Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Goods without CE markings
570 views
Skip to first unread message
D.M. Procida
Nov 5, 2011, 7:45:03 AM11/5/11
to
What's going to happen to the status of eBay (and similar outfits) as
brokers and intermediaries between private parties?
I believe it's illegal to sell or import for sale certain classes of
goods (say, electronic items) that do not have a CE mark and
corresponding declaration of conformity.
Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
to increase.
How long before there's more eBay-related action on grey markets?
Daniele
brokers and intermediaries between private parties?
I believe it's illegal to sell or import for sale certain classes of
goods (say, electronic items) that do not have a CE mark and
corresponding declaration of conformity.
Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
to increase.
How long before there's more eBay-related action on grey markets?
Daniele
Roland Perry
Nov 5, 2011, 8:00:03 AM11/5/11
to
In message
<1ka9b3b.zkaf2c1mfwkqoN%real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk>,
at 11:45:03 on Sat, 5 Nov 2011, D.M. Procida
<real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk> remarked:
as eBay liable for such a thing would also suggest they should be liable
for the testing of second hand electrical items (which we know that
charity shops are generally not handling any more).
A halfway house would be for eBay to add a box to tick for "CE marked"
and perhaps "PAT tested" for relevant items. But it would be quite a
chilling effect on the market.
--
Roland Perry
<1ka9b3b.zkaf2c1mfwkqoN%real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk>,
at 11:45:03 on Sat, 5 Nov 2011, D.M. Procida
<real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk> remarked:
>What's going to happen to the status of eBay (and similar outfits) as
>brokers and intermediaries between private parties?
>
>I believe it's illegal to sell or import for sale certain classes of
>goods (say, electronic items) that do not have a CE mark and
>corresponding declaration of conformity.
>
>Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
>to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
>wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
>to increase.
This is a bit of a slippery slope, because making an intermediary such
>brokers and intermediaries between private parties?
>
>I believe it's illegal to sell or import for sale certain classes of
>goods (say, electronic items) that do not have a CE mark and
>corresponding declaration of conformity.
>
>Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
>to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
>wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
>to increase.
as eBay liable for such a thing would also suggest they should be liable
for the testing of second hand electrical items (which we know that
charity shops are generally not handling any more).
A halfway house would be for eBay to add a box to tick for "CE marked"
and perhaps "PAT tested" for relevant items. But it would be quite a
chilling effect on the market.
--
Roland Perry
John
Nov 5, 2011, 8:00:03 AM11/5/11
to
It's generally accepted in the trade that consumer goods manufactured
in the Far East are routinely labelled with various approvals marks
such as CE without any attempt to prove that they conform to
standards. It's only the major brands that bother with the actual
testing.
Peter Parry
Nov 5, 2011, 12:05:03 PM11/5/11
to
>Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
>to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
>wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
>to increase.
CE is commonly thought to stand for "Chinese export" it is of such
>to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
>wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
>to increase.
limited worth. In the case of goods imported from abroad the
responsibility for CE marking and testing (if required) lies with the
first importer into the EU if the manufacturer has no physical office
in the EU. The problem is not therefore eBays (or Alibaba or any
other similar agency) but for the first importer if they ever resell
the goods.
Roland Perry
Nov 5, 2011, 1:00:04 PM11/5/11
to
In message <83nab75q3i5rvnedp...@4ax.com>, at 16:05:03 on
Sat, 5 Nov 2011, Peter Parry <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> remarked:
a consumer in the UK?
--
Roland Perry
Sat, 5 Nov 2011, Peter Parry <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> remarked:
>CE is commonly thought to stand for "Chinese export" it is of such
>limited worth. In the case of goods imported from abroad the
>responsibility for CE marking and testing (if required) lies with the
>first importer into the EU if the manufacturer has no physical office
>in the EU. The problem is not therefore eBays (or Alibaba or any
>other similar agency) but for the first importer if they ever resell
>the goods.
Who is the liable party if the goods are shipped straight from China to
>limited worth. In the case of goods imported from abroad the
>responsibility for CE marking and testing (if required) lies with the
>first importer into the EU if the manufacturer has no physical office
>in the EU. The problem is not therefore eBays (or Alibaba or any
>other similar agency) but for the first importer if they ever resell
>the goods.
a consumer in the UK?
--
Roland Perry
Ian Smith
Nov 5, 2011, 2:25:02 PM11/5/11
to
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
Yellow
Nov 5, 2011, 2:35:02 PM11/5/11
to
In article <slrnjbavl...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
i...@astounding.org.uk says...
Not so, unless the consumer is selling the goods on but that would mean
he was not a consumer.
i...@astounding.org.uk says...
he was not a consumer.
Ian Smith
Nov 5, 2011, 3:35:02 PM11/5/11
to
cases where it needs a CE marking. If it doesn't need a CE marking
then it is self-evident that no-one in all of creation is responsible.
I'd have thought that was self-evident.
TTman
Nov 5, 2011, 3:55:01 PM11/5/11
to
"Peter Parry" <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> wrote in message
news:83nab75q3i5rvnedp...@4ax.com...
There must be thousands of home 'hobbyists' and small one man bands that
sell non conforming stuff on Ebay .... At least they pay their taxes I
guess...and VAT...
Nightjar
Nov 5, 2011, 4:00:04 PM11/5/11
to
On 05/11/2011 16:05, Peter Parry wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 11:45:03 +0000,
> real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>
>
>> Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
>> to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
>> wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
>> to increase.
>
> CE is commonly thought to stand for "Chinese export" it is of such
> limited worth...
> On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 11:45:03 +0000,
> real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>
>
>> Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
>> to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
>> wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
>> to increase.
>
> CE is commonly thought to stand for "Chinese export" it is of such
The CE mark alone only indicates something that can be self-certified.
They may well be unreliable. Important CE marks consist of the mark
followed by a four digit number. The number identifies the independent,
government approved, notified body that certifies compliance with the
relevant EU Directive and they can be checked for reliability.
Colin Bignell
Old Codger
Nov 5, 2011, 4:20:02 PM11/5/11
to
On 05/11/2011 16:05, Peter Parry wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 11:45:03 +0000,
> real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>
>
>> Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
>> to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
>> wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
>> to increase.
>
> CE is commonly thought to stand for "Chinese export"
Nah, Caveat Emptor. :-)
> real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>
>
>> Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
>> to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
>> wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
>> to increase.
>
> CE is commonly thought to stand for "Chinese export"
it is of such
> limited worth. In the case of goods imported from abroad the
> responsibility for CE marking and testing (if required) lies with the
> first importer into the EU if the manufacturer has no physical office
> in the EU. The problem is not therefore eBays (or Alibaba or any
> other similar agency) but for the first importer if they ever resell
> the goods.
>
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field
What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]
Yellow
Nov 5, 2011, 5:05:02 PM11/5/11
to
In article <slrnjbb3t...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> If it doesn't need a CE marking
> then it is self-evident that no-one in all of creation is responsible.
> I'd have thought that was self-evident.
But I did not bring up the issue of items that do not require CE
Marking.
i...@astounding.org.uk says...
>
> On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 18:35:02 +0000, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > In article <slrnjbavl...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> > i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> > >
> > > On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 17:00:04 +0000, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > In message <83nab75q3i5rvnedp...@4ax.com>, at 16:05:03 on
> > > > Sat, 5 Nov 2011, Peter Parry <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> remarked:
> > > > >
> > > > >CE is commonly thought to stand for "Chinese export" it is of
> > > > >such limited worth. In the case of goods imported from abroad
> > > > >the responsibility for CE marking and testing (if required)
> > > > >lies with the first importer into the EU if the manufacturer
> > > > >has no physical office in the EU. The problem is not therefore
> > > > >eBays (or Alibaba or any other similar agency) but for the
> > > > >first importer if they ever resell the goods.
> > > >
> > > > Who is the liable party if the goods are shipped straight from
> > > > China to a consumer in the UK?
> > >
> > > The consumer is the importer, so presumably the consumer.
> >
> > Not so, unless the consumer is selling the goods on but that would
> > mean he was not a consumer.
>
> The consumer is responsible for ensuring it has a CE marking in
> cases where it needs a CE marking.
No, that is wrong.
>
> On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 18:35:02 +0000, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > In article <slrnjbavl...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> > i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> > >
> > > On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 17:00:04 +0000, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > In message <83nab75q3i5rvnedp...@4ax.com>, at 16:05:03 on
> > > > Sat, 5 Nov 2011, Peter Parry <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> remarked:
> > > > >
> > > > >CE is commonly thought to stand for "Chinese export" it is of
> > > > >such limited worth. In the case of goods imported from abroad
> > > > >the responsibility for CE marking and testing (if required)
> > > > >lies with the first importer into the EU if the manufacturer
> > > > >has no physical office in the EU. The problem is not therefore
> > > > >eBays (or Alibaba or any other similar agency) but for the
> > > > >first importer if they ever resell the goods.
> > > >
> > > > Who is the liable party if the goods are shipped straight from
> > > > China to a consumer in the UK?
> > >
> > > The consumer is the importer, so presumably the consumer.
> >
> > Not so, unless the consumer is selling the goods on but that would
> > mean he was not a consumer.
>
> The consumer is responsible for ensuring it has a CE marking in
> cases where it needs a CE marking.
> If it doesn't need a CE marking
> then it is self-evident that no-one in all of creation is responsible.
> I'd have thought that was self-evident.
Marking.
Ian Smith
Nov 6, 2011, 4:15:03 AM11/6/11
to
On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 21:05:02 +0000, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> In article <slrnjbb3t...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> In article <slrnjbb3t...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> > On Sat, 05 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > > In article <slrnjbavl...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> > > i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> > > In article <slrnjbavl...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> > > i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> > > > On Sat, 05 Nov 2011, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Who is the liable party if the goods are shipped straight
> > > > > from China to a consumer in the UK?
> > > >
> > > > The consumer is the importer, so presumably the consumer.
> > >
> > > Not so, unless the consumer is selling the goods on but that
> > > would mean he was not a consumer.
> >
> > The consumer is responsible for ensuring it has a CE marking in
> > cases where it needs a CE marking.
>
> No, that is wrong.
In what way? If it needs a CE marking, and the manufacturer has no EC
> > > > >
> > > > > Who is the liable party if the goods are shipped straight
> > > > > from China to a consumer in the UK?
> > > >
> > > > The consumer is the importer, so presumably the consumer.
> > >
> > > Not so, unless the consumer is selling the goods on but that
> > > would mean he was not a consumer.
> >
> > The consumer is responsible for ensuring it has a CE marking in
> > cases where it needs a CE marking.
>
> No, that is wrong.
presence, then the importer must CE mark it (that is my understanding,
at least), and the importer is the consumer in the case under
discussion, so is responsible for CE marking it.
> > If it doesn't need a CE marking then it is self-evident that
> > no-one in all of creation is responsible. I'd have thought that
> > was self-evident.
>
> But I did not bring up the issue of items that do not require CE
> Marking.
If you're so certain my answer is wrong, how about answering the
question?
In the case of an item imported by a consumer direct from a
manufacturer in China, who is responsible for ensuring it has a CE
marking?
I still believe it is no-one, because it does not need one.
You claim that is wrong.
If it's wrong, what is the right answer?
regards, Ian SMith
Yellow
Nov 6, 2011, 5:55:01 AM11/6/11
to
In article <slrnjbcjr...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
legislation.
They are not selling goods on.
i...@astounding.org.uk says...
>
> On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 21:05:02 +0000, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > In article <slrnjbb3t...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> > i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> > > On Sat, 05 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > > > In article <slrnjbavl...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> > > > i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> > > > > On Sat, 05 Nov 2011, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Who is the liable party if the goods are shipped straight
> > > > > > from China to a consumer in the UK?
> > > > >
> > > > > The consumer is the importer, so presumably the consumer.
> > > >
> > > > Not so, unless the consumer is selling the goods on but that
> > > > would mean he was not a consumer.
> > >
> > > The consumer is responsible for ensuring it has a CE marking in
> > > cases where it needs a CE marking.
> >
> > No, that is wrong.
>
> In what way? If it needs a CE marking, and the manufacturer has no EC
> presence, then the importer must CE mark it (that is my understanding,
> at least), and the importer is the consumer in the case under
> discussion, so is responsible for CE marking it.
A consumer is not an importer for the purposes of CE marking
>
> On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 21:05:02 +0000, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > In article <slrnjbb3t...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> > i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> > > On Sat, 05 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > > > In article <slrnjbavl...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> > > > i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> > > > > On Sat, 05 Nov 2011, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Who is the liable party if the goods are shipped straight
> > > > > > from China to a consumer in the UK?
> > > > >
> > > > > The consumer is the importer, so presumably the consumer.
> > > >
> > > > Not so, unless the consumer is selling the goods on but that
> > > > would mean he was not a consumer.
> > >
> > > The consumer is responsible for ensuring it has a CE marking in
> > > cases where it needs a CE marking.
> >
> > No, that is wrong.
>
> In what way? If it needs a CE marking, and the manufacturer has no EC
> presence, then the importer must CE mark it (that is my understanding,
> at least), and the importer is the consumer in the case under
> discussion, so is responsible for CE marking it.
legislation.
They are not selling goods on.
Ian Smith
Nov 6, 2011, 7:45:02 AM11/6/11
to
On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 10:55:01 +0000, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> In article <slrnjbcjr...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> i...@astounding.org.uk says...
mark they are responsible for that.
You say I am wrong to say this, but you won't say what the right
answer is. Please tell me what the right answer is.
> They are not selling goods on.
Normally. So in that case it doesn't need a CE mark, which I said. I
said "If it doesn't need a CE marking then it is self-evident that
no-one in all of creation is responsible [for marking it]". You
disagreed.
However, if it needs a CE mark, the person who imported it into the EC
is responsible for arranging that. Which is what I said, which you
say is wrong.
> > I still believe it is no-one, because it does not need one.
> > You claim that is wrong.
> > If it's wrong, what is the right answer?
Please, give us the benefit of your superior knowledge.
In cases where an imported item needs a CE mark, and the manufacturer
has no EC presence, who is responsible for marking it?
> In article <slrnjbcjr...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> i...@astounding.org.uk says...
> >
> > In what way? If it needs a CE marking, and the manufacturer has
> > no EC presence, then the importer must CE mark it (that is my
> > understanding, at least), and the importer is the consumer in the
> > case under discussion, so is responsible for CE marking it.
>
> A consumer is not an importer for the purposes of CE marking
> legislation.
The person that imports it is the importer, and if it requires a CE
> > In what way? If it needs a CE marking, and the manufacturer has
> > no EC presence, then the importer must CE mark it (that is my
> > understanding, at least), and the importer is the consumer in the
> > case under discussion, so is responsible for CE marking it.
>
> A consumer is not an importer for the purposes of CE marking
> legislation.
mark they are responsible for that.
You say I am wrong to say this, but you won't say what the right
answer is. Please tell me what the right answer is.
> They are not selling goods on.
said "If it doesn't need a CE marking then it is self-evident that
no-one in all of creation is responsible [for marking it]". You
disagreed.
However, if it needs a CE mark, the person who imported it into the EC
is responsible for arranging that. Which is what I said, which you
say is wrong.
> > I still believe it is no-one, because it does not need one.
> > You claim that is wrong.
> > If it's wrong, what is the right answer?
In cases where an imported item needs a CE mark, and the manufacturer
has no EC presence, who is responsible for marking it?
Peter Parry
Nov 6, 2011, 8:25:02 AM11/6/11
to
On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 09:15:03 +0000, Ian Smith <i...@astounding.org.uk>
wrote:
>In the case of an item imported by a consumer direct from a
>manufacturer in China, who is responsible for ensuring it has a CE
>marking?
>
>I still believe it is no-one,
It is no one because the directive applies only to goods imported to
be placed on the Community market.
> because it does not need one.
As long as it never gets "placed on the market". Unfortunately no one
seems to know quite what that means as the same words are used in
numerous directives and have quite different interpretations attached
to them. It is possible that even selling the tem privately would
count as "placing it on the market".
wrote:
>In the case of an item imported by a consumer direct from a
>manufacturer in China, who is responsible for ensuring it has a CE
>marking?
>
>I still believe it is no-one,
be placed on the Community market.
> because it does not need one.
seems to know quite what that means as the same words are used in
numerous directives and have quite different interpretations attached
to them. It is possible that even selling the tem privately would
count as "placing it on the market".
Roland Perry
Nov 6, 2011, 8:25:09 AM11/6/11
to
In message <slrnjbd07...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>, at 12:45:02
on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Ian Smith <i...@astounding.org.uk> remarked:
and later re-sold; either as second-hand, or perhaps an "unwanted gift"/
"bought wrong item"/"no longer required" kind of thing[1].
The first thing to understand is whether this is another of the "CE mark
not needed" situations, before going on to ask who might have to produce
the missing mark.
[1] I recently imported some branded clothing which I later resold on
eBay, in circumstance such as this. I'm not losing any sleep over the
consequences of any potential irregularities in the labelling, any more
than if I'd donated them to a charity shop or sold them in a boot sale.
--
Roland Perry
on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Ian Smith <i...@astounding.org.uk> remarked:
>> A consumer is not an importer for the purposes of CE marking
>> legislation.
>
>The person that imports it is the importer, and if it requires a CE
>mark they are responsible for that.
>
>You say I am wrong to say this, but you won't say what the right
>answer is. Please tell me what the right answer is.
>
>> They are not selling goods on.
>
>Normally. So in that case it doesn't need a CE mark, which I said. I
>said "If it doesn't need a CE marking then it is self-evident that
>no-one in all of creation is responsible [for marking it]". You
>disagreed.
>
>However, if it needs a CE mark, the person who imported it into the EC
>is responsible for arranging that. Which is what I said, which you
>say is wrong.
All we seem to be left with is an item that was imported by a consumer
>> legislation.
>
>The person that imports it is the importer, and if it requires a CE
>mark they are responsible for that.
>
>You say I am wrong to say this, but you won't say what the right
>answer is. Please tell me what the right answer is.
>
>> They are not selling goods on.
>
>Normally. So in that case it doesn't need a CE mark, which I said. I
>said "If it doesn't need a CE marking then it is self-evident that
>no-one in all of creation is responsible [for marking it]". You
>disagreed.
>
>However, if it needs a CE mark, the person who imported it into the EC
>is responsible for arranging that. Which is what I said, which you
>say is wrong.
and later re-sold; either as second-hand, or perhaps an "unwanted gift"/
"bought wrong item"/"no longer required" kind of thing[1].
The first thing to understand is whether this is another of the "CE mark
not needed" situations, before going on to ask who might have to produce
the missing mark.
[1] I recently imported some branded clothing which I later resold on
eBay, in circumstance such as this. I'm not losing any sleep over the
consequences of any potential irregularities in the labelling, any more
than if I'd donated them to a charity shop or sold them in a boot sale.
--
Roland Perry
Yellow
Nov 6, 2011, 8:55:02 AM11/6/11
to
In article <slrnjbd07...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
i...@astounding.org.uk says...
For the final time - the consumer is not responsible for ensuring that
goods are CE Marked.
i...@astounding.org.uk says...
goods are CE Marked.
Roland Perry
Nov 6, 2011, 8:55:09 AM11/6/11
to
In message <f22db794nthcib5q8...@4ax.com>, at 13:25:02 on
Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Peter Parry <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> remarked:
wasn't the original intention of the importer?
In another posting I mentioned importing something and then selling on
eBay because the clothes turned out not to be what I wanted. I made at
least a 50% loss on the deal, and certainly didn't import them for the
purpose of resale - but afterwards I did want to get some of my money
back in the absence of the equivalent to DSRs.
--
Roland Perry
Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Peter Parry <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> remarked:
>>In the case of an item imported by a consumer direct from a
>>manufacturer in China, who is responsible for ensuring it has a CE
>>marking?
>>
>>I still believe it is no-one,
>
>It is no one because the directive applies only to goods imported to
>be placed on the Community market.
>
>> because it does not need one.
>
>As long as it never gets "placed on the market". Unfortunately no one
>seems to know quite what that means as the same words are used in
>numerous directives and have quite different interpretations attached
>to them. It is possible that even selling the tem privately would
>count as "placing it on the market".
Does it matter if the "placing on the market" happens subsequently, and
>>manufacturer in China, who is responsible for ensuring it has a CE
>>marking?
>>
>>I still believe it is no-one,
>
>It is no one because the directive applies only to goods imported to
>be placed on the Community market.
>
>> because it does not need one.
>
>As long as it never gets "placed on the market". Unfortunately no one
>seems to know quite what that means as the same words are used in
>numerous directives and have quite different interpretations attached
>to them. It is possible that even selling the tem privately would
>count as "placing it on the market".
wasn't the original intention of the importer?
In another posting I mentioned importing something and then selling on
eBay because the clothes turned out not to be what I wanted. I made at
least a 50% loss on the deal, and certainly didn't import them for the
purpose of resale - but afterwards I did want to get some of my money
back in the absence of the equivalent to DSRs.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Nov 6, 2011, 9:05:02 AM11/6/11
to
In message <MPG.2920a18a1...@news.x-privat.org>, at 13:55:02
on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
>For the final time - the consumer is not responsible for ensuring that
>goods are CE Marked.
Even if he resells them? (See my other postings for scenarios where a
sale might happen).
--
Roland Perry
on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
>For the final time - the consumer is not responsible for ensuring that
>goods are CE Marked.
sale might happen).
--
Roland Perry
Peter Parry
Nov 6, 2011, 10:00:05 AM11/6/11
to
On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 13:55:09 +0000, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>
wrote:
>In message <f22db794nthcib5q8...@4ax.com>, at 13:25:02 on
>Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Peter Parry <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> remarked:
at any time.
>In another posting I mentioned importing something and then selling on
>eBay because the clothes turned out not to be what I wanted. I made at
>least a 50% loss on the deal, and certainly didn't import them for the
>purpose of resale - but afterwards I did want to get some of my money
>back in the absence of the equivalent to DSRs.
Placing on the market includes goods sold at no profit (or used as
samples).
wrote:
>In message <f22db794nthcib5q8...@4ax.com>, at 13:25:02 on
>Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Peter Parry <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> remarked:
>>As long as it never gets "placed on the market". Unfortunately no one
>>seems to know quite what that means as the same words are used in
>>numerous directives and have quite different interpretations attached
>>to them. It is possible that even selling the tem privately would
>>count as "placing it on the market".
>
>Does it matter if the "placing on the market" happens subsequently, and
>wasn't the original intention of the importer?
No, in that respect they all agree - placing on the market can occur
>>seems to know quite what that means as the same words are used in
>>numerous directives and have quite different interpretations attached
>>to them. It is possible that even selling the tem privately would
>>count as "placing it on the market".
>
>Does it matter if the "placing on the market" happens subsequently, and
>wasn't the original intention of the importer?
at any time.
>In another posting I mentioned importing something and then selling on
>eBay because the clothes turned out not to be what I wanted. I made at
>least a 50% loss on the deal, and certainly didn't import them for the
>purpose of resale - but afterwards I did want to get some of my money
>back in the absence of the equivalent to DSRs.
samples).
Roland Perry
Nov 6, 2011, 10:20:03 AM11/6/11
to
In message <cs7db7tghoo1fm3gk...@4ax.com>, at 15:00:05 on
importing them for resale. But if resale at any time and for any price
triggers the need for CE marking, then that has implications for the
second-hand market (a bit like furniture without 'flameproof' labels).
--
Roland Perry
Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Peter Parry <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> remarked:
>>In another posting I mentioned importing something and then selling on
>>eBay because the clothes turned out not to be what I wanted. I made at
>>least a 50% loss on the deal, and certainly didn't import them for the
>>purpose of resale - but afterwards I did want to get some of my money
>>back in the absence of the equivalent to DSRs.
>
>Placing on the market includes goods sold at no profit (or used as
>samples).
Making a loss in this case demonstrates reasonably clearly that I wasn't
>>eBay because the clothes turned out not to be what I wanted. I made at
>>least a 50% loss on the deal, and certainly didn't import them for the
>>purpose of resale - but afterwards I did want to get some of my money
>>back in the absence of the equivalent to DSRs.
>
>Placing on the market includes goods sold at no profit (or used as
>samples).
importing them for resale. But if resale at any time and for any price
triggers the need for CE marking, then that has implications for the
second-hand market (a bit like furniture without 'flameproof' labels).
--
Roland Perry
Yellow
Nov 6, 2011, 11:35:02 AM11/6/11
to
In article <h07x$PR1Mp...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...
If he buys to sell on then he is not a consumer.
Second hand goods are covered by the legislation but I not convinced a
consumer to consumer transaction would count as putting the goods on the
market.
Second hand goods are covered by the legislation but I not convinced a
consumer to consumer transaction would count as putting the goods on the
market.
Roland Perry
Nov 6, 2011, 12:10:09 PM11/6/11
to
In message <MPG.2920c69fe...@news.x-privat.org>, at 16:35:02
will buy something for himself (or to become a gift) and then it will
become unexpectedly "unwanted" and be put on sale "as new". So it wasn't
bought to sell on, but transpires that it is in fact sold on.
>Second hand goods are covered by the legislation but I not convinced a
>consumer to consumer transaction would count as putting the goods on the
>market.
When you say "consumer to consumer" I presume that's not in contrast to
"consumer to business"? For example, if my unwanted item is put on eBay,
I will probably end up selling it to another consumer, but it feels a
bit like it's been "on the market".
--
Roland Perry
on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
>> >For the final time - the consumer is not responsible for ensuring that
>> >goods are CE Marked.
>>
>> Even if he resells them? (See my other postings for scenarios where a
>> sale might happen).
>
>If he buys to sell on then he is not a consumer.
I've tried to make it as clear as possible that sometimes a consumer
>> >For the final time - the consumer is not responsible for ensuring that
>> >goods are CE Marked.
>>
>> Even if he resells them? (See my other postings for scenarios where a
>> sale might happen).
>
>If he buys to sell on then he is not a consumer.
will buy something for himself (or to become a gift) and then it will
become unexpectedly "unwanted" and be put on sale "as new". So it wasn't
bought to sell on, but transpires that it is in fact sold on.
>Second hand goods are covered by the legislation but I not convinced a
>consumer to consumer transaction would count as putting the goods on the
>market.
"consumer to business"? For example, if my unwanted item is put on eBay,
I will probably end up selling it to another consumer, but it feels a
bit like it's been "on the market".
--
Roland Perry
Ian Smith
Nov 6, 2011, 12:25:02 PM11/6/11
to
fundamental to a person. How do you define consumer? How do you tell
that someone who has bought something from China and is now
advertising it in a marketplace for sale to any member of the public
(or indeed business) is a consumer? In what way is someone advertising
something for sale a consumer?
Yellow
Nov 6, 2011, 1:25:02 PM11/6/11
to
In article <1XwEHNXb...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...
are being sold as a business enterprise.
> >Second hand goods are covered by the legislation but I not convinced a
> >consumer to consumer transaction would count as putting the goods on the
> >market.
>
> When you say "consumer to consumer" I presume that's not in contrast to
> "consumer to business"? For example, if my unwanted item is put on eBay,
> I will probably end up selling it to another consumer, but it feels a
> bit like it's been "on the market".
It might feel like that but I am simply considering what the legislation
actually says.
I am not a lawyer BTW but come into contact with the legislation as part
of my job.
>
> In message <MPG.2920c69fe...@news.x-privat.org>, at 16:35:02
> on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
> >> >For the final time - the consumer is not responsible for ensuring that
> >> >goods are CE Marked.
> >>
> >> Even if he resells them? (See my other postings for scenarios where a
> >> sale might happen).
> >
> >If he buys to sell on then he is not a consumer.
>
> I've tried to make it as clear as possible that sometimes a consumer
> will buy something for himself (or to become a gift) and then it will
> become unexpectedly "unwanted" and be put on sale "as new". So it wasn't
> bought to sell on, but transpires that it is in fact sold on.
Then we are probably back to the question of whether or not the goods
> In message <MPG.2920c69fe...@news.x-privat.org>, at 16:35:02
> on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
> >> >For the final time - the consumer is not responsible for ensuring that
> >> >goods are CE Marked.
> >>
> >> Even if he resells them? (See my other postings for scenarios where a
> >> sale might happen).
> >
> >If he buys to sell on then he is not a consumer.
>
> I've tried to make it as clear as possible that sometimes a consumer
> will buy something for himself (or to become a gift) and then it will
> become unexpectedly "unwanted" and be put on sale "as new". So it wasn't
> bought to sell on, but transpires that it is in fact sold on.
are being sold as a business enterprise.
> >Second hand goods are covered by the legislation but I not convinced a
> >consumer to consumer transaction would count as putting the goods on the
> >market.
>
> When you say "consumer to consumer" I presume that's not in contrast to
> "consumer to business"? For example, if my unwanted item is put on eBay,
> I will probably end up selling it to another consumer, but it feels a
> bit like it's been "on the market".
actually says.
I am not a lawyer BTW but come into contact with the legislation as part
of my job.
Yellow
Nov 6, 2011, 1:35:02 PM11/6/11
to
In article <slrnjbdge...@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
i...@astounding.org.uk says...
business.
> How do you tell
> that someone who has bought something from China and is now
> advertising it in a marketplace for sale to any member of the public
> (or indeed business) is a consumer?
Personally, I would look at their sales history. If they are selling
similar goods by the shed load then they are operating as a business, if
they are selling random, one off items, then they are simply selling
their personal possessions.
> In what way is someone advertising
> something for sale a consumer?
If you are selling your personal possession then it is a personal sale,
not a business sale. If you purchase goods specifically to sell on, then
it is a business sale.
i...@astounding.org.uk says...
>
> On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 16:35:02 +0000, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > In article <h07x$PR1Mp...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...
> > >
> > > In message <MPG.2920a18a1...@news.x-privat.org>, at 13:55:02
> > > on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
> > >
> > > >For the final time - the consumer is not responsible for ensuring
> > > >that goods are CE Marked.
> > >
> > > Even if he resells them? (See my other postings for scenarios
> > > where a sale might happen).
> >
> > If he buys to sell on then he is not a consumer.
> >
> > Second hand goods are covered by the legislation but I not
> > convinced a consumer to consumer transaction would count as putting
> > the goods on the market.
>
> All of which reads as if you believe 'consumer' to be something
> fundamental to a person. How do you define consumer?
The consideration is actually whether or not someone is operating as a
> On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 16:35:02 +0000, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > In article <h07x$PR1Mp...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...
> > >
> > > In message <MPG.2920a18a1...@news.x-privat.org>, at 13:55:02
> > > on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
> > >
> > > >For the final time - the consumer is not responsible for ensuring
> > > >that goods are CE Marked.
> > >
> > > Even if he resells them? (See my other postings for scenarios
> > > where a sale might happen).
> >
> > If he buys to sell on then he is not a consumer.
> >
> > Second hand goods are covered by the legislation but I not
> > convinced a consumer to consumer transaction would count as putting
> > the goods on the market.
>
> All of which reads as if you believe 'consumer' to be something
> fundamental to a person. How do you define consumer?
business.
> How do you tell
> that someone who has bought something from China and is now
> advertising it in a marketplace for sale to any member of the public
> (or indeed business) is a consumer?
similar goods by the shed load then they are operating as a business, if
they are selling random, one off items, then they are simply selling
their personal possessions.
> In what way is someone advertising
> something for sale a consumer?
not a business sale. If you purchase goods specifically to sell on, then
it is a business sale.
Roland Perry
Nov 6, 2011, 4:20:03 PM11/6/11
to
In message <MPG.2920e0dc3...@news.x-privat.org>, at 18:25:02
>> >Second hand goods are covered by the legislation but I not convinced a
>> >consumer to consumer transaction would count as putting the goods on the
>> >market.
>>
>> When you say "consumer to consumer" I presume that's not in contrast to
>> "consumer to business"? For example, if my unwanted item is put on eBay,
>> I will probably end up selling it to another consumer, but it feels a
>> bit like it's been "on the market".
>
>It might feel like that but I am simply considering what the legislation
>actually says.
So as long as I'm not selling my secondhand nick-nacks as a business,
I'm OK?
--
Roland Perry
on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
>> I've tried to make it as clear as possible that sometimes a consumer
>> will buy something for himself (or to become a gift) and then it will
>> become unexpectedly "unwanted" and be put on sale "as new". So it wasn't
>> bought to sell on, but transpires that it is in fact sold on.
>
>Then we are probably back to the question of whether or not the goods
>are being sold as a business enterprise.
No, they aren't (in my examples).
>> will buy something for himself (or to become a gift) and then it will
>> become unexpectedly "unwanted" and be put on sale "as new". So it wasn't
>> bought to sell on, but transpires that it is in fact sold on.
>
>Then we are probably back to the question of whether or not the goods
>are being sold as a business enterprise.
>> >Second hand goods are covered by the legislation but I not convinced a
>> >consumer to consumer transaction would count as putting the goods on the
>> >market.
>>
>> When you say "consumer to consumer" I presume that's not in contrast to
>> "consumer to business"? For example, if my unwanted item is put on eBay,
>> I will probably end up selling it to another consumer, but it feels a
>> bit like it's been "on the market".
>
>It might feel like that but I am simply considering what the legislation
>actually says.
I'm OK?
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Nov 6, 2011, 4:30:03 PM11/6/11
to
In message <MPG.2920e27ea...@news.x-privat.org>, at 18:35:02
collection, but still be a consumer.
>> In what way is someone advertising
>> something for sale a consumer?
>
>If you are selling your personal possession then it is a personal sale,
>not a business sale. If you purchase goods specifically to sell on, then
>it is a business sale.
I'd agree with that. Apart from a few corner cases. For example buying a
pack of two of something, with intentions of re-selling the second
because you only wanted one. But that's also into "random item"
territory, because you'd only do that once.
--
Roland Perry
on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <ye...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
>Personally, I would look at their sales history. If they are selling
>similar goods by the shed load then they are operating as a business, if
>they are selling random, one off items, then they are simply selling
>their personal possessions.
That's a little too prescriptive. A collector might sell off their
>similar goods by the shed load then they are operating as a business, if
>they are selling random, one off items, then they are simply selling
>their personal possessions.
collection, but still be a consumer.
>> In what way is someone advertising
>> something for sale a consumer?
>
>If you are selling your personal possession then it is a personal sale,
>not a business sale. If you purchase goods specifically to sell on, then
>it is a business sale.
pack of two of something, with intentions of re-selling the second
because you only wanted one. But that's also into "random item"
territory, because you'd only do that once.
--
Roland Perry
Yellow
Nov 6, 2011, 5:05:02 PM11/6/11
to
In article <zxclOiep...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...
Personal opinion - yes.
Out of interest, the directive is available on-line along with
application notes. You can also find the statuary instrument to see
exactly how the directive has been applied in UK law. This is all free.
And while it is all a bit dry, it is not that difficult a read
especially if you are looking for answers to particular questions rather
than trying to take the whole lot on board because that means you can
skip whole chunks.
Out of interest, the directive is available on-line along with
application notes. You can also find the statuary instrument to see
exactly how the directive has been applied in UK law. This is all free.
And while it is all a bit dry, it is not that difficult a read
especially if you are looking for answers to particular questions rather
than trying to take the whole lot on board because that means you can
skip whole chunks.
Nightjar
Nov 7, 2011, 3:50:03 PM11/7/11
to
On 06/11/2011 18:35, Yellow wrote:
....
Mark, when the importer is own branding the goods for another business
before selling them on. However, it is several years since it was
discussed and it didn't directly affect my business, so I forget the
details.
Colin Bignell
....
> If you are selling your personal possession then it is a personal sale,
> not a business sale. If you purchase goods specifically to sell on, then
> it is a business sale.
ISTR some complication in that, in relation to responsibility for the CE
> not a business sale. If you purchase goods specifically to sell on, then
> it is a business sale.
Mark, when the importer is own branding the goods for another business
before selling them on. However, it is several years since it was
discussed and it didn't directly affect my business, so I forget the
details.
Colin Bignell
Man at B&Q
Nov 9, 2011, 4:00:02 AM11/9/11
to
On Nov 6, 9:30 pm, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <MPG.2920e27ea8eab333989...@news.x-privat.org>, at 18:35:02
> on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <y...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
LOL!
MBQ
> In message <MPG.2920e27ea8eab333989...@news.x-privat.org>, at 18:35:02
> on Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Yellow <y...@please.no.spam.com> remarked:
>
> >Personally, I would look at their sales history. If they are selling
> >similar goods by the shed load then they are operating as a business, if
> >they are selling random, one off items, then they are simply selling
> >their personal possessions.
>
> That's a little too prescriptive. A collector might sell off their
> collection, but still be a consumer.
>
> >> In what way is someone advertising
> >> something for sale a consumer?
>
> >If you are selling your personal possession then it is a personal sale,
> >not a business sale. If you purchase goods specifically to sell on, then
> >it is a business sale.
>
> I'd agree with that. Apart from a few corner cases. For example buying a
> pack of two of something, with intentions of re-selling the second
> because you only wanted one. But that's also into "random item"
> territory, because you'd only do that once.
DO it with houses and HMRC will assume you are a property developer,
> >Personally, I would look at their sales history. If they are selling
> >similar goods by the shed load then they are operating as a business, if
> >they are selling random, one off items, then they are simply selling
> >their personal possessions.
>
> That's a little too prescriptive. A collector might sell off their
> collection, but still be a consumer.
>
> >> In what way is someone advertising
> >> something for sale a consumer?
>
> >If you are selling your personal possession then it is a personal sale,
> >not a business sale. If you purchase goods specifically to sell on, then
> >it is a business sale.
>
> I'd agree with that. Apart from a few corner cases. For example buying a
> pack of two of something, with intentions of re-selling the second
> because you only wanted one. But that's also into "random item"
> territory, because you'd only do that once.
LOL!
MBQ
Man at B&Q
Nov 9, 2011, 4:05:03 AM11/9/11
to
On Nov 6, 12:45 pm, Ian Smith <i...@astounding.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 10:55:01 +0000, Yellow <y...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > In article <slrnjbcjrq.bo5....@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
item on the market, is not responsible for testing, certifying or CE
marking their own property.
They are, however, bound by regulations that cover putting the item
into service. For example if you purchase an item that causes
excessive RF interference (which could not have a CE mark in any case)
you will fall foul of the putting into service parts of the EMC
regulations if you actually use it.
MBQ
> On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 10:55:01 +0000, Yellow <y...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> > In article <slrnjbcjrq.bo5....@acheron.astounding.org.uk>,
> > i...@astounding.org.uk says...
>
> > > In what way? If it needs a CE marking, and the manufacturer has
> > > no EC presence, then the importer must CE mark it (that is my
> > > understanding, at least), and the importer is the consumer in the
> > > case under discussion, so is responsible for CE marking it.
>
> > A consumer is not an importer for the purposes of CE marking
> > legislation.
>
> The person that imports it is the importer, and if it requires a CE
> mark they are responsible for that.
A person purchasing a one off item as a consumer, not putting that
>
> > > In what way? If it needs a CE marking, and the manufacturer has
> > > no EC presence, then the importer must CE mark it (that is my
> > > understanding, at least), and the importer is the consumer in the
> > > case under discussion, so is responsible for CE marking it.
>
> > A consumer is not an importer for the purposes of CE marking
> > legislation.
>
> The person that imports it is the importer, and if it requires a CE
> mark they are responsible for that.
item on the market, is not responsible for testing, certifying or CE
marking their own property.
They are, however, bound by regulations that cover putting the item
into service. For example if you purchase an item that causes
excessive RF interference (which could not have a CE mark in any case)
you will fall foul of the putting into service parts of the EMC
regulations if you actually use it.
MBQ
Paul
Nov 17, 2011, 5:30:02 PM11/17/11
to
I think it's normally a case of the government and everyone turns out a
blind eye until there's a serious safety issue or accident and then a
safety investigation is carried out. Those selling the goods will be the
ones in the firing line and in court as I believe its their
responsibility to make sure the goods are CE approved properly.
The government can ban the sale of certain items or take retailers/
manufacturers to court, but I think eBay won't be liable because it's
merely an auction and can't possibly regulate all the items sold or
validate what is genuinely CE approved and what is not. They must have
some responsibility though to end listings or block products which have
safety issues or complaints logged against them.
Yellow
Nov 19, 2011, 8:10:03 PM11/19/11
to
In article <CoSdndOMffPeFVjT...@brightview.co.uk>,
pa...@nospam.net says...
it is not an issue of a blind eye being turned. I say mostly, because
some goods have to be independently assessed before they can be legally
CE marked.
In addition, when goods are imported into Europe, they should have their
paperwork checked at that point but in reality a lot depends on the
method used to transport the goods.
> Those selling the goods will be the
> ones in the firing line and in court as I believe its their
> responsibility to make sure the goods are CE approved properly.
If the goods are manufactured in Europe it will be the manufacturer. If
they are manufactured outside of Europe it will be the manufacturer's
representative in Europe.
The seller, unless they have imported the goods to sell them on and are
therefore deemed the manufacturer's representative in Europe, have no
responsibility and do not even have a legal entitlement to a copy of the
EC Declaration of Conformity.
> The government
Trading Standards.
> can ban the sale of certain items or take retailers/
> manufacturers to court, but I think eBay won't be liable because it's
> merely an auction and can't possibly regulate all the items sold or
> validate what is genuinely CE approved and what is not.
Ebay would never be involved with CE Marking of goods.
> They must have
> some responsibility though to end listings or block products which have
> safety issues or complaints logged against them.
Only if Trading Standards have banned the goods I'd have thought.
pa...@nospam.net says...
>
> I think it's normally a case of the government and everyone turns out a
> blind eye until there's a serious safety issue or accident and then a
> safety investigation is carried out.
Mostly, proof only needs to be provide when an incident has occurred, so
> I think it's normally a case of the government and everyone turns out a
> blind eye until there's a serious safety issue or accident and then a
> safety investigation is carried out.
it is not an issue of a blind eye being turned. I say mostly, because
some goods have to be independently assessed before they can be legally
CE marked.
In addition, when goods are imported into Europe, they should have their
paperwork checked at that point but in reality a lot depends on the
method used to transport the goods.
> Those selling the goods will be the
> ones in the firing line and in court as I believe its their
> responsibility to make sure the goods are CE approved properly.
they are manufactured outside of Europe it will be the manufacturer's
representative in Europe.
The seller, unless they have imported the goods to sell them on and are
therefore deemed the manufacturer's representative in Europe, have no
responsibility and do not even have a legal entitlement to a copy of the
EC Declaration of Conformity.
> The government
Trading Standards.
> can ban the sale of certain items or take retailers/
> manufacturers to court, but I think eBay won't be liable because it's
> merely an auction and can't possibly regulate all the items sold or
> validate what is genuinely CE approved and what is not.
> They must have
> some responsibility though to end listings or block products which have
> safety issues or complaints logged against them.
Man at B&Q
Nov 21, 2011, 9:40:02 AM11/21/11
to
On Nov 20, 1:10 am, Yellow <y...@please.no.spam.com> wrote:
> In article <CoSdndOMffPeFVjTnZ2dnUVZ7r2dn...@brightview.co.uk>,
> p...@nospam.net says...
manufacturer has a representative in the same country. Goods could be
imported independently without the manufacturer's knowledge.
MBQ
> In article <CoSdndOMffPeFVjTnZ2dnUVZ7r2dn...@brightview.co.uk>,
> p...@nospam.net says...
>
>
>
> > I think it's normally a case of the government and everyone turns out a
> > blind eye until there's a serious safety issue or accident and then a
> > safety investigation is carried out.
>
> Mostly, proof only needs to be provide when an incident has occurred, so
> it is not an issue of a blind eye being turned. I say mostly, because
> some goods have to be independently assessed before they can be legally
> CE marked.
>
> In addition, when goods are imported into Europe, they should have their
> paperwork checked at that point but in reality a lot depends on the
> method used to transport the goods.
>
> > Those selling the goods will be the
> > ones in the firing line and in court as I believe its their
> > responsibility to make sure the goods are CE approved properly.
>
> If the goods are manufactured in Europe it will be the manufacturer. If
> they are manufactured outside of Europe it will be the manufacturer's
> representative in Europe.
>
> The seller, unless they have imported the goods to sell them on and are
> therefore deemed the manufacturer's representative in Europe, have no
> responsibility and do not even have a legal entitlement to a copy of the
> EC Declaration of Conformity.
I believe it is always the importer that is responsible, even if the
>
>
> > I think it's normally a case of the government and everyone turns out a
> > blind eye until there's a serious safety issue or accident and then a
> > safety investigation is carried out.
>
> Mostly, proof only needs to be provide when an incident has occurred, so
> it is not an issue of a blind eye being turned. I say mostly, because
> some goods have to be independently assessed before they can be legally
> CE marked.
>
> In addition, when goods are imported into Europe, they should have their
> paperwork checked at that point but in reality a lot depends on the
> method used to transport the goods.
>
> > Those selling the goods will be the
> > ones in the firing line and in court as I believe its their
> > responsibility to make sure the goods are CE approved properly.
>
> If the goods are manufactured in Europe it will be the manufacturer. If
> they are manufactured outside of Europe it will be the manufacturer's
> representative in Europe.
>
> The seller, unless they have imported the goods to sell them on and are
> therefore deemed the manufacturer's representative in Europe, have no
> responsibility and do not even have a legal entitlement to a copy of the
> EC Declaration of Conformity.
manufacturer has a representative in the same country. Goods could be
imported independently without the manufacturer's knowledge.
MBQ
vgin...@gmail.com
Feb 4, 2014, 8:19:40 AM2/4/14
to
суббота, 5 ноября 2011 г., 13:45:03 UTC+2 пользователь D.M. Procida написал:
> What's going to happen to the status of eBay (and similar outfits) as
>
> brokers and intermediaries between private parties?
>
>
>
> I believe it's illegal to sell or import for sale certain classes of
>
> goods (say, electronic items) that do not have a CE mark and
>
> corresponding declaration of conformity.
>
>
>
> Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
>
> to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
>
> wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
>
> to increase.
>
>
>
> How long before there's more eBay-related action on grey markets?
>
>
>
> Daniele
In recent years we’ve got used to the fact that if a product bears CE mark, it is safe. The reason for this assumption is the goods’ compliance with EU standards. Unfortunately, there exists a much similar mark which the majority of consumers and even sellers understand as CE mark of the European Union. However, this mark symbolizes something quite different. This mark means that the product was manufactured in China, and means “China Export”. This similarity is not a chance coincidence. It expresses the aggressive approach and is used to confuse European consumers.
The China Export mark is not registered, it does NOT confirm positive test results and is placed by Chinese manufacturers arbitrarily. http://www.icqc.co.uk/en/china-export.php
> What's going to happen to the status of eBay (and similar outfits) as
>
> brokers and intermediaries between private parties?
>
>
>
> I believe it's illegal to sell or import for sale certain classes of
>
> goods (say, electronic items) that do not have a CE mark and
>
> corresponding declaration of conformity.
>
>
>
> Now that eBay seems to be one of the main sources for consumers who want
>
> to buy such items, the CE safeguards are being bypassed in a way that
>
> wouldn't have been forseen even a few years ago, and this is just going
>
> to increase.
>
>
>
> How long before there's more eBay-related action on grey markets?
>
>
>
> Daniele
In recent years we’ve got used to the fact that if a product bears CE mark, it is safe. The reason for this assumption is the goods’ compliance with EU standards. Unfortunately, there exists a much similar mark which the majority of consumers and even sellers understand as CE mark of the European Union. However, this mark symbolizes something quite different. This mark means that the product was manufactured in China, and means “China Export”. This similarity is not a chance coincidence. It expresses the aggressive approach and is used to confuse European consumers.
The China Export mark is not registered, it does NOT confirm positive test results and is placed by Chinese manufacturers arbitrarily. http://www.icqc.co.uk/en/china-export.php
Tim Watts
Feb 4, 2014, 8:29:39 AM2/4/14
to
On Tuesday 04 February 2014 13:19 vgin...@gmail.com wrote in
uk.legal.moderated:
> In recent years we’ve got used to the fact that if a product bears CE
> mark, it is safe. The reason for this assumption is the goods’
> compliance with EU standards. Unfortunately, there exists a much
> similar mark which the majority of consumers and even sellers
> understand as CE mark of the European Union. However, this mark
> symbolizes something quite different. This mark means that the product
> was manufactured in China, and means “China Export”. This similarity
> is not a chance coincidence. It expresses the aggressive approach and
> is used to confuse European consumers. The China Export mark is not
> registered, it does NOT confirm positive test results and is placed by
> Chinese manufacturers arbitrarily.
> http://www.icqc.co.uk/en/china-export.php
Proper CE marks are self-cerified by the manufacturer and are thus
pretty meaningless anyway.
Unlike, say, an FCC compliance certificate which means samples of the
product have undergone rigorous and expensive testing at a 3rd party's
testing facility.
--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/
http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal
coverage
uk.legal.moderated:
> In recent years we’ve got used to the fact that if a product bears CE
> mark, it is safe. The reason for this assumption is the goods’
> compliance with EU standards. Unfortunately, there exists a much
> similar mark which the majority of consumers and even sellers
> understand as CE mark of the European Union. However, this mark
> symbolizes something quite different. This mark means that the product
> was manufactured in China, and means “China Export”. This similarity
> is not a chance coincidence. It expresses the aggressive approach and
> is used to confuse European consumers. The China Export mark is not
> registered, it does NOT confirm positive test results and is placed by
> Chinese manufacturers arbitrarily.
> http://www.icqc.co.uk/en/china-export.php
pretty meaningless anyway.
Unlike, say, an FCC compliance certificate which means samples of the
product have undergone rigorous and expensive testing at a 3rd party's
testing facility.
--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/
http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal
coverage
Yellow
Feb 4, 2014, 1:20:21 PM2/4/14
to
In article <si67sa-...@squidward.local.dionic.net>,
tw+u...@dionic.net says...
> > In recent years we�¤?ve got used to the fact that if a product bears CE
> > mark, it is safe. The reason for this assumption is the goods�¤?
If your goods have an applicable standard that is published in the
Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) and it does not require
you to involve a third party then you can self-certify but if the
standard requires the use of a third party or there is no appropriate
standard available for your particular item published in the OJEU then
you have to use the third party.
If you want to know what standards have been complied with and whether a
third party has been involved, you need to get a copy of the Certificate
of Conformity that supports the CE Mark.
The law does not say that you are entitled to this document, that
privilege being reserved for the body in your country that is
responsible for policing CE Marking, but in reality most companies will
cheerfully hand them over when asked nicely and some even routinely
print them in the back of the product's documentation so you do not even
have to ask.
tw+u...@dionic.net says...
> > In recent years we�¤?ve got used to the fact that if a product bears CE
> > mark, it is safe. The reason for this assumption is the goods�¤?
> > compliance with EU standards. Unfortunately, there exists a much
> > similar mark which the majority of consumers and even sellers
> > understand as CE mark of the European Union. However, this mark
> > symbolizes something quite different. This mark means that the product
> > was manufactured in China, and means ⤽China Export⤝. This similarity
> > is not a chance coincidence. It expresses the aggressive approach and
> > is used to confuse European consumers. The China Export mark is not
> > registered, it does NOT confirm positive test results and is placed by
> > Chinese manufacturers arbitrarily.
> > http://www.icqc.co.uk/en/china-export.php
>
> Proper CE marks are self-cerified by the manufacturer and are thus
> pretty meaningless anyway.
>
> Unlike, say, an FCC compliance certificate which means samples of the
> product have undergone rigorous and expensive testing at a 3rd party's
> testing facility.
Actually it depends on the standards that need to be complied with.
> > similar mark which the majority of consumers and even sellers
> > understand as CE mark of the European Union. However, this mark
> > symbolizes something quite different. This mark means that the product
> > was manufactured in China, and means ⤽China Export⤝. This similarity
> > is not a chance coincidence. It expresses the aggressive approach and
> > is used to confuse European consumers. The China Export mark is not
> > registered, it does NOT confirm positive test results and is placed by
> > Chinese manufacturers arbitrarily.
> > http://www.icqc.co.uk/en/china-export.php
>
> Proper CE marks are self-cerified by the manufacturer and are thus
> pretty meaningless anyway.
>
> Unlike, say, an FCC compliance certificate which means samples of the
> product have undergone rigorous and expensive testing at a 3rd party's
> testing facility.
If your goods have an applicable standard that is published in the
Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) and it does not require
you to involve a third party then you can self-certify but if the
standard requires the use of a third party or there is no appropriate
standard available for your particular item published in the OJEU then
you have to use the third party.
If you want to know what standards have been complied with and whether a
third party has been involved, you need to get a copy of the Certificate
of Conformity that supports the CE Mark.
The law does not say that you are entitled to this document, that
privilege being reserved for the body in your country that is
responsible for policing CE Marking, but in reality most companies will
cheerfully hand them over when asked nicely and some even routinely
print them in the back of the product's documentation so you do not even
have to ask.
0 new messages