Would you have issues with this Surveyor?

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

He wrote me up for expired portable fire extinguisher. I thought surveyors were supposed to follow USCG Regulations and/or ABYC "Recommendations? Keep in mind I hired this guy to do an in water survey.

See Below. What say you TF?



I sent the following to my surveyor:


Hi David,

This is just FYI.

I started to dig into the portable fire extinguishers and the expiration date. What I found was this.

ABYC does not address expiration dates of portable extinguishers.
USCG also does not address expiration dates.

Therefore the only one that does address expiration dates is NFPA 10, section 7.3.6.3.

According to NFPA the expiration is 12 years after the manufacture date.
None of the above requires or recommends that fire extinguishers be mounted horizontally. A USCG Auxiliary suggested it to me, which make sense if I have the room.

My fire extinguishers were manufactured in 2015, so they would expire in 2027.

It just so happens that these particular fire extinguishers had been recalled by the manufacture Kidde. They are shipping me new fire extinguishers at no cost to me.

I am not trying to criticize you or your ability to conduct a fair survey.

Have a great summer.

Tom


His Response:

Thanks. The information I received about replacing the fire extinguishers was by the pro technician at Huser fire whom weighs and certifies them. Not abyc and not nfpa. They recommend the replacement of the plastic head units because the potential of plastic degradation and failure. Metallic nozzeled units are 12 years of service before they are no longer serviceable. I don't always follow abyc standard because it doesn't always apply to real world situations, and sometimes it's flat out unreasonable. Sometimes the guide line does.

 

[AKDoug]

In home inspections, the expectation is that they will find a few things wrong in their inspection. I have a friend who does this, and in his first inspection of a house he found things wrong, which were subsequently "repaired". In his second inspection of the same home, he found other things wrong that had not been "discovered" on his first inspection that need to be corrected. His credentials as an inspector are that he has worked in the construction industry for "X" number of years. He was a painter and dry waller...

I can only assume that a marine surveyor likewise has credential history that probably wasn't specific to his job as a surveyor, like being a Captain or Mate for "X" number of years before becoming a surveyor.

I think you did it the right way!

 

[Xsbank]

A surveyor carries no responsibility for his survey, only his reputation. Even if you replace all of your extinguishers, say 10 of them, that would likely only be around $250 at Costco, which ticks the box for your insurer and you can move on. At least he didn’t find “hull issues” or tank issues. That could really hurt.

 

[alormaria]

It's a good thing he didn't mention the boat would look better painted blue.



My insurance company would have required me to paint the boat blue.


Get a new fire extinguisher.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Ok understand. But I am paying the surveyor to do an inspection on my boat to make sure it comply with USCG and ABYC standards not XYZ fire extinguish Joe. I pay for accuracy not what the surveyor BFF states.

A surveyor carries no responsibility for his survey, only his reputation. Even if you replace all of your extinguishers, say 10 of them, that would likely only be around $250 at Costco, which ticks the box for your insurer and you can move on. At least he didn’t find “hull issues” or tank issues. That could really hurt.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

I have 5 new ones coming

It's a good thing he didn't mention the boat would look better painted blue.



My insurance company would have required me to paint the boat blue.


Get a new fire extinguisher.

 

[rslifkin]

If the surveyor had a good reason for making a recommendation outside of ABYC / USCG standards, I'd be ok with that. If, for example, he had some kind of documentation that showed a fire extinguisher shop had been seeing a high rate of failure with a certain type of extinguisher past X years of age or something, I'd be happy to know that and replace them.

Stuff like that shouldn't just be based on the surveyor's opinion though.

 

[Comodave]

The surveyor should be working to ABYC, USCG standards and anything special that the insurance company specified. He should not be working to someone that weighs extinguishers specifications. Is he a NAMS or SAMS member? That would be the first thing I would look for when picking a surveyor. If he isn’t then the insurance company may decline to accept his survey. His reply to you is laughable.

 

[Chrisjs]

Not sure why you have a problem. Seems to me he gave you good information.
We routinely carried out fire safety inspection annually that involved checking all extinguishers ( I think we had about 10) and the automatic suppression system. Most of the cheap extinguishers are fine but do not last as long as you think. Fire is one of the most deadly events to happen on a boat. Best to have an overkill (excuse pun) approach IMO. On the other hand we had a boater friend who had never tested/inspected any of his fire safety systems in 12 years ownership!!

 

[BandB]

I would expect that if in the course of the survey, the surveyor came across additional things that he noticed, reporting them to you would be appropriate. Yours was a unique survey request, but even so, I would want the surveyor to note expired extinguishers. He probably should have put it in an "other" section, noting it was not a USCG or ABYC issue.

I guess I always had strange relationships with auditors and consultants as they have specific work to do but with all the time and money they had to observe other things and I wanted those things brought to my attention.

In this case also I think not mentioning the extinguishers would have been wrong.

 

[Choices]

What did you ask him to do?
Did you specify to those standards only?

I had those fire extinguishers. The handle could break on actuation. Not really when you want it to. Kiddie replaced all mine.

Not only did he possibly help you out, his answer makes perfect sense. Only metal nozzles are good for 12 years. The new Kiddie are metal.

So although the code does not require it. He was ahead of the code. Be interesting to see what else he noticed.

The Kiddie issue is well know to marine surveyors.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

What did you ask him to do?
Did you specify to those standards only?

I had those fire extinguishers. The handle could break on actuation. Not really when you want it to. Kiddie replaced all mine.

Not only did he possibly help you out, his answer makes perfect sense. Only metal nozzles are good for 12 years. The new Kiddie are metal.

So although the code does not require it. He was ahead of the code. Be interesting to see what else he noticed.

The Kiddie issue is well know to marine surveyors.

Well all my extinguishers were bad due to the recall, not because of plastic handles. From what I researched absent the recall, my extinguishers were legal and outside the 12 year expiration.

I asked him to do an in water survey for insurance. All haul out facilities are closed.

 

[BandB]

Well all my extinguishers were bad due to the recall, not because of plastic handles. From what I researched absent the recall, my extinguishers were legal and outside the 12 year expiration.

I asked him to do an in water survey for insurance. All haul out facilities are closed.

And why would you consider his fire extinguisher comments outside the scope of the survey or inappropriate. Legal doesn't mean good. So yours are bad due to recall and otherwise undesirable even if legal. I'm just not getting why you feel he did wrong. If I was an insurer, I would definitely expect the report to include fire extinguishers.

 

[healhustler]

I recently switched my insurance carrier and had to complete a new out of water survey. The survey noted several fire extinguishers of the plastic handle type which needed to be turned over to Kidde for exchange. The surveyor told me that I had to have the fire extinguishers certified by a fire equipment company, which I did, but now the fire equipment company says that the only way my extinguishers would remain insurance certified would be with a yearly inspection costing $25 per extinguisher and $125 for the Fireboy system in the ER. That’s eight 2.5 lb.. and two 5 lb. units. I watched the inspection and it involved observing the gauge to be in the green, and then tagging each unit. $375 per year? I want my boat to be safe but I could probably save $100 or more by just replacing all but the Fireboy with Costco units on sale. Still thinking about it.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

And why would you consider his fire extinguisher comments outside the scope of the survey or inappropriate. Legal doesn't mean good. So yours are bad due to recall and otherwise undesirable even if legal. I'm just not getting why you feel he did wrong. If I was an insurer, I would definitely expect the report to include fire extinguishers.

Yes I do have a problem with it. The Surveyor relied on non-marine requirements to make a write up that "could" mean the difference in insurance costs. As stated here he should have known of the recall. He didn't. Instead he suggested I take the bottles to his friends shop to have new handles installed.

Again I paid for a qualified marine ACMS surveyor. I want the report to be accurate and complete. These inspections has a direct influence on your insurance.

 

[O C Diver]

I would expect a survey to meet the USCG minimum standards for a recreational vessel. Those would include minimum number and type of fire extinguishers with current inspection stickes or hang tags. The USCG does require that current sticker from an authorized service company. The assumption is that the service company will make sure all requirements for the extinguisher are met before issuing the tag.

Cost of the inspections varies widely and has no bearing on quality. My Maryland facility charges $7 per tank and usually does them while I wait. The one time I did it in Fort Myers, it cost 3 times the price.

Ted

 

[BandB]

Yes I do have a problem with it. The Surveyor relied on non-marine requirements to make a write up that "could" mean the difference in insurance costs. As stated here he should have known of the recall. He didn't. Instead he suggested I take the bottles to his friends shop to have new handles installed.

Again I paid for a qualified marine ACMS surveyor. I want the report to be accurate and complete. These inspections has a direct influence on your insurance.

But regardless of the reason you still need to replace your extinguishers. That's all the insurer will do is require that, not charge more.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

But regardless of the reason you still need to replace your extinguishers. That's all the insurer will do is require that, not charge more.

True

 

[wwestman]

You lost me at the mounting of the equipment was supposed to be "horizontal". Every extinguisher I have (other than my halon unit in the ER) is mounted vertically. Can someone explain the horizontal mounting thing?

 

[SteveK]

I do not recall if you shared the wording from the survey.
It sounds like the surveyor gave you the bottom line, your extinguishers need to be replaced but not the reason why. He and perhaps the extinguisher guy consulted should have told you they are under recall. Neither seems to know they are good for 12 years before the recall. Surveyor had to ask as he did not know your extinguishers and then was given misleading info.

With CGA we were also told to suggest horizontal mount to spread the powder and reduce compaction event. Back then no rules about testing annual, so we shook them, tilted to feel powder flowing, otherwise it was a fail.

I thought the recall was to do with the plastic nozzle?

Your letter to surveyor was well worded and his reply also. He may have since learned more about it.

 

[BruceK]

You lost me at the mounting of the equipment was supposed to be "horizontal". Every extinguisher I have (other than my halon unit in the ER) is mounted vertically. Can someone explain the horizontal mounting thing?

Something to do with powder not consolidating at the bottom? Maybe then it just consolidates on one side of the canister.

 

[SteveK]

You lost me at the mounting of the equipment was supposed to be "horizontal". Every extinguisher I have (other than my halon unit in the ER) is mounted vertically. Can someone explain the horizontal mounting thing?

vertical compacts at bottom with less ability to loosen from shaking than horizontal where it is spread thinner over larger footprint so can be shaken and loosened easier. This is more noticed in smaller craft that pound on the waves.
You should feel the powder flowing when tilt side to side, otherwise when you go to use it, all you get is propellent.

 

[Comodave]

In the past the dry powder would tend to cake solid in the bottom of the extinguisher so you would have to shake it to break the powder up so it would come out of the extinguisher when it was used. You could tip the extinguisher back and forth slowly and feel the powder flow back and forth. So mounting it horizontally would help keep it broken up. Now they say that the powder has non caking additives in it so caking isn’t the problem it used to be.

 

[Benthic2]

It sounds like you wanted to just pass the survey, not actually get the surveyors opinion.

If he said "I found 3 broken stringers, but for 50 bucks I won't mention it" Would you think he was a good survey or a bad one ??

 

[psneeld]

It sounds like you wanted to just pass the survey, not actually get the surveyors opinion.

If he said "I found 3 broken stringers, but for 50 bucks I won't mention it" Would you think he was a good survey or a bad one ??

You just showed the difference between an insurance survey and a pre-purchase one.


Anyone who has a lot of experience knows what insurance companies require and actual safety are light years apart.


Insurance surveys are to get insurance...nothing more and thus take WAY less time and usually cost about 2/3, maybe less than a pre-purchase one.


I have to go through the process for switching insurance here in a month and have a surveyor that is well known to keep insurance surveys short and to the point.


Of course if he finds major structural damage, that will affect his valuation number and safety recommendations.


But if he finds items that could add up and be expensive to repair or upgrade, but he doesn't determine them to be actually unsafe/ just "recommended for new boats"....then I have the option without the insurance company demanding them.


I think for some of us, it is ESPECIALLY important to keep boating costs down these days.....maybe all costs.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

It sounds like you wanted to just pass the survey, not actually get the surveyors opinion.

If he said "I found 3 broken stringers, but for 50 bucks I won't mention it" Would you think he was a good survey or a bad one ??

I paid for an insurance survey. I understand the difference between an insurance and purchase survey as PSNEELD has stated. The surveyor also told me the same.

I wanted an accurate and complete insurance survey. That is what I paid for. If I am wrote-up for expired fire extinguisher then I also want it to be accurate. I guess I should have required any write-ups be supported by a regulation quote.

You just showed the difference between an insurance survey and a pre-purchase one.


Anyone who has a lot of experience knows what insurance companies require and actual safety are light years apart.


Insurance surveys are to get insurance...nothing more and thus take WAY less time and usually cost about 2/3, maybe less than a pre-purchase one.


I have to go through the process for switching insurance here in a month and have a surveyor that is well known to keep insurance surveys short and to the point.


Of course if he finds major structural damage, that will affect his valuation number and safety recommendations.


But if he finds items that could add up and be expensive to repair or upgrade, but he doesn't determine them to be actually unsafe/ just "recommended for new boats"....then I have the option without the insurance company demanding them.


I think for some of us, it is ESPECIALLY important to keep boating costs down these days.....maybe all costs.

I agree. Thanks

 

[Benthic2]

I suppose it would have been good of him to give you an oral report and allow for correction and rebuttal before he committed something to print.

 

[fgarriso]

I have a problem with most things I read on TF.
But this is not worth the effort it took to write up the posting in the first place.

Just count up the number of extinguishers needed , then add a few extra to the count. Go to the store and replace them all with approved type and have it over with.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

I have a problem with most things I read on TF.
But this is not worth the effort it took to write up the posting in the first place.

Just count up the number of extinguishers needed , then add a few extra to the count. Go to the store and replace them all with approved type and have it over with.

It really isn't about extinguishers, rather the level of service you pay for and the quality of that service. You may have lots of $$$, but some of us want what we pay for.

BTW new extinguishers in the mail.

Oh and you can choose not to read the thread, just say'n

 

[SoWhat]

"I don't always follow abyc standard because it doesn't always apply to real world situations"

What? A marine surveyor chooses what what standards to follow?
In this case, fire extinguisher requirements are controlled by USCG and of course the manufacturer, Kidde. USCG is silent about expiration date. Kidde is silent about expiration date. Ergo, they last forever. Kidde clearly states they must be inspected monthly and the pointer in the green. Kidde also states the extinguiser must be mounted with the supplied holder (vertical) in order to be USCG compliant.

Surveyor was way off the reservation when he decided to substitute his own opinion based upon a conversation with someone at a filling station. Clearly the someone was not an angineer. Neither plastic nor metal nozzles deterioate after 12 years. I have seen some in mint condition after 50 years.

Opinions are helpful in a purchase survey, but don;t belong in an insurance survey. Inspect to the mandated standards.