Phoenix_V

The only reason for doing that would be in order to commit fraud which would be easily provable

Did I. I don't think so. I was addressing the argument you made in your post. Agreed if you don't understand what I am saying best we agree to differ

It is likely that the transporter co will only insure against damage caused by their negligence. Ask them! Check your own insurance/ask them

The point is that by saying that you must have a fire extinguisher if you have lithium with no other qualification at all they remove any possibility they might otherwise have to decline a claim on the grounds that they weren't told about the lithium.

Indeed and anyone pushing them to act more swiftly is not helping. If the cap fits............

I keep repeating this. If buying a £40 fire extinguisher makes my insurer happy then I am happy. I dont have to use it, (wouldnt on lithium) even if there is a fire, though it apparently works oK on ordinary fires so is not a complete waste. The alternative is for them to be persuaded by you to adopt all sorts of things that I may or may not want to do but will certainly be more expensive. Stop poking the sleeping bear.

Go to France

I think that we can safely assume that the Institute of Electrical Engineers will make sure that only their qualification is recognised and make it prohibitively expensive for anyone to acquire. The standards bodies will similarly charge hundreds of pounds for access. The British Marine Federation and the RCD recognised surveyors will pile in with a demand for a £4000 major craft alteration survey. The insurers will demand a 100% premium.

be nice if you did though all adds fuel to the fire

yes but at that level they will not be discussing the ABC fire

I agree with most of what Ian D has written especially the bit about mcas and jobs for the boys. However with regard to insurance whilst the insurers of ABC may or may not be in a flap I doubt the others are panicking at all yet and it would be nice if no one prodded them to do so. The current wording on my insurance policy is clear that so long as I have a lithium fire extinguisher I am covered. They almost certainly had the bike battery fires in mind when adding it and not installed lithium but its there, they will never be able to argue that if I install lithium I should have informed them of the install its in black and white that they cover lithium as long as there is a fire extinguisher. Anything that comes along and suggests to them that they should impose more onerous terms can only be a bad thing even if Ian thinks the fire extinguisher bit is silly. Also this suggestion that if comp cover isnt available because of a lithium install third party cover can be had is just as likely to backfire if the third party insurer has been misled in any way.

I think the downward slide for me came when we changed from gas to electric fridge and suddenly needed loads more power

I am very happy with my insurers current requirements even if they are daft. One fire extinguisher which I shall never use. I'm happy they are happy. Fwiw I am considering a vented box but if that means I've made a major craft conversion needing a pca that introduces a new and more immediate problem. Also do far noone appears to know where and how big the vent needs to be. As Ian D has observed the requirements for sewer tubes do not need to be as stringent as those for ocean going catamarans. Anyway don't you have a lifeboat?

yes i know all that the point is an the current over reaction plus the pca implications of building something safer may drive people to such measures