I couldn't have said it better (ok I'll accept As Well). The same goes for spotting installation/design issues. We encourage to do so on a separate form from your 25 inspection form with the CYA caveat that it was not a complete review of the entire facility and covers just the location identified. Unbelievably, there was a lawsuit where the inspector was sued AND LOST when they identified such a deficiency and a fire occurred at a different location with the same deficiency. You'd think being told of one problem that common sense would say it is possible to be present elsewhere so the OWNER would look into it. ughhhhh
Roland Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives Dallas, TX http://www.firesprinkler.org On Sep 9, 2013, at 10:01 AM, Rod DiBona <[email protected]> wrote: > Agree. Roland was replying to Jerry's post where a company was acting as if > it was a REQUIREMENT of the inspecting contractor to inform them of the > recall. Steve L and you make a different point to me which is we as > contractors would be foolish not to inform the owner. Our guys are trained to > always look for these and inform the owner for two main reasons. One because > we are hoping they will hire us to do the work and we make money. Two - > because it is the right thing to do for your customers- although not required. > > Rod at Rapid _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
