MikeR Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 Cutting off the clamp & taking it away will also get you arrested and charged with damage to property & theft. Promise. Be clever - remove it without damaging it & leave it behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSA Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 Alternatively, do a Johnathan Creek, and take your own clamp and yellow sticker. Talking of car parking problems - I looked out of the window earlier today in Bristol and along came a truck with a big crane thing and lifted a car away. It tried to tow one on its back too, that was next to it - however the owner came back JUST in time literally! In all it took him about 3 mins... Just shows that they really do mean that offenders will be towed away... I guess its the same in many other cities. Anyway that is , sorry! Just was quite amazed at lunch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slim_mcslim Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 but on a job earlier this year we got the 7.5t truck clamped in london... but if you don't want to get lifted, either convert your car to lpg or at least put on a little sticker saying "caution lpg" and the council shouldn't lift it, as it is considered dangerous, well to be fair it is!!! paul... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mush Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 Still OT putting a compressed gas warning diamond on your vehicle will ensure that they wont try and lift it, tip got from a press photgrapher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gallente Posted October 21, 2004 Author Share Posted October 21, 2004 Hello All. Update on the situation....Ive informed my Ex-store, now that ive left, of this topic, and shown them a copy of it, and told them to get it sorted by next friday. That gives them two delieveries to order hook clamps in, which is more then enough. So next friday il go in the store, if there still not changed im going to send this to my regional manager. I will get this sorted!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G2000 Posted October 23, 2004 Share Posted October 23, 2004 Just joined this site, was very interested in this topic. have been in the industry for a while and have to say it is my belief that it is never acceptable to rig any lantern with cable ties, even birdies, they have holes in the yokes for a reason you know!!! And for all those annoyed with maplin, two letters RS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 And for all those annoyed with maplin, two letters RS.Since I design equipment for a living I'm always buying components. Certainly RS are one of the best. Others to consider (who take credit card orders online) would be Farnell, CPC and Digikey (US based but UK pricing available). Rapid are supposed to be good but I've never used them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagardner1984 Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 Quite agree that it is stupid and dangerous to rig lanterns using only cable ties. The point is that even if they are 50mm thick, so long as they are Nylon, there is always the very real chance of them melting, given the close proximity to a very hot piece of equipment. BUT ... I have been told by a reliable source that there is actually no need for the G-Clamps or other primary fixing to be rated, so long as there is a rated, tested secondary fixing in place. To quote this person, "So long as it has a safety bond, you could actually hold up the lantern with a bit of string." Personally though, I wonder whether there ought to be a rule that the primary fixing must be "Fit for purpose" i.e. not able to melt, burn or break under a small amount of pressure. A G Clamp which has a quick visual inspection, rated or not, surely fits this category - any thoughts ... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew C Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 Personally though, I wonder whether there ought to be a rule that the primary fixing must be "Fit for purpose" i.e. not able to melt, burn or break under a small amount of pressure. A G Clamp which has a quick visual inspection, rated or not, surely fits this category - any thoughts ... ?<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Of course it must be "Fit for the purpose". I don't have a copy of LOLER to hand but it's in there somewhere! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagardner1984 Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 From LOLER: sufficiently strong, stable and suitablefor the proposed use. Similarly, the load and anything attached (eg timber pallets, lifting points) must be suitable; So, in answer to my own question, yes, it must be fit for purpose - but also a very good argument against Maplin I would have thought. But, does the clamp/boom need to be rated, if we are saying there is a rated secondary fixing. I don't think it does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James C Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 And for all those annoyed with maplin, two letters RS.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I see your two letters, and I raise you three words: "subsidised-theatre budgets"!!! It can be hard to justify piling up my RS account, when Maplin can often provide appropriate, cheaper alternatives. Have to say that I'd never rely on them if I needed something in a hurry, though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mush Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 And for all those annoyed with maplin, two letters RS.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I see your two letters, and I raise you three words: "subsidised-theatre budgets"!!! It can be hard to justify piling up my RS account, when Maplin can often provide appropriate, cheaper alternatives. Have to say that I'd never rely on them if I needed something in a hurry, though!<{POST_SNAPBACK}> RS have the range and tend to stock in depth, Farnell tend to be a bit cheaper. Personally find Rapid: http://www.rapidelectronics.co.uk a bit cheaper than either RS or Maplin and they live up to their name. Back on topic, be interested to hear how the orginal poster gets on with getting Maplin to change their habits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazz Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Hi all, Very good range of views expressed here ( unless you manage a branch of Maplins ) The bottom line, which the manager has to be aware of, is that his order to mount any fixture with cable ties is in breach of legislation, & Maplins own item description. On a quick visit to their website, the only task description for cable ties is: "for tidying wire & cable forms" If, god forbid, an accident did occur you can bet a team of ambulance chasers like Claims Direct would handle the legal case, put the manager in the dock, then ask the question "why did you sanction the use of cable ties as a means of suspension ?" Ruling out ignorance as a defence ( it is not ) the manager has no legal argument for this practice. Factor in that he had prior warning, in writing, from a junior employee that he was in breach of H & S law, and that the store he was in charge of stocked the correct item fit for purpose, and just watch how quickly Maplin HQ try to distance themselves from this individual. Mazz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 I don't think this is the problem of an individual manager. I've seen this horrible setup in Maplin, Edgware road, Holborn, Croydon, Kingston, Totenham Court Road and Cambridge to name but a few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagardner1984 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Although of course it is always the respnisbility of the individual manager who sanctions such a thing, what happens if there is evidence of, say, a regional manager specifically ordering such a thing (email, memo, phone conversation etc.)? Obviously they cannot use "I was just following orders" as everyone is a free thinking being, but they presumably are have a lesser responsibility than the person who orders the action. Very hard to prove I suppose, harder to make a case out of. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.