Vending machine Gfci: Lawsuit waiting to happen?

Status
Not open for further replies.
brother said:
I noticed you didn't answer any of my previous questions. ;)
[/b]
Click to expand...

No, I tend to ignore posts that are long winded, full of colors, capitols and bold font. etc.

1. How are you 'violating' the 'listing' of the product/device by providing gfci protection, unless its instructions 'specifically' says 'do not provide gfci protection'???
Click to expand...

I never said that installing a GFCI would 'violate' the listing. What I did say is an inspector can not call something a 'vending machine' if it is not listed as a vending machine.

2. .. would your only defense be that 'there is not a listing/tag' that says its a vending machine so I do not have to provide gfci protection??
Click to expand...

My defense? :roll: :roll:

It is not my 'defense' it is my opinion.

IMO an item listed as one thing can not suddenly at the whim of an inspector be called something else.
 
iwire said:
No, I tend to ignore posts that are long winded, full of colors, capitols and bold font. etc..
Click to expand...

:roll:That would explain the misunderstandings and taken out of context comments that was made. In order to really respond to a post its sometimes best to read it all.

iwire said:
I never said that installing a GFCI would 'violate' the listing. What I did say is an inspector can not call something a 'vending machine' if it is not listed as a vending machine...
Click to expand...
you may not have said that 'specifically' but it was 'suggested' and implied in your posts.

iwire said:
My defense? :roll: :roll:

It is not my 'defense' it is my opinion.
Click to expand...
well when i talked about the 'defense' issue, I was giving an example of a hypothetical situation, but sense you "tend to ignore posts that are long winded, full of colors, capitols and bold font. etc" , its obvious you took that comment out of context and didnt read the first part of the example.
iwire said:
IMO an item listed as one thing can not suddenly at the whim of an inspector be called something else.
Click to expand...
Well i guess since you didnt read all of the examples i gave cause you "tend to ignore posts that are long winded, full of colors, etc." you would have known that this would not be at the 'whim' of the inspector. I do not agree the 'whim' of the inspector can call something listed as one thing and call it something else either. However The NEC definition is not at the 'whim' of the inspector. So the inpector would have the 'right' to enforce the NEC if a product meets that definition of 422.51. Just in case you decide to read this 'long winded' post, Ill repost my example with the questions.
brother said:
Lets say the manufactures of the these 'candy/soda vending machines' decides in order to AVOID the extra expense of manufacturing the new machines after Jan 1 2005 with gfci as an intergral part of the attachment plug on the cords, they decide to put a 'tag' or 'listing' on it saying its a 'candy/soda distrubutor' instead of 'vending machine'. Im sure some of these BIG MONEY manufacturers can CONVINCE the UL to go along with it.

1. Would that be okay???
2. Should this get them out of the requirement of the NEC 422.51 since it is 'listed' as a 'candy/soda distributor' instead of a 'vending machine'??
Click to expand...
 
Brother, we just disagree.

I am not going to respond to every scenario that you come up with.

If it comforts you to tell yourself that is because I can't or I am afraid to that's fine.
 
GFCI in MI, Oh My!

GFCI in MI, Oh My!

In Michigan, GFCI's are also required for any portable electric device used in a production operation in a manufacturing facility where the portable electric device is connected to a unprotected receptacle by extension cord!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top