December 12, 2011

 

*************

************

Question

************

Ken,

I was curious if you have any stories that demonstrate what can happen if you void a UL listing of a fire system by doing things such as; using a non-UL relay, covering a smoke detector with a non UL listed cage, or painting the same. Is the liability of a dealer affected when there is an incident and it is revealed in court that the UL listing has been voided?

Bob Dolph

Product & Training Consultant

**************

Answer

*************

I don't speak for UL, and this response may require some advice from others. I don't know that a UL listing is "voided" by non compliance. As I understand it a UL listed company is authorized to issue a UL certificate, certifying that the system and service will meet certain UL guidelines. UL can, and I believe does, ramdomly inspect listed accounts and if guidelines are not followed the UL certificate is pulled; canceled. Correct me if I am wrong.

So what happens if a UL certificate is issued and, after a loss, it is established that the system did not comply with the UL guidelines for the certification? The non compliance will be further evidence of negligence.

The UL guideline establishes the accepted industry trade practice for the installation and service. Departure from those standards is evidence of negligence. Unless the UL standard has been codified, which means incorporated into a law affecting the installation, the departure from the guideline, now the law, will not establish negligence "per se". If negligence "per se" is found then the burden of proof shifts from Plaintiff [to prove negligence] to the defendant alarm company to prove that it wasn't negligent.

What if there is a departure from a UL guideline but no loss? After a passage of time the subscriber finds out that the installation does not comply with the contract which incorporates the UL requirements. The subscriber would have a good claim for breach of contract and could seek damages. The damages may include the difference between what the subscriber paid for and what the subscriber received. This could be a reduction in pricing thus necessitating a partial or full refund of money paid, and the cost of bringing the system into compliance with all the UL standards what should have been followed in the first place.

 

************

 

More comments on what is a fire alarm

 

***********

Ken,

I have always understood that one smoke detector was a violation of the code unless the home had another smoke system installed that met the code and was a total no go in commercial accounts. I see from your blog that so many are just installing just one, what's the story?

Thank you,

Bob

*************

Ref: Horse vs Bird, 11-24, 12-8, 12-9-2011

Ken,

I drafted about 1000 words on the subject of adding fire detectors to burg systems, but decided that all I need to write is:

What has happened to our society? With our complicated codes and licensing we've completely discarded the common sense that "something is better than nothing."

Lou Arellano, III

Quakertown, PA

*************

Ken,

this conversation on what constitutes a 'fire alarm' is really heating up ;-). I do have a question about a 'siren sensors' that listen for the sound of a smoke detector or fire alarm nearby. Since that sensor is not responding to a fire or smoke, is that considered a fire system device? I am curious to hear the opinions of your audience!

Best regards,

Sterling

***********

Ken

I enjoy your articles and the forum they create. I agree that systems should be installed to code and professionally. NFPA 72 (2010) 17.5.3.3.1 and 2 basically explains that if you put a smoke detector in to achieve specific results (Such as in a room where a safe is to detect someone drilling or torching through a wall) then additional detectors are not required if they are not needed to meet that objective. So you would not have to put detectors throughout the building en essence bringing the entire project up to code with spacing requirements and such. We have had fire marshals that have disagreed with this code reference until they read it. Once a fire marshal told us if we added one smoke we then had to put in smoke detectors into all the egress pathways on a occupancy that otherwise did not require a fire system at all etc...I personally don't make a habit of arguing with AHJs so I simply point out the reference and then ask them how they interpret it.

Having said that I would strongly encourage people doing projects such as these to meet the code requirements because the argument that the system has now become a fire system is a semi valid argument. I would install that smoke or heat detector using the proper methods and cable, have the proper battery backup and have the communication method meet the code requirements and I would definitely have the customer sign a contract that outlined the limitations of the system so their expectation would not be the expectation of a full fire alarm system when it is not one. I appreciate everyone point of view and insights thank you.

Sincerely,

Larry G. Love

NICET II / Master Fire Tech State of Utah

American Security & Fire, Inc.

*************