CE Mark – real and fake

[Andrew TinsleyParticipant @andrewtinsley63637]

 

 

Edited By Andrew Tinsley on 20/01/2018 16:48:00

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Posted by Phil Whitley on 20/01/2018 15:42:08:

Yes Herbert, I understand what you mean, but none of the CE marked equipment goes anywhere near those laboratories, it comes from china to market with the stamp already on it, that is why the EU has placed responsibility for safety on the importer, when in reality it should be, and used to be, the responsibility of the manufacturer, or the government to ensure all imports were tested before being allowed to market!

It can hardly be the responsibility of the Government to actually test imports – that would be nanny state! The present legislation requires that they are certified which is a reasonable position for the government to take.

The problem with putting the onus on the manufacturer is that we have a global economy but not global standards. The issue of the UK requiring fused plugs but not the rest of the EU (because we use ring mains that can overload a 13A lead, while the rest of EU uses the more expensive but arguably safer approach of individually fused spurs) highlights the incompatible standards.

In safety terms it doesn't make any difference whether it is manufacturer, exporter or importer who is responsible for the certification.

It is interesting though that posters keep blaming the manufacturers for falsely CE marked goods while it is the EU based importers who are (knowingly or otherwise) breaking the regulations. The manufactures are not blameless, but the companies who buy kit without the testing etc. are the ones who should have fingers pointed at them.

For the record I have actually seen the VERY fat CE Compliance file for an imported product made in China which included (genuine, I was assured) third-party test reports obtained by the manufacturer.

It is a big shame that a thread like this gives the impression that such responsible partnerships between Chinese manufacturers and UK importers do not exist.

It is worth considering whether some anaonymous individual selling goods cheaply on line through a seller website has the resources to ensure the goods they are importing are properly certified. They may be lucky and it may be the same product as sold by a responsible importer (although they won't have the paper trail to prove this in the event of something going wrong) or they may be unlucky and what they have got cheap is a container of QC rejects… These are risks we potentially face when buying cheaply on line but I don't think it's really possible to quantify or understand just how risky or not this is in practice.

One thing I do recommend – keep the 3-pin to USB chargers supplied with quality equipment, and use them to replace those supplied with any cheap 'grey imports'.

Neil

[Andrew TinsleyParticipant @andrewtinsley63637]

Hello Neil,

Your support of Chinese manufacturers who do comply with the CE regulations is to be wholeheartedly supported.

Unfortunately many Chinese companies do not warrant such support. There were several companies in China that sold counterfeit equipment into the EU based on the products of the company for whom I worked. All CE marked and looking kosher. The first counterfeit product actually beat us to the market place. They must have seen the item concerned at a trade show before we launched the product in the EU and US!

I know of quite a few very reputable Chinese companies, who realise that they need to comply with the regulations of the markets that they sell into. Their products are excellent and they compete on a level playing field as far as abiding by the regulations.

Their are other Chinese companies that are simply beyond the pale.

Andrew.

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Posted by Andrew Tinsley on 20/01/2018 17:41:57:

Their are other Chinese companies that are simply beyond the pale.

Andrew.

My point is that these companies would not sell anything into Europe without the complicity of a Europe-based importer…

Neil

[Phil WhitleyParticipant @philwhitley94135]

Posted by Phil Whitley on 20/01/2018 15:42:08:

Yes Herbert, I understand what you mean, but none of the CE marked equipment goes anywhere near those laboratories, it comes from china to market with the stamp already on it, that is why the EU has placed responsibility for safety on the importer, when in reality it should be, and used to be, the responsibility of the manufacturer, or the government to ensure all imports were tested before being allowed to market!

It can hardly be the responsibility of the Government to actually test imports – that would be nanny state! The present legislation requires that they are certified which is a reasonable position for the government to take.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42760756

They have done just that Neil! The first responsibility of Government is surely the safety and well-being of it's people (theoretically anyway) I think Herbert misunderstands what I am saying, there are testing houses (private companies) who will test equipment, if you pay them (and it is generally very expensive), and then you can put their "mark" on your product BUT, there is no legislation that says these items HAVE to be tested, and anyway, all the counterfeit goods have these marks, and no one has any real idea about how many fakes there are in the marketplace, It seems that in most of Asia, there are companies who will copy any high ticket item in great detail, and as with the MK sockets (reported in electrical review 2(?) years ago) the physical appearance is really good, and will fool most people. These sockets were not being sold by back street organisations, they were being sold by major electrical wholesalers, as they had been touted as a cancelled export order from an Arab nation (can,t remember which one) I don't know if the Arabs in question actually use 13A sockets, but no one seemed to have questioned the validity of the claim. I have been shown fake electronic equipment, that looked absolutely right, till you plugged it in, and it was used, and even then the results are mixed, some is really bad, some is actually quite good. What I was trying to point out is that European manufactured appliance imported into the UK and CE marked, cannot have been tested properly, or at all, to go on to cause 750 fires. In this case the CE mark was truly worthless.

[Phil WhitleyParticipant @philwhitley94135]

Just to add, re Andrew Tinsley's very salient point, this is why photography is banned or restricted at a lot of trade shows, especially of individual items!

[MuzzerParticipant @muzzer]

Phil – you misunderstand. It is a legal requirement to test to the applicable requirements and it's up to you to ensure you find out what those are. The "private test houses" don't apply "their mark" to your product, they apply the tests that are mandated by the relevant authorities.

There will always be people and companies that will fraudulently claim their products meet the legal requirements. But that doesn't make the CE, UL, CSA etc etc marks "worthless". Should we stop testing altogether?

The "authority" announced by the government is a cynical response to the shockingly complacent response by the likes of Electrolux (Whirlpool, Hotpoint, Indesit, Beko etc) to fire hazards, despite clear evidence of fatalities etc. It's perfectly possible to design and manufacture products that pass the established tests but are lethal in unforeseen ways. But it's unforgivable to refuse to recall those products when they are clearly a significant risk to the public.

It's not clear from that short report if the alleged body would be able to force automotive companies like GM Europe / Vauxhall to fix their incendiary Zafira vehicles for instance but they probably didn't think it through much further than the announcement anyway.

Murray

[Phil WhitleyParticipant @philwhitley94135]

This from the .GOV website.

The letters ‘CE’ appear on many products that are traded on the single market in the European Economic Area (EEA).

The CE marking is required for many products. It:

shows that the manufacturer has checked that these products meet EU safety, health or environmental requirements
is an indicator of a product’s compliance with EU legislation
allows the free movement of products within the European market

By placing the CE marking on a product a manufacturer is declaring, on his sole responsibility, conformity with all of the legal requirements to achieve CE marking. The manufacturer is thus ensuring validity for that product to be sold throughout the EEA. This also applies to products made in third countries which are sold in the EEA and Turkey.

Note that it clearly states that it is the manufacturers responsibility to make sure that these goods comply, not the importers, but this puts no obligation on the manufacturers to have any independent testing done, it merely places the responsibility for compliance on them. My point of view is that a European made CE marked tumble dryer (for example) that causes 750 fires has not been adequately tested, or indeed tested at all, by the manufacturer or anyone else, and this makes the CE mark worthless, or at the very least, not an indicator of quality of manufacture, or testing, or electrical safety! No, the outside testing houses don't apply the mark, they licence the manufacturer to use it(Obviouslydevil) The above CE legislation clearly shows that all it does is place responsibility for compliance on the manufacturer, who tests, or doesn't at his own risk. The phrase "on his sole responsibility" is quite telling, don't you think. It would be interesting to send one of these tumble dryers to, say VDE for instance, to see what they said, because if it failed, it would prove the CE mark worthless, and if it passed, it would prove the VDE test regime worthless.

[Phil WhitleyParticipant @philwhitley94135]

Sorry, that last bit is supposed to read as follows,

The above CE legislation clearly shows that all it does is place responsibility for compliance on the manufacturer, who tests, or doesn't at his own risk. The phrase "on his sole responsibility" is quite telling, don't you think, as it could be construed as saying "Even if you use an independent test house, it is STILL your sole responsibility". It would be interesting to send one of these tumble dryers to, say VDE for instance, to see what they said, because if it failed, it would prove the CE mark worthless, and if it passed, it would prove the VDE test regime worthless.

[Phil WhitleyParticipant @philwhitley94135]

Can we also assume (as I have said before) that the cladding that burnt Grenfell tower down was also CE marked and had a manufacturers compliance file available to prove it had been evaluated as compliant with the neccasary safety standard!Doesn't actually give you a lot of confidence does it!

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Phil Whitley on 22/01/2018 17:26:00:

Can we also assume (as I have said before) that the cladding that burnt Grenfell tower down was also CE marked and had a manufacturers compliance file available to prove it had been evaluated as compliant with the neccasary safety standard!Doesn't actually give you a lot of confidence does it!

Nothing to do with CE!

The panels being blamed claim to meet many different technical standards. In Europe Fire Certificates to EN 13501, aka British Standard EN 13501.

I doubt the Public Enquiry will find CE Marking has anything whatever to do with Grenfell. Expect instead to hear that sloppy British Fire Regulations are confused and out-of-date, and that it is permissible for builders in the UK to use materials in ways not allowed abroad. In this example, the panels are fire resistant sufficient for low-rise and domestic use, but aren't suitable for high-rise. I think the enquiry will find that out-of-date UK Regulations don't forbid their use on high-buildings and that the risk by was taken by the Landlord as part of a competitive bidding process focussed on saving money. The blame most likely lays with governments keen to keep costs down; cuts are right and proper, but not when they risk lives. In my view this includes failure to fund updates to standards. Sadly it is very unlikely that the individuals responsible will be brought to book. Remember Horse-meat?

In comparison with what else goes on, fraudulent use of CE Marks isn't in my experience a major problem. Most of the CE marked products I own are genuine. I'm much more likely get a fake if I buy a "bargain".

Dave

[Phil WhitleyParticipant @philwhitley94135]

Interesting! I was given t believe they were made by Arconic, in the UK, although the company is actually American. As you say, it will probably be whitewashed out of existence.

The only people who suffer from Fakes are the end users, and even then, not always, I have come across some that were actually quite good value for money compared with the high priced genuine article, but some are just junk. As always, it's them at bottom as suffers! Unfortunately, when it comes to stuff like fake "Fluke" test equipment some is good, and some blows up when you use it for high voltages.! Caveat emptor!

[Martin 100Participant @martin100]

Posted by Phil Whitley on 22/01/2018 22:03:47:

Unfortunately, when it comes to stuff like fake "Fluke" test equipment some is good, and some blows up when you use it for high voltages.! Caveat emptor!

Do you know what Fluke kit is being faked?

[Author]

Posts