Equipment guarding 1

[robsb123]

We quote and build a lot of custom conveyors for bulk and package handling. We are not always responsible for the installation of these conveyors and most of the time we do not know the exact location of where the equipment will be installed. As a general rule we do not include guarding as a standard option (specifically tail pulley, return roller guards and pull cords). Often times conveyors are guarded by location and do not require these guards so it doesn't make sense for us to inflate our price to include unnessesary guards. We now have a customer arguing that we should have included guarding on some conveyors that we built for him. The customer does not want to pay for the required guarding, even though it was clearly spelled out in the quote that guarding was not included in the price.

So my question is: Who is responsible for providing guarding for a piece of equipment, the user or the manufacturer? We have added an extensive amount of guards to equipment (that was manufactured by someone else) throughout the years. The user was always charged for these additional guards, not the OEM. Is there a standard somewhere that clearly states who is responsible for the guarding of equipmnet?

 

[gerhardl]

The normal European way of handling this is exactly as you described, mainly:

a) Offer from supplier specifying 'guarding necessary according to rule so and so...' NOT included.

b) Extra guarding above customary may be offered as an option, but always against given details or specification from the customer/end user according to the sites requirements. (Else you do not know what to include or the cost)

c) The end user/equipment owner is always responsible towards athorities for total function for his factory/installment.

d) Local authorities are responsible for local inspection and any actions or extra requirements against owner for improper installation. (Rules and applying and understasnding of rules could vary locally - you do not know as a supplier)

e) Supplier is responsible for product function, but not for guardrails or shieldings etc. As you state, the equipment could be guarded locally by access or location. You can find a lot of practical exampels for this just looking around...you will find a lot of rotating fans in shop ceilings, but they only have to be protected if you can easily reach them from the floor...

f) Only exception from above would be if it is clearly stated in inquiries or included in contract that the delivery is complete including guards.

g)... and only if there is a discrepancy between inquiry, offer and /or contract on the description of the delivery this should be a problem.

....Unfortunately most often customers or purchasers going into this type of discussion are trying to cover up for their own neglect in specifying,reading or understanding the technical details in an offer or a piece of machinery correctly..

 

[griffengm]

Your question begs a legal answer and you will likely not get one here. Find a good attorney or start talking to your insurance company.
Either way it may be cheaper to just make the guards.

Griffy

 

[robsb123]

It seems that there must be a standard somewhere that clearly differentiates the responsibilities of the OEM and of the user.

"Either way it may be cheaper to just make the guards."

We have built a lot of equipment guarding and it can be very expensive. It really depends on what the customer wants. Some customers want their equipment totally caged in, or may want light curtains installed which can be tens of thousands of dollars.

 

[looslib]

Two things from your post come to mind. One, your quote specifically stated that guarding was not included at the base price. Did you offer them a price sheet with the cost of the optional guards? Two, who did the installation? Did your company do the installation, did the customer do it or was it done by a third-party. If third-party install, who was the actual customer of the conveyor system, the customer or the installer?


"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications

 

[FACS]

We design conveyors; guarding the ends and providing Emergency stops is standard, and we would never omit them from the quote.

Your quote clearly stated that guards were not included so you need to weigh how badly you want to keep this customer.

Anything you build should be safe, that's your responsibility or at least, my opinion.

I have never had a customer complain about pricing on guards.

Charlie

http://www.facsco.com

 

[JRLAKE]

I agree with FACS. It depends on how good a customer this is. Sounds to me like he is in hot water for missing this on your quote. If you bail him out, it may reap a ROI.

Properly guarding equipment is the end user's responsibility. But here again I agree with FACS. I would always include guarding. If adding guarding inflates the cost with respect to the competition, take advantage of it by pointing it out to the customer. It's added value in your product and it shows the end user that you care about safety. Since you took the time to properly guard the equipment, you obviously approached the overall construction with equal care. If you cut corners to cut costs in one place, what's to make the customer think you didn't do it in other places?

Most customers appreciate value, service and attention to detail, even it if costs them a few bucks.

 

[PeterCharles]

If you sell equipment in the EU it must be "safe". Any equipment "offered for sale" and "placed on the market" has to conform with with various EU Directives. Guarding HAS to be included in the scope of supply.

If you're interested in selling in the EU here's a start point for your investigations.

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/mechan_equipment/machinery/index.htm

PS, ignorance of the law is NO excuse. Selling "unsafe" equipment can result in prosecution, fines, even prison!

 

[chicopee]

The matter should be simple. If the contract says guarding is not provided and the customer signed it, then it is up to the customer to install the required guards, not you.

 

[ajack1]

A star for Peter Charles, at least in Europe the fact that you say this product may have bare wires and kill you would not stand up in court, basic safety is not an add on option.

 

[JRLAKE]

In the U.S. safety is everyone's responsibility, not just the vendor's.

 

[iepeulas]

A quote and subsequent purchase order constitutes a contract. Carefully review the language in each document.

Maybe the two companies could come to a compromise.