1 start machine used extra cee

[joshua]

Hello.
the antefactor:

our customer bought in South East Asia a car used (original provenance Italian!). in detail, after a little quick observation:
- the Asian salesman has failed because he can't make it work.
- the machine is marked there, but it is completely without documentation (manualistic, certification, electrical schematics )
- the machine is marked there, but it doesn't seem to respect the norms (first impression, maybe I'm wrong). the lack of electric patterns leaves everything with a big doubt.
- the Italian manufacturer is irreperable, say so... .

the client asked me to:
- proceed with the first start,
- make sure the machine produces
- assist the car.


I have to protect the safety of my parents and those who will have to produce them. My perplexity is:
- knowing that the initial constructor is irreperible and that the missing documentation will be rebuilt by us, who is responsible?
- who bought the machine is "mandatory" and has the burden of verifying the real respect of the rules of the machine directive?

Thank you.

joshua

 

[gerod]

Good problem.

the responsibility of the conformity of the machines entered in Europe is of the seller, that of those who import it in Europe.
therefore one must identify someone who has these characteristics (mandatory or manufacturer who is).
in the absence of such a person, the responsibility is of the employer who buys it (if I were the ddl I would never do this step).

- the machine is marked ce, but it is completely devoid of documentation (manualistic, certification, electrical schematics)
- the machine is marked there, but it doesn't seem to respect the norms (first impression, maybe I'm wrong). the lack of electric patterns leaves everything with a big doubt.

like 90% of machines that circulate freely in Europe.

- the Italian manufacturer is irreperible, so... .

by selling in Asia the manufacturer is not obliged to comply with European standards unless other indications. if you put us there then you must respect them otherwise the brand would be used improperly.

- knowing that the initial constructor is irreperible and that the missing documentation will be rebuilt by us, who is responsible?

As I said, the warrant if there is no manufacturer. the mandatario gets charges and you have to watch!
must do the ftc (technical fascicle of the construction), the ddc and everything you need. Obviously this has a cost.

- who bought the machine is "mandatory" and has the burden of verifying the real respect of the rules of the machine directive?

It is not said that the purchaser is a mandatory, the agent is a person formally appointed by the manufacturer. Let's say ni.

I would do like this:
- I break the boxes to the irreperable manufacturer because he is responsible until proven otherwise having marked it. he, for 10 years, must provide all the necessary documentation to both the customer and the supervisory bodies (and here would be a nice signal to the asl possibly that then reports the ministry).
If you don't show up and I need the car, I'll take someone, and I'll tell them to put it in order and take all the responsibilities.
Hi.

 

[Mario SJPD]

If you don't show up and I need the car, I'll take someone, and I'll tell them to put it in order and take all the responsibilities.

probably this and what joshua's client did for the rest quoting everything.

 

[joshua]

Thank you for the very useful tips.
the problem, the usual problem, is to make the customer understand that must standardize the machine.

Good year.

joshua