BSC time

[Arthur Marshall]

31 minutes ago, Northernboater said:

I don't think the OP know's what he's doing or talking about, he blamed the first BSS examiner/electrician for the engine bay battery wiring the said that there had been work done to the engine and the wires were moved when the engine/gearbox was replaced, he thinks he fitted new connections for a bilge pump. Everyone has asked questions about the original BSS examiner's credibility due to the information stated by the OP,  I think the OP is trying to do everything and has done everything on a shoestring looking at the wiring and the state of the batteries and it has finally caught up with him.

Thank you for your positive and helpful comments.

I'm trying very hard not to actually blame anyone here.  To clear it up, at the last test four years back I had a new fuse panel put in and all the wiring from the batteries to that redone, together with all the rest of the wring in the engine bay.  It was done by a well known electrician who specialises in boats and also is a BSC examiner. Not on a shoestring - looking again at the pic, I think that may be the one I sent to him BEFORE he did it.  Personally, I have no doubt that it was all done up to the standards, and nothing much has changed since.

Since then, the gearbox came out, which involved moving the engine and I suspect that the engineer had to move the supported wires to do it.  He may, though I have no idea why, have had to cut the sleeving off.  As at the time I was more interested in getting moving again, I never thought to resleeve or resupport the wires, but they haven't changed. I added one direct wire from the battery to the auto terminal on the bilge pump, and that's the limit of my tampering.  It's quite possible, as above,  that the photo  predates four years ago and so gives a completely wrong impression - sorry.

My problems arose when this year's examiner queried ALL the wiring, including that of the panel, apparently on the grounds that he didn't understand what had been done or where the wires went or what they were for, and asked me to get an electrician's report in order to ensure everything as OK.  This electrician came along, basically looked at the wiring and implied it was all wrong and rather than put right a few bits that needed it, thought it would be quicker and cheaper to rip the lot out and redo it. That was what was going to cost over two grand. Not the whole boat, just the battery to panel bit.

First, I'd never heard of an examiner asking for an external report, and according to others on here, that isn't usually done.  That doesn't bother me too much as I would have had to get someone to do the work anyway to make sure it was compliant. And safe. I'm not blaming the first bloke because as far as I'm aware he did it right.  I'm not blaming the current examiner because, as I've said, he pointed out several things that were definitely wrong and it was an advisory visit and he was advising me of what he wasn't sure of. I do not know what he would have done if I had refused what he had asked and just fixed the obvious errors in the wiring and he had then done the test officially.

As this has gone on, and in the light of suggestions made on here (and of other people's experiences), i have obviously thought hard about how things have happened over the past four years and how some of the changes down there have occurred.  On reflection, I think it was the electrician's response that started the whole "maybe the first guy did it wrong" scenario, because that was essentially what was said.  But as we know, it's like taking your car to a different garage - the last bloke never, ever, did it right and it'll always cost a fortune to do it properly... and so on.

So, I resent being told I don't know what I'm doing or talking about.  I've been boating thirty years and suffering the vagaries of examiners since this rip-off came in.  It's not their fault either.  As a non-expert in either electrics or engineering, I have to trust those who claim that's what they are, even though time and time again they have proved to be anything but.  What I get from the odd rant on here is the knowledge of other people's experiences, advice and comments and constructive suggestions that make me think about what happened,  analyse it more and get a general idea as to how to proceed.  It's all been useful, sorry if i gave the wrong impression about a few things, in general you've all been very helpful!

I suggest we leave it there and close the thread.

[Paul C]

I think you need to take at least part of the blame here. Firstly, is the examiner's visit a visit to do the actual BSS test or a pre-inspection? Clarity is needed here - if its the former, he must pass/fail. If its the latter, he can say "it really needs an electrician to look at it" if he wants to - which is probably the best advice to be given.

If you're going to post photos then I'm sure you'll understand that posting a photo of something else is about as useful as a chocolate fireguard. So, if posting a picture of electrics which has just failed a BSS (or been queried by an examiner, possibly not doing a BSS test at the time) then it needs to be of those electrics, not 4 years ago. I can't believe you can't see the date of a file, or can't recognise pre- and post- work (and money) spent on it.

If someone alters wiring to eg remove/replace a gearbox, then part of the job is to reinstate the wiring, not to leave it in a BSS-fail condition. If he's been instructed to "just do the gearbox" and not the wiring, then the responsibility shifts to the person who instructed him to do that. If you're not competent to do the electrics then it would be folly to have it left in a potential fail condition, but its appreciated that you might need an electrician to visit to do this.

People have made valid points on this thread and have sought clarification on a number of issues, rather than prejudge the situation. Unfortunately that clarity hasn't come, which has somewhat diluted the (I believe actually a valid) point that the BSS scheme is a bit of a con. Also threads, just because they are started by someone, aren't "owned" by that person and I'd hope the mods can also appreciate this and lock a thread only because it breaks forum rules, rather than simply the wish of the OP. Having said that, without the clarity of what's actually occurred with the wiring, I'm not sure onwards discussion is going to be particularly focused.

[Northernboater]

[Arthur Marshall]

I think I made it clear fairly early on that it was a pre-inspection. And you're right, suggesting an electrican have a look at it may well have been the sensible thing to do. The problem came when the electrician got involved.

As to the photo, I agree - it was the only one i could find on my PC at home and at first sight it looked OK. I should have waited and taken an up to date one.

The engineer who did the gearbox, assuming it was him that shifted the wires, and I can't think of anyone else who might have done, did a fine job on the gearbox (at least, it's still working at the moment) but managed to fit the coupling with half the bolts missing and one of the others so loose that it fell out as soon as I started the engine.  Confidence in him doing a proper tidy up after a job I do not have. And no, he wasn't my choice but that of RCR.

I have tried to clarify where points were raised. Nor have i suggested that the thread be locked, just that it be treated as dealt with and not bothered with much.  It's turning from a useful source of info and comments, all of which I've taken on board, to coin a phrase, into postings about how info has been asked for and not given, which as far as I'm aware, unless I've missed a post or two, is not the case.  Here and there, as I've studied what people have asked for and tried to reply, I have found that what I thought at first was incorrect, and I've said so.

The discussion on here has clarified in my mind a few things. That the original electrician probably did an OK job, that the latest examiner was right to suggest i get someone to look at the electrics, that I hadn't noticed that the wires had been unhooked and left lying about iin an untidy manner and that some of them were unsafe was actually my fault, and that i ought to file my photos with dates attached. And that you should always get at least two quotes before getting work done. 

[Paul C]

I guess time has passed by now, but if an "engineer" who changed a gearbox left disturbed others areas and left a job incomplete, then it falls to him to take responsibility for it. I guess if its RCR work it gets complicated, but all the same you've paid RCR for cover including doing this type of work, not half doing it.

I think one thing you can take from it is "if you want something doing properly, do it yourself". Whenever you get someone else to work on a boat (or car, or your house, etc etc) you have the advantage that they're (supposed to be) an expert in the area, and all that goes with it (they might also have tools or tech information that you don't have) but the disadvantage that to them its just a "job" and its not their boat (or car, or house etc). Hence why so many people, rightly or wrongly, at least make some attempt to tackle jobs themselves, including learning about electrical work on a boat.

You'd think that in the days of the internet etc businesses would realise that 1 bad job adversely affect their reputation as much as 10 good ones reinforces it, but alas not in the corners of canal boat work, it seems.

Regarding the BSS being a con........some of us realise its a bit of a game, but that wiring which is undeniably neat and tidy, clearly compliant with the various rules and an overall impression of a boat which is obviously well maintained helps. Yes, some of the rules are daft, but most of it is sensible. Its a joke though that the test is every 4 years, for a start.....but you don't see many campaigning it should be shorter validity (like car Mots.....)

[Machpoint005]

3 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

 I don't know what I'm doing or talking about.  ...  

...As a non-expert in either electrics or engineering

Has anyone else spotted the confirmation straight from the horse's mouth?

[system 4-50]

The man came on here for help and support to deal with mistakes of his own and others resulting in the prospect of enormous bills. He has got the clarification, admitted some of his own shortcomings, and is still in need of tea & sympathy. There is no need to harry the guy further. imho.

[WotEver]

4 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I added one direct wire from the battery to the auto terminal on the bilge pump

Did you fuse it?  If not, that's a BSS fail right there. 

[Arthur Marshall]

6 hours ago, Machpoint005 said:

Has anyone else spotted the confirmation straight from the horse's mouth?

Has anyone spotted someone selecting quotes and then banging in an insult without bothering to say anything constructive?

I didn't realise that you had to be an expert to post on here and that asking for help and advice had suddenly become a crime.  Luckily, most people (as are most boaters) are helpful rather than just looking for a scrap.  However, it must be nice to know everything about electronics and engineering as you obviously do. I really do hope that if you ever need advice in any field outside of your own (such as mine,maybe), you don't come upon someone with your attitude.

4 hours ago, WotEver said:

Did you fuse it?  If not, that's a BSS fail right there. 

No i didn't. Yes I know. It's been pointed out above somewhere.  That's one of the bits of advice I appreciated.  So wot?

Edited June 27, 2017 by Arthur Marshall

[MtB]

I must say, I don't really understand why Arthur has been coming in for flack over the errors in his installation. He started the thread asking for help in getting it put right.

[rasputin]

Cos he comes on here and says woe is the world I just failed my bssc everyone says sympathys old chap the man is a brute

Then he says actually it wasn't a proper test, and everyone says, still a bit of a bummer 

Than he says here's a photo

And everyone says, ah I see what the inspector was on about

Then he says but that was from ages ago

 

And everyone says your having a laugh with us here 

[MtB]

On 28/06/2017 at 00:40, rasputin said:

Cos he comes on here and says woe is the world I just failed my bssc everyone says sympathys old chap the man is a brute

Then he says actually it wasn't a proper test, and everyone says, still a bit of a bummer 

Than he says here's a photo

And everyone says, ah I see what the inspector was on about

Then he says but that was from ages ago

 

And everyone says your having a laugh with us here 

 

That's all true, but why are people saying he is an idiot for not fitting a fuse, and condemning him for errors in the installation? He knows all this already and acknowledges he is outside his area of expertise.

It's almost as if they haven't read the thread!

[b0atman]

This is what i like about this site the ability for holier than thous's to jump on people who admit that they have scant knowledge of a subject.  NOT.

 

[WotEver]

7 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

why are people saying he is an idiot for not fitting a fuse

Has anyone actually said that?  I pointed out that it would be a fail but it's hardly a big deal. 

9 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

No i didn't. Yes I know. It's been pointed out above somewhere.  That's one of the bits of advice I appreciated.  So wot?

Sorry, I missed that it had already been mentioned or I wouldn't have repeated it.