job done

 

As has been mentioned all the CE mark does is prove that the unit meets certain standards. NOT having a CE mark does not mean there is anything "wrong" with the item in question..indeed it may be superior to the CE marked unit....I would take a guess that items coming out of China get a CE sticker if detined for Europe & don't if going elsewhere...ie its the same item being sold its just that one has a sticker & one doesn't

 

Isn't it amazing though, that our Lords & Masters (ie the EU) impose this sort of thing on us & no-one seems to understand fully what its all about & given that the membership of this forum encompasses people from such a wide range of professions & industries I'd say thats quite incredible.....

 

It would be interesting to get a definitive answer on this point...maybe we should have a whipround & employ a lawyer to tell us!!!

[Tim Mackey]

Crikey wih the lawyers likely  fees I could stock up on genuine Spektrum receivers for all the models in the entire club - if not the whole of Wales I reckon

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

As I stated above I have talked to some legal people about it - albeit informaly and in-house. I relayed what they said above.

 

All this talk of "its only self certification so it doesn't matter" is I think potentially rather risky. As I said, if your non-CE marked kit complies with the specs then you have nothing to worry about - you arecommitting no offence by using it.

 

But,...and its very big but!....remember that if you brought it into the EU you are personally liable for the fact that it is compliant. Effectively you are self certifying by the act of using it. Self certifying isn't just some "minor unimportant beauacratic activity" because when you certify you accept the liability that goes with it.

 

As stated above a big importer is protected because;

 

1. He will ask the manufacturer for evidence of compliance which he will keep on file.

2. He has profession indemnity insurance if he's wrong

3. He has limited liability through his company.

 

As individuals we have none of these - so in my view choosing to self certify (which remember is what you are doing if you use the kit) could seen as very brave and very trusting given that you doing it on no evidence.

 

In answer to your question Tim (i.e. why not just claim it was on the box etc) the reason why not is that it would be illegal to do so! This sort of thing is only going to come to light if there was, say, a very serious accident in which someone was killed or seriously injured which resulted in an investigation into your kit. If you lied about CE marking at that point you could obviously find yourself in very serious trouble, especially if it was subsequently shown that the kit in quesion was non-compliant. Remember, insurance isn't going to help you here - this isn't just civil liability we are talking about.

 

My guess is that the vast majority of the cloned stuff from the East is probably compliant, CE marked or not, and so is no problem. But I do think folks have to understand the potential risk they are running in effectively self certifying.

 

BEB

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

To muddy the waters even more - one of the dTI documents I read last night from their website specifically excluded a person selling a surplus to requirement non-CE marked item at a car boot sale from prosecution!  So if it's "legal" for someone to sell that item then surely by extension, it must have been bought by the new purchaser  legitimately!

Edited By Martin Harris on 17/09/2010 17:21:25

[Biggestgerbil]

Posted by Tim Mackey - Administrator on 17/09/2010 11:44:13:

You see this is where it remains a muddy issue.

Ioan has "high end" branded receivers which bear no such mark - perhaps he should sell them on to someone quickly -  no wait, he cant do that can he as this would be illegal.

He can continue to use them, but not pass them to anyone else.

Its all very clear now...clear as mud.

As far as buying and selling stuff to and from each other, I am afraid I take the rather old fashioned and ( IMO ) sensible approach of "buyer beware", and accept responsibility for your own actions.

 

 

Oh! deary, deary me!! The last of my 35Mhz Rx's are on e-bay as we speak...

 

[kc]

Biggles Elder Brother is right again!

 

The situation is ( seems to be ) this Rx is not legal!  We might bitch about CE marks but in this case they should protect RC buyers from duff equip ( even if this particular Rx seems OK to us )

 

We must not use illegal equipment.   No responsible person can endorse using illegal RC gear.  That is the bottom line.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

kc - I have a lot of personal sympathy with your position. But with respect that's not what I said!

 

I didn't say it was illegal to use these rx's - its only illegal if they are non compliant with the standards. My point is that by using them you are effectively becoming responsible for them being compliant and that is a potentially exposed position because being responsible for that isn't just some meaningless bit of admin.

 

BEB

[Erfolg]

Non of my Futaba equipment has a CE sticker,now or when purchased.

 

I have just had my fridge tungsten Filament Bulb fail. I was told by a jobs worth, at  B&Q, you cannot have a replacement bulb, it would be illegal to sell one to you. The electrical factors down the road said the EU allows tungsten bulbs for fridges. They just cost more now.

 

My own experiences of legal advice within a very large company, is that it could change significantly with subtle changes in the position presented, even when positive, in there assessment of outcome, it was never 100% certain.

 

Rxs receive signals don't they, not transmits signals?

 

Normally these Rxs appear from some parts of the UK model trade, I would bet that they then certainly will have a self certification certificate. Why the antipathy from some from self certification? 

 

I am surprised at the absolutist positions some adopt, surely all laws and regulations should be reasonable, if they are to be respected and not become viewed with contempt. Take bananas, once it was illegal to sell some bent ones, but due to ridicule, now the regulation has been amended and I only eat bent ones, as an act of defiance..

[Erfolg]

That is my receivers have no CE markings, none. Txs do!

[Erfolg]

Just had a thought, should servos have a CE mark?

 

What about battery chargers, for Lipos etc?

 

Or how about that electronic sealing iron?

[David perry 1]

Some kids ought to have it.

 

D 

[Lazygit]

Posted by Erfolg on 18/09/2010 11:08:08:

Just had a thought, should servos have a CE mark?

 

What about battery chargers, for Lipos etc?

 

Or how about that electronic sealing iron?

 Everything electrical (and possibly other things). If teh RF emissions or susceptibility aren't relevant, the Low Voltage Directive will be, and both involve the CE mark.

Edited By Lazygit on 18/09/2010 16:51:14

[Steve W-O]

Posted by Erfolg on 18/09/2010 11:08:08:

Just had a thought, should servos have a CE mark?

 

What about battery chargers, for Lipos etc?

 

Or how about that electronic sealing iron?

 

 

 

Possibly, but not for the same reason the transmitter needs one.

 

The lipo battery charger would need one if it was powered from the mains, but that would apply to insulation standards for example, and would have nothing to do with how well or how safely it charges the lipos.

 

The transmitter will have one to say it complies with things like output power and spurious emissions, it will be nothing to do with the build quality of the gimbals etc.

 

On a transmitter with a removable RF module, the module needs one, but the rest doesn't.  

[Lazygit]

Sorry to disagree Steve, but essentially the charger does need one for the same reason the transmitter does in that having a microprocessor in, it has fast switching edges and these give rise to RF output unless handled correctly. A transmitter without it's module also needs one for the same reason. Then there is the susceptibility side of the problem. All the devices must function correctly in the presence of a RF signal of a specified field strength.

I do agree with you in that it has nothing to do with mechanical build quality. 

All this EMC stuff was to protect European manufacturers from cheap imports, so most manufacturers now get the kit build cheaply abroad and ship it in for a handsome profit, and we are not legally allowed to build our own gadgets unless we get a very expensive compliance certificate. 

So thanks a bunch to the EU and the manufacturers.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Lazygit on 18/09/2010 21:45:12:

 we are not legally allowed to build our own gadgets unless we get a very expensive compliance certificate. 

So thanks a bunch to the EU and the manufacturers.

 Oh dear, this is the first I've heard of this and I hope you're wrong - but it won't surprise me if you're not... 

 

Between the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister deciding that I'm incapable of shifting a socket in my kitchen or providing a light fitting in my bathroom and the EU poking their nose in to everything we'll soon be needing certification to do up our shoelaces!

 

What's the applicable legislation?

[Lazygit]

Posted by Martin Harris on 18/09/2010 22:15:23:

 

What's the applicable legislation?

 The EMC directive.

You might be right questioning whether or not I am right. There is a proviso that allows use of equipment without testing by the use of a design file. The file has to contain all design details and justification for the claim that you make that the equipment complies with the directive. This will be signed by the person who will be in the dock in the event of a case coming to court.

As for the shoelaces certificate, we will be holding training courses in the new year. We are anticipating forthcoming legislation which will require a competency certificate, followed by five year reassessment. Failing to attain the required standard will not allow persons to tie shoelaces. They will however be allowed to wear carpet slippers, flip-flops, or wellington boots (providing they do not have side laces).

Edited By Lazygit on 18/09/2010 22:43:16