Waivers for AFCI?

electrofelon said:
I dont follow what you are saying here. I never said I leave them out. I Am just saying that from a legal standpoint - and any and every lawyer will tell you this - never admit you did something illegal, never plead guilty , Never say to the cop you know why he pulled you over, DENY DENY DENY, or better yet do not say anything at all other than "I will not be answering any questions" to a law enforcement person.
Click to expand...
Officer: do you know how fast you were going?

Motorist: well you have the radar but you want me to tell you how fast I was going because you are too lazy to use it?
 
kwired said:
Officer: do you know how fast you were going?

Motorist: well you have the radar but you want me to tell you how fast I was going because you are too lazy to use it?
Click to expand...
They want you to admit you were speeding as it makes their case stronger. Even if they have you on radar, you can do things like inquire about the calibration of the radar unit, when it was last calibrated, the effect of nearby other cars, etc. if you have admitted you were speeding, then you have a much weaker position to get the charges dropped or for a reduction of charges.
 
When do you ever fight a ticket when you know you were speeding though?

I know there's a "never talk to the police" concept, but I've had better success at copping to my minor errors in speed judgment and getting let off with a warning vs "oh I don't know can I request a copy of the radar printout and am I being detained", which you're never going to actually fight in court so who cares.

Different than a murder case, of course, probably want a lawyer for that one.
 
electrofelon said:
Every time. I mean let me be clear, I don't get tickets often, I haven't even been pulled over in years. But yes you should never plead guilty even to a traffic infraction. I am extremely skeptical that "being honest" with a cop will result in lesser or no charges.
Click to expand...
I just go in and ask for court supervision on the rare instances.
I have definitely been let off before with a warning. I don't think playing lawyer would be so successful, but I don't try it generally.
 
hbiss said:
Care to explain that?? Are you saying that they will show up crossed neutrals and neutral to grounds? Because that's the only thing they are good for.

-Hal
Click to expand...
Rather than give it away, we should follow ActionDave's rule where he said in the last sentence,

"AFCI Tech is a black box"

I liken the black box to a Roach Motel, where hacks go in, but don't come out.
 
Last edited:
ramsy said:
Rather than give it away, we should follow ActionDave's rule where he said in the last sentence,

"AFCI Tech is a black box"

I liken the black box to a Roach Motel, where hacks go in, but don't come out.
Click to expand...
The long post that detailed why AFCIs are mostly bogus is a good reason that anyone who doesn't want to use them is a hack :unsure:

If clients come to me and don't want to waste their money on magic black boxes that are unproven and rely on scant-to-nonexistent hard statistical evidence and are 100% reliant on industry PR for a technical backing, it's not an issue of hackness so much as a purely business decision as to whether I want the supposed liability in the off event of a fire that may possibly be blamed on a lack of an AFCI by a hand waving "fire inspector" (about as competent as "home inspector") and a team of lawyers (who make up reality as they go).

I will take this into consideration with each job, and will not utilize a waiver as others made good points about "why admit guilt outright" regardless of that decision. Ultimately, much of my service area has amended out AFCI coverage so this is less of an issue for me. At least a few inspectors see it for what it is here.

Some people don't have anything to hang their hat on other than checking boxes, and then compensate with insults. Neither here nor there, of course...
 
kwired said:
Well you don't want to tell them you were going 85, before finding out they were only going to write the ticket for 75.
Click to expand...
"I'm sorry I trust you when you say I was speeding, I wasn't really paying attention and just following the flow of traffic, officer. I'm honestly not sure how fast I was."
vs
"Yeah I was bombin' down that sumbich at a hundie, pig."

There is a nuance to the approach.
 
NoahsArc said:
"I'm sorry I trust you when you say I was speeding, I wasn't really paying attention and just following the flow of traffic, officer. I'm honestly not sure how fast I was."
vs
"Yeah I was bombin' down that sumbich at a hundie, pig."

There is a nuance to the approach.
Click to expand...

My approach to AFCI/GFCI ... Insall them per the NEC. Then have a statement in the contract or invoice "AFCI/GFCI breakers and receptacles have a reputation for "Phantom" tripping. There will be no charge for the first service call, additional service call will be charged".
 
mtnelect said:
My approach to AFCI/GFCI ... Insall them per the NEC. Then have a statement in the contract or invoice "AFCI/GFCI breakers and receptacles have a reputation for "Phantom" tripping. There will be no charge for the first service call, additional service call will be charged".
Click to expand...

I prefer:
  • No warranty offered on AFCI devices, barring workmanship defects
 
NoahsArc said:
"I'm sorry I trust you when you say I was speeding, I wasn't really paying attention and just following the flow of traffic, officer. I'm honestly not sure how fast I was."


There is a nuance to the approach.
Click to expand...
I don't think any lawyer would recommend saying that. The cop will probably put down on his report driver acknowledged he was likely speeding, and also you admitted to not paying attention which is not good either. The DA now has those two negative things in front of him when deciding what (or if) to reduce your ticket to. Again the cop is not your friend and is not looking out for your interests , that is not his role in the interaction.
 
electrofelon said:
I don't think any lawyer would recommend saying that. The cop will probably put down on his report driver acknowledged he was likely speeding, and also you admitted to not paying attention which is not good either. The DA now has those two negative things in front of him when deciding what (or if) to reduce your ticket to. Again the cop is not your friend and is not looking out for your interests , that is not his role in the interaction.
Click to expand...
It's never been an issue when I did get ticketed, it just gets thrown into court supervision and expunged after 1-2 years.
The cop can just warn me and leave if I'm polite about it. Then I never see a courtroom nor have to build a legal defense.
 
NoahsArc said:
It's never been an issue when I did get ticketed, it just gets thrown into court supervision and expunged after 1-2 years.
The cop can just warn me and leave if I'm polite about it. Then I never see a courtroom nor have to build a legal defense.
Click to expand...
Things must be different there. I don't know what "court supervision" is, but they are not dropping or expunging any charges here.
 
electrofelon said:
Things must be different there. I don't know what "court supervision" is, but they are not dropping or expunging any charges here.
Click to expand...

Unless you kill somebody, then it's out in an hour. But God forbid you don't install AFCI breakers. Straight to the electric chair where you will experience first hand how AFCIs don't work. :rolleyes:

-Hal
 
electrofelon said:
Things must be different there. I don't know what "court supervision" is, but they are not dropping or expunging any charges here.
Click to expand...

Illinois has “Supervision.” Basically, you admit to the traffic offense and if you don’t get another citation for a period of time (usually a year) your record gets cleared.
 
retirede said:
Illinois has “Supervision.” Basically, you admit to the traffic offense and if you don’t get another citation for a period of time (usually a year) your record gets cleared.
Click to expand...
We have something similar here called an ACD (adjournment in contemplation of dismissal), but the courts just don't hand them out, you would typically need an attorney and it will depend on the offense and the circumstances and how strong are weak your case is, i.e. if you admitted to doing it or not More likely traffic infractions get reduced to "failure to obey a traffic device" which is no points and a fine.
 
If an educated customer came to you demanding that you not install AFCIs, then the waiver might help. Basically if you are doing everything you can to get the AFCIs in but the customer isn't having it.

Say you did an installation at my house, knowing that the AFCIs would be pulled when you left, so you install regular breakers so the non-professional isn't swapping breakers.

But if the AFCIs are not installed in order to reduce your bid, you are essentially encouraging the customer to accept a below standard installation.

Jonathan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top