Your premier resource for building code knowledge.
This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.
Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.
Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.
If the owner refused to participate in the recall, the service agency is not accounable. We have had 4 facilities refuse to take advantage of the recalls. Two did have us replace the heads, but only after the recall was ended. One facility paid us $40,000.00 to do what could have been done for free. They ignored 12 years of service reports. Two facilities have not had the heads replaced. They get written up at each inspection. Unlike the majority of you, we have no enforcement authorityMarshal Chris said:Notify them in writing that all the heads are required to be replaced. usually, i'll find a copy of the CPSC or other documentation to substantiate. Then when they ask, who pays for it, I say it's up to the building owner. I'd imagine that if they've had the same sprinkler company since the recall that they could be held accountable since 25 requires them to check for recalled heads.
5.2.1.1.6 Sprinklers that are subject to recall shall be replaced
per the manufacturer’s requirements.
Somebody with authority should be getting copies of your reports and follow up on the required corrections. That's part of my job. It usually just takes a phone call to the owner or maitnance supervisor to get the ball rollingThey ignored 12 years of service reports. Two facilities have not had the heads replaced. They get written up at each inspection. Unlike the majority of you, we have no enforcement authority
And then this shows up in the 08 version:A.4.1.4 Recalled products should be replaced or remedied.Such replacement or remedial product should be installed in
accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions and the appropriate
NFPA installation standards. A recalled product is a
product subject to a statute or administrative regulation specifically
requiring the manufacturer, importer, distributor,
wholesaler, or retailer of a product, or any combination of
such entities, to recall the product, or a product voluntarily
recalled by a combination of such entities.
Fireguy, I agree with your statements, I was saying that the sprinkler company may be liable if they had no record of advising the building owner.5.2.1.1.6 Sprinklers that are subject to recall shall be replacedper the manufacturer’s requirements.
I know some of will not believe this, but some jurisdictions see no value in inspections or service work of any kind. And we work in areas that an AHJ who tries to enforce codes, gets to speak to the city mgr about being a team player and how business needs to make a profit, and when was the last time a furniture store/school/ALF/anything actually burned. If an inspection results in problems, we do send service reports to management. After a couple of months of no action, I send reports to the AHJ. Fortunatly, my company is in a position of being busy taking care of those who think life safety is important. For those who do not get serious problems fixed, I have the option of firing them and letting them make other arrangements. And my techs have the same crappy attitude.Marshal Chris said:Fireguy, I agree with your statements, I was saying that the sprinkler company may be liable if they had no record of advising the building owner.