RCD and CE marking

[Figital]

I've been out of the boat market for some time. As per my previous posts - I'm considering a build of a rowing skiff.

It has come as some surprise to read that any boats on the market (other than those for racing) require a CE mark.

I understand that I can build and use for myself- but cannot sell for 5 years!

Now - I have a number of questions - please can anyone help ?

1 - I see that there is still a significant market in secondhand boats - none of them referring to CE marking. Is this directive enforced anywhere? e.g. if I (or another) were (for instance) to buy a boat subject to this directive (i.e. age, useage etc. ) which was not CE marked would I be prohibited from using it or insuring it?

2 - The boat I have in mind would almost certainly be classified in class D - inland/ coastal <force 4 etc. I have read the directive - and it seems that it is possible to self certficate such a craft. Has anyone done this? It looks mainly like a box ticking exercise, with a bit of techy analysis on top.

3 - If the directive IS actively in force AND you cannot easily certificate your own craft for sale - does this mean you are all sitting on a number of boats that you have built but can't sell for 5 years?

My interest in building is partly for the reward of building - I may or may not get 5 years use from a boat - and in any case I may want to learn and move on. I can't afford to invest significant money in a boat which may sit idle for a few years.

Is there a working solution to this??

Thanks

Regards
Geoff

[Jeremy]

There's some useful (!) stuff in this thread on the RCD: http://uk-hbbr-forum.967333.n3.nabble.com/RCD-and-CE-homologation-questions-tp3248538.html

In essence, it's probably too expensive to get a Notified Body to do the necessary certification, so most either ignore the RCD for small boats or just keep them until they are 5 years old and then sell them (or give them away).

There are ways that have been discussed to try and get around the RCD rules (which were clearly designed to protect commercial enterprise rather than promote safety), but I've not heard of anyone being caught for a breach of these regulations anyway.

[Timmo]

Hi Geoff.

This is always a question that gets some interesting responses.

Try typing RCD into the search option on the HBBR Forum. Thay will bring up a history, some of which will touch on your questions.

There are different schools of thought ranging from the 'it must comply or someone might sue you if bad things happen' to the 'buyer beware, if they buy knowing it's not marked then it's their problem'.

There are people who admit to selling on boats within the 5 year period, though most find it's a shorter time than it seems. Especially if you are creative about when the 'boat' was built (as opposed to extensivelly modified with thwarts, floorboards, gunwhales, etc. Though as yet no one knows how the official date of a home build is recorded or officially noted so some people could find even more scope for creativity.

Has any amateur builder actually been pursued or prosecuted for any 'breach' of the RCD. Not that I've ever heard of, would be interested to know if anyone else has.

Many of us actually drop below the RCD radar by building 'canoes' and/or 'traditional craft'.

Getting a boat through certification yourself? That might be challenging but we'd be interested to follow your progress if you try. There are others who may add their thoughts here who are considerably more expert in the legalities than I.

Tim


On 30 Mar 2013, at 14:14, Figital [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

> 1 - I see that there is still a significant market in secondhand boats - none of them referring to CE marking. Is this directive enforced anywhere? e.g. if I (or another) were (for instance) to buy a boat subject to this directive (i.e. age, useage etc. ) which was not CE marked would I be prohibited from using it or insuring it?
>
> 2 - The boat I have in mind would almost certainly be classified in class D - inland/ coastal <force 4 etc. I have read the directive - and it seems that it is possible to self certficate such a craft. Has anyone done this? It looks mainly like a box ticking exercise, with a bit of techy analysis on top.

[Paul H (admin)]

Geoff,

Five years will fly by. Last week I was quite surprised when I realised that I actually started building MilliBee in December 2001, when it only felt like "a few years ago".

cheers
Paul

[John P]

The RCD legislation does seem wierd, but I suppose the rule about not selling a home made boat within the first five years could be justified in that it helps to protect professional boat builders against unfair competition from amateurs. Unfair in that professional boat builders have to meet all kinds of costs that do not apply to amateurs. For example, professional boat builders have to pay business rates on their premises, amateurs only pay the cheaper domestic rates, professionals have to cover warrenty claims for the first 12 months, they have the cost of compliance with health and safety at work legislation that does not apply to amateurs and if they employ staff they have to cover all kinds of employment costs that do not apply to amateurs who persuade family members to help with projects.

[GregHBBR]

Hi John,

On 06 Apr 13 08:53 "John P [via UK HBBR Forum]"
<[hidden email]> said:
> The RCD legislation does seem wierd, but I suppose the rule about
> not selling a home made boat within the first five years could be
> justified in that it helps to protect professional boat builders
> against unfair competition from amateurs.

But what has any of those justifications got to do with making boats
safe, the sole stated purpose of the RCD. Your "justifications" are
all to do with protecting businesses, not boat safety.

[Jeremy]

This sums up the main issue I have with the RCD.  It has been foisted on us as safety-related legislation, and passed by the Eurocrats as such, yet in reality it is about protecting businesses.

If anything, a 5 year old home built boat may well be less safe than a newly built one, so there is no logic at all in safety terms in insisting upon this daft time limit.

If the originators of this legislation were really interested in safety, rather than erecting barriers to entry for very small businesses and inconveniencing hobby boat builders, then they could very easily have added a self-certification process that doesn't require oversight by an (expensive) approval body.  

For example, I can build a small, single seat aircraft, and as long as it doesn't have an empty weight of more than 115kg or a wing loading of more than 10kg/m² then I don't need any form of inspection or certification at all, in fact I can fly such a machine anywhere in Europe, without hindrance (and a friend did just that with one he's put together last year).

A boat of the same sort of weight would almost certainly be subject to the full rigour of the RCD (unless it was an extremely heavy canoe!), which is complete and utter nonsense.

[Figital]

I had a brief further look into this, and I think I may have been a bit blase about the 'box ticking'

The directive itself is very broad and sets no standards - e.g. "The craft must be strong enough..."

The standards are set either by member states or as an agreed 'common standard'.

However - the individual points in the directive are covered by a number of different standards (even for a class D human powered craft).

It seems that to actually VIEW the standard I need to BUY the written standard from an ISO publisher. EACH one costing £100 or more!

So - even to read the standards, let alone to meet them would cost me many hundreds of pounds. I wonder whether the standards should be available under a freedom of information enquiry - surely I should be able to see the rules which I am required to meet!

The points about 'protection of business' are irrelevant (are you by chance in the industry - as you seem to think the restrictions are reasonable?). The are innumerable things that amateurs can make and sell (e.g. build your own house, kit car, RC aircraft.. all of which have a professional option. The EU is supposed to encourage competition, not protectionism.

As for 5 years.. I am not talking about a yacht here - I'd hope to complete it in a few months, and anyhows the clock starts when 'put into service' - so even if it took 4 years to build I still can't sell it until 5 years after 1st use.


Vive Europe


Cheers
Geoff

[Jeremy]

The problem is that there is zero representation within the UK for home built boat builders, so there is no way to get this daft restriction changed.

I was involved with getting very light aircraft deregulated, but we had a fairly effective group of like-minded people, including some small manufacturers, who argued the case with the government (over several years) and got them to agree that there was was no safety case for continuing to regulate such aircraft.

The RYA seem to have seen the RCD as an opportunity to raise revenue by becoming an approval body, the canoeists managed to make a forceful argument for exemption from the RCD (essentially based on canoes being unable to comply with the stability requirements), but no one was there for home boat builders to make the case against the daft 5 year rule.

I've often thought that a legal challenge on the basis of getting the government (who are responsible for UK implementation of the RCD) to justify the safety case for the 5 year rule might succeed.  The RCD is purely safety legislation, so if the government were unable to provide an adequate safety case (supported by hard evidence) to show that a 5 year old home built boat is safer than, say, a 2 year old one, then they would, under current policy, be pretty much forced to review the way the RCD has been implemented here.