Becoming a panel shop

Status
Not open for further replies.
cowboyjwc said:
It's not hard to get them certified when you are building a lot of them, it's when you're building one offs that it could get expensive.

I'm sure though if you built them to some UL standard that you could list them as a control panel instead of having to have each part UL listed.
Click to expand...

I am not entirely sure what you are saying.

UL has several listing programs for items that are commonly made as one ups including signs, industrial control panels, and control panels for hazardous areas (I think there are more, but these are the ones I can think of off hand).

My understanding is that just about any assembly can be listed under UL508a if it has wires and does not fall within the boundries of one of the other classifications. IOW, you can't list a sign under UL508a. You can't list a control panel as a sign.

However, you could potentially list an entire machine as a control panel, as long as it does not fit into one of their other classifications.
 
cowboyjwc said:
I've heard the same thing for years. Yet I've seen insurance companies pay when I thought that they should be arresting somebody.
Click to expand...
Everything an insurance company does is based on a cost / benefit analysis and risk assessment. They care nothing about legality, unless it can be used against someone to collect. But if they assess that it will cost them less to pay out than to challenge, they will pay out.

As to it being a myth, I have worked at two places that had very active insurance company inspectors who combed through every piece of electrical equipment looking for UL, FM or some other NRTL listing on an annual basis. I have worked at or been at many many places where it's obvious that this was not taking place, or maybe it happened when the policy was first written and never again since. So no, it's not universal for sure, but it does exist.
 
petersonra said:
I am not entirely sure what you are saying.

UL has several listing programs for items that are commonly made as one ups including signs, industrial control panels, and control panels for hazardous areas (I think there are more, but these are the ones I can think of off hand).

My understanding is that just about any assembly can be listed under UL508a if it has wires and does not fall within the boundries of one of the other classifications. IOW, you can't list a sign under UL508a. You can't list a control panel as a sign.

However, you could potentially list an entire machine as a control panel, as long as it does not fit into one of their other classifications.
Click to expand...

What I meant was, you don't build a one of a kind control panel and send it to UL to have it tested and have them send it back. Like I said I'm sure that there is a standard that you can build them to and, as like a sign, you can label it.
 
Jraef said:
Everything an insurance company does is based on a cost / benefit analysis and risk assessment. They care nothing about legality, unless it can be used against someone to collect. But if they assess that it will cost them less to pay out than to challenge, they will pay out.

As to it being a myth, I have worked at two places that had very active insurance company inspectors who combed through every piece of electrical equipment looking for UL, FM or some other NRTL listing on an annual basis. I have worked at or been at many many places where it's obvious that this was not taking place, or maybe it happened when the policy was first written and never again since. So no, it's not universal for sure, but it does exist.
Click to expand...

Oh I don't disagree. I would assume as you said that it might depend on the amount of $$$ that dictates whether or not they pay or fight.
 
weressl said:
Legality is to determine the liability. So when you say that they do not care about legality, do you mean that they don't care if they can become liable by willfuly ignoring legality?
Click to expand...
No, don't read too much into what I said. All I meant was that in response to the previous comment about how someone should have been arrested, the insurance company wouldn't care about that unless it meant being able to use that information to decide if someone else other than them should pay for something. If the situation were such that they have to pay out either way, they wouldn't be concerned about someone being arrested or not. The context to that would of course be after the fact, not willfully ignoring anything.
 
Jraef said:
No, don't read too much into what I said. All I meant was that in response to the previous comment about how someone should have been arrested, the insurance company wouldn't care about that unless it meant being able to use that information to decide if someone else other than them should pay for something. If the situation were such that they have to pay out either way, they wouldn't be concerned about someone being arrested or not. The context to that would of course be after the fact, not willfully ignoring anything.
Click to expand...

The context of the objection was that the Insurance Company is paying, EVEN where there is willfull and prior negligence can be established on part of the payee.

To which you replied:"Everything an insurance company does is based on a cost / benefit analysis and risk assessment. They care nothing about legality, unless it can be used against someone to collect."

I was not reading anything but what you've posted. If that is not what you wanted to say, feel free to correct it.
 
For now Ive decided to back off the idea, but may take it up at a later date, if we add a Jman to our little company.....For now, I cant keep up with what's currently going on, so I better stay on track and focused on customers at hand..............
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top