rcd

[dreadnought]

hi all,a friend of mine is going to sell her 2018 widebeam, she fitted it out herself and is a live aboard,after having a word with the local broker she was told that before it can be sold it would have to be inspected and have an RCD certificate and the price of this is nearly three grand,does this sound right? many thanks

[PaulD]

2 minutes ago, dreadnought said:

hi all,a friend of mine is going to sell her 2018 widebeam, she fitted it out herself and is a live aboard,after having a word with the local broker she was told that before it can be sold it would have to be inspected and have an RCD certificate and the price of this is nearly three grand,does this sound right? many thanks

Yes

 

[GUMPY]

Yes absolutely 😱

[Tracy D'arth]

Yes,

or sell it cheap underhand to someone who does not care and risk prosecution.  You have to have owned it for 5 years to avoid the RCD hassle but others know better than me.

[cuthound]

38 minutes ago, dreadnought said:

hi all,a friend of mine is going to sell her 2018 widebeam, she fitted it out herself and is a live aboard,after having a word with the local broker she was told that before it can be sold it would have to be inspected and have an RCD certificate and the price of this is nearly three grand,does this sound right? many thanks

 

The three grand will be for the inspection and paperwork.

 

If the boat requires remedial work to bring it up to standard (very likely if it the RCD documentation wasn't followed in the first place), then the cost could be much more.

[David Mack]

26 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

You have to have owned it for 5 years to avoid the RCD hassle

And I think the 5 year clock starts ticking when the boat is put into use, so not necessarily fully completed, but if all the fitting out was done on land then the 5 years wouldn't start until the boat was put in the water.

[ditchcrawler]

Probably pay them to keep it. The number of posts you see saying I wont be selling it when they start their fit out.

[Bee]

3 grand sounds more than reasonable to me. There are many hours or even many days of work just compiling the manual.  To do it properly and by the book is a big job.  Most of the RCD is nothing to do with the construction of the boat so its not like a boat safety cert, or a survey ,its all about the manufacturing processes and procedures that the builder followed to ensure a level playing field for manufacturers. If the boat has a safety certificate it is 'canalworthy' Your friend can self certify that it complies (happy to be corrected if that has changed) and take a chance on it. That will take a good week of research in itself. Anyway, the chances of any trouble are microscopic. That's what I did but Bee is now 15 yrs old or so and outside the RCD stuff. 

[ditchcrawler]

Rather depends if the fitout was done to the RCD standards which plebs like us have difficulties finding. Minor things like cable size, terminations etc. to larger things that are not covered by the BSS

[matty40s]

12 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Rather depends if the fitout was done to the RCD standards which plebs like us have difficulties finding. Minor things like cable size, terminations etc. to larger things that are not covered by the BSS

It doesnt depend on that at all.

The broker is absolutely correct.

[Bee]

Just now, ditchcrawler said:

Rather depends if the fitout was done to the RCD standards which plebs like us have difficulties finding. Minor things like cable size, terminations etc. to larger things that are not covered by the BSS

You are correct about the RCD actually specifying cable standards and stuff, I think the BSS does as well but I've no idea if they vary or are comparable. Also there is stuff like stability and 'Downflooding' which I think is just 'Sinking' and  the categories that any boat is built for, everything from the Grand union to the South Atlantic in winter. I doubt if any narrowboat or widebeam has ever had a meaningful stability test. I know that my self certified boat was not built to any of the manufacturing standards as I did it myself on a patch of ground in the open  with no employees and occasional electricity but it does have an emergency steering apparatus in case the hydraulics burst - a tiller that slots into a socket and that was a requirement at the time and I bet there are precious few narrowboats that have that yet they will claim to be built to the RCD. Its a strange hybrid the RCD, it tries to cover the making and selling all boats so it is so vague and generalised as to be quite meaningless - apart from the manual which is specific to the boat.

[PeterF]

52 minutes ago, cuthound said:

If the boat requires remedial work to bring it up to standard (very likely if it the RCD documentation wasn't followed in the first place), then the cost could be much more.

Especially if something like the 230V wiring has been done with single core domestic house cable not multistrand flexible cable per the RCD specification.

[Alan de Enfield]

2 hours ago, dreadnought said:

hi all,a friend of mine is going to sell her 2018 widebeam, she fitted it out herself and is a live aboard,after having a word with the local broker she was told that before it can be sold it would have to be inspected and have an RCD certificate and the price of this is nearly three grand,does this sound right? many thanks

 

Absolutely correct. Unless the boat has been built in accordance with the RCD (now called RCR) and has been signed off as compliant by the manufacturer then it cannot be sold for 5 years after being "first placed on the market" (which pretty much means completed and put into the water).

 

The RCD now means that the boat has to remain compliant for the life of the boat so the 5-year rule is not quite as simple as it used to be, and the builder becomes liable for any injusry / death 'caused by the boat'.

 

Basically trying to sell a boat without an RCD is becoming more difficult unless you have a PCA (Post Construction  Assessment) by a suitably qualified surveyor.

 

I was looking to buy a boat in the EU where the RCD paerwork and the VAT paid certificates were missing. In boating these two documents are as importand as your BIrth Certificate and Passport. I offered the seler £80,000 less than they were asking because legally they could not sell it without the paperwork, they accepted and I took ownership and had to get the paperwork 'sorted out' before I was allowed to leave Europe and bring it back to the UK.

 

Your friend can either

1) Find someone prepared to buy it at a knock down price

2) Pay the £3000 and get it certified as compliant

3) Put it in storage for 3 years and then sell it.

4) Keep it.

 

For anyone doing their own fit-out on a sailaway they should NOW employ a surveyor to monitor their work and sign the boat off at the end (like the building inspector does when you build your own house), that way you have no legal liability if the boat, explodes, sinks, catches fire and kills someone.

The new laws mean that 20 years down the road the relatives of the deceased (that bought your boat - even 2nd, 3rd or 10th owners) could sue you in a criminal court.

 

There are Boat Fitting / Boat Building websites where this is all explained in much more detail.

[Ronaldo47]

They certainly like their paperwork in Europe. Some 15 years ago my late brother-in-law, a brit who had been  resident in France for more than 30 years, bought an "Old Gaffer" in the USA and had it shipped to France. In order to get it registered, as well a document showing that VAT and import duty had been paid, he had had to get a certificate proving that it had been built to a  classic design (I forget the cut-off date) to avoid it having to comply with the then-current European regulations. He managed to track down a original issue of a 1930's US yachting journal that described the design in great detail, and included a comprehensive set of drawings of the design.  The Bureau Veritas office in Paris duly issued his boat's exemption certificate.

 

When he died suddenly,, and we had to sort out his estate and sell the boat, I found that the small print on the certificate stated that, if the boat were sold within 5 years of the date of importation, it would then have to comply with the current EC regulations ( his correspondence indicated that it was impossible to make an Old Gaffer meet the buoyancy requirement). It was also clear from his correspondence that he had been unaware of this condition, as was the notaire who was arranging the sale when I pointed it out to him. Fortunately we were then at the 4 years 11 months point, so it was only necessary to delay the official date of sale by a month.

 

 

, 

[system 4-50]

4 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The new laws mean that 20 years down the road the relatives of the deceased (that bought your boat - even 2nd, 3rd or 10th owners) could successfully sue you in a criminal court, if you had built a lethal defect into the boat.

I have modified your statement above because I fancied doing so.  

I would recommend not building a lethal defect into the boat.

[Alan de Enfield]

Just now, system 4-50 said:

I have modified your statement above because I fancied doing so.  

I would recommend not building a lethal defect into the boat.

 

 

And, without compiling a proper manual (RCD requirement) who is to know that it was the 3rd owner and not you (the builder) that capped off the gas pipe with some gaffa-tape, and spliced in those extra electrical wires with chocolate block connectors, or, had 5 wires connecting onto one battery terminal, or ................................

 

It is now too much of a risk not to do it 'by the book'.

[Tacet]

4 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

For anyone doing their own fit-out on a sailaway they should NOW employ a surveyor to monitor their work and sign the boat off at the end (like the building inspector does when you build your own house), that way you have no legal liability if the boat, explodes, sinks, catches fire and kills someone.

 

No matter how negligent or even fraudulent I may have been, I will have no liability whatsoever if a surveyor signs off the boat?  Sounds ideal.

[MtB]

48 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

And, without compiling a proper manual (RCD requirement) who is to know that it was the 3rd owner and not you (the builder) that capped off the gas pipe with some gaffa-tape, and spliced in those extra electrical wires with chocolate block connectors, or, had 5 wires connecting onto one battery terminal, or ................................

 

It is now too much of a risk not to do it 'by the book'.

 

 

And how many people have been killed by extra wires in a chocolate block, or five wires on a battery terminal? 

 

Or even by a gas pipe capped off with gaffa tape! 

[Neil2]

8 hours ago, Tacet said:

No matter how negligent or even fraudulent I may have been, I will have no liability whatsoever if a surveyor signs off the boat?  Sounds ideal.

 

RCD like the Building Regulations is nothing to do with safety, it's to do with liability. 

 

We stopped being concerned with safety quite some time ago.  

[MtB]

27 minutes ago, Neil2 said:

 

RCD like the Building Regulations is nothing to do with safety, it's to do with liability. 

 

We stopped being concerned with safety quite some time ago.  

 

Quite so. And for imposing political goals like reducing CO2 emissions from engines and boilers.  

 

 

 

Perfectly safe classes of engines and boilers are both banned in new builds for unacceptable levels and types of emissions. 

 

 

[Jen-in-Wellies]

9 hours ago, system 4-50 said:

I would recommend not building a lethal defect into the boat.

Sound advice. Let's not do that.

[Alan de Enfield]

10 hours ago, MtB said:

 

 

And how many people have been killed by extra wires in a chocolate block, or five wires on a battery terminal? 

 

Or even by a gas pipe capped off with gaffa tape! 

 

 

Irrelevant : The law states what you must do, if you do not do it then you are legally liable.

It is rarely more difficult to do something properly than to do it incorrectly, why take the risk ?

 

I'm sure we have all done a 'get you home bodge' and forgotten to repair it properly at a later date, but building a boat from scratch I don't see why you wouldn't do it correctly.

Is it just ignorance, is it because of financial limitations, or is just because "its a canal boat and no one has died from having 5 connections onto a battery" mentality.

 

I'm sure that in your long career as a 'gas boiler man' you have found shortcuts and 'alternatives' to make your work easier, but, would you leave a customers gas boiler in a condition that was not compliant with the regs ?

[MtB]

15 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Irrelevant :

 

It is not irrelevant. We were discussing risk, not compliance with the law. You just twisted and swerved the point I was making, that five wires on a batt terminal present virtually zero elevated risk over doing it the RCR way.

[PaulD]

When CE marking started a risk assessment was done to determine which standards should be applied and the consequences of each risk to ensure it was being dealt with adequately. I still have my course notes. It was originally intended to be within the ability of any competent engineer. Gradually the process degenerated into an expensive paper exercise to demonstrate compliance with a huge list of standards many (most) of which were irrelevant and not associated with any real hazard. 

[Alan de Enfield]

34 minutes ago, PaulD said:

When CE marking started a risk assessment was done to determine which standards should be applied and the consequences of each risk to ensure it was being dealt with adequately. I still have my course notes. It was originally intended to be within the ability of any competent engineer. Gradually the process degenerated into an expensive paper exercise to demonstrate compliance with a huge list of standards many (most) of which were irrelevant and not associated with any real hazard. 

 

 

I think that the big problem is that the original idea has evolved to become a 'monster' that needs continual 'feeding', encompasses 27 (28 ?) different nations and cultures, and covers everything from a "rowing boat to a £10m transatlantic motor yacht". There are huge swathes of legislation that are going to be potentially 'not applicable' to some class of boats.

 

If I was writing it I'd have core subjects that all powered vessels must comply with (eg, fuel, engines, gas and electrics) and other requirements would be listed as applicable to Category A, B, C, or D vessels as required.

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.