BSS examiners in short supply?

[LadyG]

18 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Despite Alan asserting BSS compliance on each check is a matter of fact, in my similar job I can confirm loads of it is a matter of personal opinion of the tester. For example this LPG tail is within date but the sun has caused the outer rubber face of it to have a few minor cracks in it but it doesn't leak. Fail or pass? A matter of opinion.

 

I also assert that if a given examiner keeps on failing boats on trivial matters like this his business will dry up pretty quickly. 

 

What makes anyone recommend a given examiner? That he always passes a boat? Or turns up on time then find 122 trivial faults and issues a fail? 

 

Arguably, the latter is perhaps the more diligent examiner. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm quoting the GSIUR regs for a liver board, e.g. yours. 

I just meant regarding lpg regulators, they should be the same, one would expect

Edited May 9 by LadyG

[Stroudwater1]

As most of us know cars over 40 years old need have no MOT unless the owner has had significant changes. So there appears to be a precedent for trusting owners to self report if there are changes to a vehicle/ vessel . 
 

I changed the pipes from the gas to regulator pre BSS recently. They were manufactured in 1993. The BSS Examiner had a look at them and advised me that I didn’t need to, they were fine. Never mind,  more environmental damage. 
 

One thing that is unorthodox is the changes that take place to the BSS. No significant change for 30 years on our boat  but now the ventilation rules have changed so each area needs a certain amount rather than the interior in general. Fair enough if boats were sealed like a home but most are far from that. We nearly had  an advisory due to this but as MtB commented it’s a matter of opinion.
 

Trying to understand the BSS guidance in advance I found  difficult. It’s not going to win a plain English award. 

About the only things really worthwhile seem to be gas safety and Carbon monoxide meters that work. There seem to be no check on a smoke alarm yet we need 3 fire extinguishers when if the smoke detectors work we would be highly likely to get out ASAP. 

 

 

[LadyG]

8 minutes ago, Stroudwater1 said:

As most of us know cars over 40 years old need have no MOT unless the owner has had significant changes. So there appears to be a precedent for trusting owners to self report if there are changes to a vehicle/ vessel . 
 

I changed the pipes from the gas to regulator pre BSS recently. They were manufactured in 1993. The BSS Examiner had a look at them and advised me that I didn’t need to, they were fine. Never mind,  more environmental damage. 
 

One thing that is unorthodox is the changes that take place to the BSS. No significant change for 30 years on our boat  but now the ventilation rules have changed so each area needs a certain amount rather than the interior in general. Fair enough if boats were sealed like a home but most are far from that. We nearly had  an advisory due to this but as MtB commented it’s a matter of opinion.
 

Trying to understand the BSS guidance in advance I found  difficult. It’s not going to win a plain English award. 

About the only things really worthwhile seem to be gas safety and Carbon monoxide meters that work. There seem to be no check on a smoke alarm yet we need 3 fire extinguishers when if the smoke detectors work we would be highly likely to get out ASAP. 

 

 

Pedant alert: gas hose is flexible, gas pipe is not.

The extinguishers are there to allow you to get out of the boat.  You are strongly advised not to fire fight as such, but to exit asap. Obviously there may be circumstances that could dictate otherwise, but generally, get out ASAP. 

 

Edited May 9 by LadyG

[T_i_m]

9 minutes ago, Stroudwater1 said:

As most of us know cars over 40 years old need have no MOT unless the owner has had significant changes.

I think it's more about opting out of having the MOT, if you choose to, along with the changes thing. Interesting you can make quite a few changes, especially if they are considered to make the car greener or safer, or you can't get straight replacements etc.

 

eg, You could have a car over 40 years old and it still be having an MOT.

 

I opted out of the MOT with my kitcar but would still put it in for for one (or going though the same motions) if I was to start driving it again.

[Mike Todd]

12 hours ago, Jerra said:

You are assuming everybody is as sensible and responsible as yourself.  They aren't!  I have had hundreds (thousands) of individuals through my hands in the 40 years of my career believe me many aren't.

How long since you took your degree?  Both my daughters have taken them recently (3 courses between them) and they weren't like you suggest.

The same is true of the MOT.  So what relevance has the MOT.

Yet again you are basing your suggestions on what you as a sensible responsible mature person would do.  Rules and regulations can not function on such a level as not everybody is sensible, responsible and mature. 

Now that there is a MOT true prior to the MOT there was no standard or check on road worthiness.  Just like boats before the BSSC.  The insurance on a boat might be invalidated but after the gas explosion and fire it might be difficult to prove it wasn't safe.  Unless of course you say every fire etc is owing to the boat being unsafe then what value in insurance.

A slight hint here that suggests that those who are 'not responsible and mature' are somehow feckless and wilful. However, fixing these things, potential fails, costs money usually in large lumps. Perhaps worth pondering what you might stretch to doing if you found yourself without the savings to fund the repair or fix.

[T_i_m]

6 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

A slight hint here that suggests that those who are 'not responsible and mature' are somehow feckless and wilful. However, fixing these things, potential fails, costs money usually in large lumps. Perhaps worth pondering what you might stretch to doing if you found yourself without the savings to fund the repair or fix.

I think this all comes under  the 'Don't Let Perfect Be the Enemy of Good” and trying to work that in with real world stuff but it can be very difficult for the average Joe to determine and whilst trying to balance say environmental issues (replacing stuff unnecessarily 'because' or 'just in case') with real tangible risk.

 

If I took over a s/h boat (or car) I would know what things I should check or replace because they could be high risk and / or were likely to be ignored (like rear drum brakes).

[T_i_m]

12 hours ago, Stroudwater1 said:

There seem to be no check on a smoke alarm yet we need 3 fire extinguishers when if the smoke detectors work we would be highly likely to get out ASAP.

That reminds me of when I refitted the rebuilt Webasto TTC the exhaust cover started smoking fairly heavily as the hot exhaust was burning the diesel off that got on there from the general area / refitting works.

 

Given I was sitting on the engine and very close to it all at the time I asked my mate if he had an extinguisher handy and his only reply was that 'did you know you can only use them once'.  Needless to say I wasn't given one so just got ready to abandon ship. 😉

 

I think I may need to re-evaluate our relationship. 😉

[Mike Todd]

10 hours ago, T_i_m said:

I think this all comes under  the 'Don't Let Perfect Be the Enemy of Good” and trying to work that in with real world stuff but it can be very difficult for the average Joe to determine and whilst trying to balance say environmental issues (replacing stuff unnecessarily 'because' or 'just in case') with real tangible risk.

 

If I took over a s/h boat (or car) I would know what things I should check or replace because they could be high risk and / or were likely to be ignored (like rear drum brakes).

If you want your BSSC then you really don't have a lot of options if tgd examiner fails you.

[Tacet]

On 09/05/2025 at 16:12, Momac said:

 

Even the orange gas hose doesn't have an expiry date (as popularly misunderstood) but it may be examined and accepted. It might be considered good practice to replace regulator and the gas hose periodically but it's not a BSS requirement. 

 

 

On 09/05/2025 at 16:21, Alan de Enfield said:

 

It is an industry recommendation and 'best practice' - should you have a gas leak and explosion do you think your insurers would pay out if you had not followed industry installation recommendations ?

What sort of gas leak and explosion can occur - if I follow industry installation recommendations?  Or are you close to saying you cannot have effective insurance for gas incidents?

The reason for insurance is largely to cover for the mistakes of the insured.  If insurance was readily voided by making mistakes, it wouldn't be worth having.

Edited May 10 by Tacet

[Alan de Enfield]

44 minutes ago, Tacet said:

 

What sort of gas leak and explosion can occur - if I follow industry installation recommendations?  Or are you close to saying you cannot have effective insurance for gas incidents?

The reason for insurance is largely to cover for the mistakes of the insured.  If insurance was readily voided by making mistakes, it wouldn't be worth having.

 

An example would be where gas hoses perish / crack and leak gas.

 

There are several clauses in (my) boat insurance policy which could be used to avoid paying out, for example :

 

 

Your insurers will not pay for :

 

loss or damage caused by Gradual Deterioration which
could have been identified by routine inspection and / or
prevented by servicing or maintenance or recommended
replacement intervals, in accordance with engineers’,
surveyors’ or manufacturers’ advice;

 

 

[Momac]

10 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

An example would be where gas hoses perish / crack and leak gas.

 

The orange hose in my boat is in the gas locker only. In the event the hose or the regulator should leak the gas would drain harmlessly overboard. I thought all boats had a gas bottle locker or external mounting designed on this principle.

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

20 minutes ago, Momac said:

The orange hose in my boat is in the gas locker only. In the event the hose or the regulator should leak the gas would drain harmlessly overboard. I thought all boats had a gas bottle locker or external mounting designed on this principle.

 

 

 

That does not apply to all boats tho'!

 

Many boats have a short length of hose connecting the cooker to the copper pipe (for example)

 

One of my boats, for example, is with the 'full system' being installed in rubber hose and complies with both the BSS and ISO 10239:2025 "Small craft — Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) systems".

[Momac]

14 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

That does not apply to all boats tho'!

 

Many boats have a short length of hose connecting the cooker to the copper pipe (for example)

 

One of my boats, for example, is with the 'full system' being installed in rubber hose and complies with both the BSS and ISO 10239:2025 "Small craft — Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) systems".

I see.

I don't think my boat doesn't has any rubber hose other than the orange hose in the gas locker . I thought this was normal with the possible exception of a flexible hose to the cooker on some yachts where the cooker may be  gimbal mounted . 

 

Is it not a recommendation that the hose length should be minimised and the hose not more then 1 metre  in length ? So if your boat with full system in flexible hose is  a good example of an installation that does  not match industry recommendations but is acceptable to the BSS. 

Recommendations and  requirements are not the same thing .

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

32 minutes ago, Momac said:

flexible hose to the cooker on some yachts where the cooker may be  gimbal mounted . 

 

 

Flexible hoses are used on NB cookers so the can be pulled forward for cleaning etc.

 

From the BSS :

 

Are all low-pressure LPG hoses used to connect regulators or appliances to LPG
supply pipework only, and are they a maximum of 1m in length?

 

So, if you elect to go for a pipe system, you are allowed to use up to 1mt of hose to connect appliances to the rigid pipes.

 

 

32 minutes ago, Momac said:

So if your boat with full system in flexible hose is  a good example of an installation that does  not match industry recommendations

 

 

Not sure what you mean ..................

 

How can it not be an 'industry standard' (applicable throughout the world and written into the RCD/RCR) when it is installed in accordance with an ISO standard ?

Edited May 11 by Alan de Enfield

[Momac]

18 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

 

Not sure what you mean ..................

 

How can it not be an 'industry standard' (applicable throughout the world and written into the RCD/RCR) when it is installed in accordance with an ISO standard ?

Please don't  confuse standards with recommendations 

It is and industry  recommended that rubber hoses  should be minimised in length and not more than 1 metre in length .

Your full installation in hose certainly doesn't sound like it matches that recommendation.

 

You say your installation in flexible hose  complies with standards which i don't wish to look into so i don't dispute it for the purposes of this post.

 

Standards and recommendations are not the same thing.

So if there is a conflict which do you think  is the most important between standards and recommendations?

I say standards are the higher authority with recommendations being just chit chat.

 

[LadyG]

1 hour ago, Momac said:

I see.

I don't think my boat doesn't has any rubber hose other than the orange hose in the gas locker . I thought this was normal with the possible exception of a flexible hose to the cooker on some yachts where the cooker may be  gimbal mounted . 

 

Is it not a recommendation that the hose length should be minimised and the hose not more then 1 metre  in length ? So if your boat with full system in flexible hose is  a good example of an installation that does  not match industry recommendations but is acceptable to the BSS. 

Recommendations and  requirements are not the same thing .

 

 

My BSS Examiner changed the cooker armoured hose to a coil of copper tubing. 

[Momac]

13 minutes ago, LadyG said:

My BSS Examiner changed the cooker armoured hose to a coil of copper tubing. 

I think this is usual for a fitted gas cooker/hob but I guess a freestanding cooker has a hose eg just like a freestanding  domestic cooker in a house

[LadyG]

9 minutes ago, Momac said:

I think this is usual for a fitted gas cooker/hob but I guess a freestanding cooker has a hose eg just like a freestanding  domestic cooker in a house

You may guess all you like but i am not convinced the BSS has two standards on cookers: fixed / free standing. I suspect it comes down to interpretation. As armoured hose cant be inspected for condition its a bit of a moot point.

[Tacet]

14 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

An example would be where gas hoses perish / crack and leak gas.

 

There are several clauses in (my) boat insurance policy which could be used to avoid paying out, for example :

 

 

Your insurers will not pay for :

 

loss or damage caused by Gradual Deterioration which
could have been identified by routine inspection and / or
prevented by servicing or maintenance or recommended
replacement intervals, in accordance with engineers’,
surveyors’ or manufacturers’ advice;

 

 

Surely a perished/ cracked pipe could be identified by routine inspection

 

So I'll ask again, what sort of gas leak & explosion do you think is covered by insurance, if any?

[Alan de Enfield]

13 minutes ago, Tacet said:

Surely a perished/ cracked pipe could be identified by routine inspection

 

You obviously have more faith in boaters making routine inspections than I do - I know of many that don't even look the engine over and look for loose belts, oil leaks, coolent levels etc before turning the key.

To have 'routine inspections' down to checking the condition of hoses would be an anathema to most boaters.

[T_i_m]

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

You obviously have more faith in boaters making routine inspections than I do - I know of many that don't even look the engine over and look for loose belts, oil leaks, coolent levels etc before turning the key.

To have 'routine inspections' down to checking the condition of hoses would be an anathema to most boaters.

I think it can be down to your personality , if you are risk averse / aware and if you have any previous experience of stuff going wrong (and survived). 😉

 

There is also the impact of having an engineering mindset or not. When I was planning our kitchen the Mrs sounded like she understood the drawing but only seemed to actually understand what was what when it was there in front of her.

 

I see the world like something from the Matrix, everything translucent, an exploded diagram, or at least those things I've had experience of (so now including a Webasto water heater etc). 😉

 

So for me, I would wonder if you had a cooker joined to the boat via a coil of copper tube, would you need to anneal the tube every so often, depending on how often you pulled it out to clean? Eg, how many people know about work hardening of materials to consider that at all?

 

One of our daughters would generally take heed of our advice because she respected our POV. The other seemed to have to put herself though the things we advised her against before she would accept them as fact. Forewarned didn't seem to mean forearmed in her case.

 

So, there are things my mate on his LANB seems to consider important that I don't and the other way round, like changing the engine oil!

 

33 minutes ago, Tacet said:

Surely a perished/ cracked pipe could be identified by routine inspection

 

So I'll ask again, what sort of gas leak & explosion do you think is covered by insurance, if any?

Ooh, oooh, I've give it a go ... 'any that happened by accident and that weren't reasonable to predict / check'?

 

Like, say another boat hits yours whilst it's moored, knocks something that would be normally considered 'retained' over and that clips a gas pipe / hose, causing a leak'?

 

What did I win? 😉

[Alan de Enfield]

20 minutes ago, T_i_m said:

I think it can be down to your personality , if you are risk averse / aware and if you have any previous experience of stuff going wrong (and survived)

My "problem" (if it's viewed as such) is probably my flying background both as a civilian flying instructor' in the RAF and an Instructor at a civilian gliding club.

 

In both activities formalised 'pre-flight' checks and a DI (Daily Inspection before the 1st flight of the day) are not optional.

 

 A 2 or 3 minute check in the engine 'ole can pick up an assortment of potential problems before they happen.

Edited May 11 by Alan de Enfield

[T_i_m]

11 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

My "problem" (if it's viewed as such) is probably my flying background both as a civilain flying instructor' in the RAF and an Instructor at a civilian gliding club.

 

In both activities formalised 'pre-flight' checks and a DI (Daily Inspection before the 1st flight of the day) are not optional.

 

 A 2 or 3 minute check in the engine 'ole can pick up an assortment of potential problems before they happen.

Exactly ... and because if you are responsible for others (in your boat or plane) you also carry that responsibility personally, the buck stops with you etc.

 

Whilst talking to an AA guy at a open day thing he suggested those of us driving old cars who have the basic tools and a reasonable level of skill are the least burden to them re Roadside or Recovery.

 

We had put a decent length / telescopic brace in the boot because we know it's unlikely we would be able to remove most wheel nuts without.  The brace would be beside the tow rope, the jump leads, the rag and gloves etc.

 

I gave our daughter a pair of walkie talkies to take with her when she went on holiday to the Peak District. She didn't bother to take them and ended up needing vehicle recovery where there was no mobile phone coverage and she was a miles rainy walk to a cafe that has WiFi access. He stayed in the car to protect their gear and receive the Recovery agent and she walked between the car and cafe to get updates. She said she would take the walkie talkies next time ... 😉

 

 

Edited May 11 by T_i_m

[Sue68]

I self certified that I could see well enough to drive my car, which is much more lethal than a boat. After being on the management committee of the BSS many years ago I'm still convinced it is a money making empire building scheme.

[Unicorn Stampede]

I'm not surprised if the number of BSS examiners is dropping. My partner looked at doing it at one point, but the initial costs felt so high that it felt not worth the time or investment.