LiPo Batteries / £540 for damages

[DCM]

Just out of curiosity, do ALL LiPo cells need to be in a sack when being charged? Receiver packs, handset packs, starter boxes etc?

[mattybucks]

Originally Posted by jimmy

I dread the day I have to put my laptop in a 'sac' at a race meeting just so I can report.

A bit like this, apparently the user had just typed www.rcracechat.com

[c0sie]

Steve, the wording from the General Rules states: LiPo /LiFe drive batteries will be charged in a “LiPo sack” at all times.

I would presume that drive means to power the ESC etc, but PLEASE dont quote me on that...

I wouldnt want Rob Fitzgerald quoting me out on context on Raceshat again

Originally Posted by DCM

Just out of curiosity, do ALL LiPo cells need to be in a sack when being charged? Receiver packs, handset packs, starter boxes etc?

[DCM]

So, what makes any other LiPo cells safe to charge 'out of a sack'?

[c0sie]

Dont know

Although there seem to be hundreds of "experts" coming out of the woodwork into this thread.....*tumbleweed*.....I would probably suggest emailing Paul Worsley and asking his advice before all others. That man knows his shizzle!

[peetbee]

The Consumer Protection Act is clear that the importer is responsible for the product liability, however, it does include an exclusion from liability where:

the product was not supplied in the course of a business, for example, the donation of homemade toys for sale at the occasional church bazaar or sales by private individuals of second-hand goods;

(source - http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file22866.pdf)

This would imply that individuals involved in personal imports would not be liable when they subsequently sell the items on after use. It may even absolve them completely But I would take professional legal advice though!

As a side note, next time you moan about the cost of RC products in the UK, please bear in mind that distributors such as CML for example have to pay for Product Liability insurance, as the responsibility lies with the importers not the manufacturers (outside of the EU).

[baD]

Originally Posted by peetbee

The Consumer Protection Act is clear........

the product was not supplied in the course of a business, for example, the donation of homemade toys for sale at the occasional church bazaar or sales by private individuals of second-hand goods;

What a Star post from a Star man for finding that one.

It raises the issue as to whether the BRCA Insurer as the legal right in this incident to consider the individual as an importer as clearly it was purchased in the course of a hobby and not a business.

I do feel this needs to be clarified as the insurer will use this legal process in the future to recover their outlay.

[c0sie]

If you want it clarified, email the BRCA and ask their advice

Better to contact them directly than hope someone important reads your post

[baD]

Originally Posted by c0sie

If you want it clarified, email the BRCA and ask their advice

I have

Originally Posted by c0sie

Better to contact them directly than hope someone important reads your post

I only hope to publicise the need on here as I fear the day when every racer needs to keep his receipts in a safe simliar to the one where he now keeps his LiPo's

[Jim Spencer]

Hi

Re last few posts.
Yes you're quite correct you are not liable if you sell a product on as secondhand goods.

Same as if you sell / purchase a car off somebodies drive as opposed to a sale / purchase via a dealer

[Jim Spencer]

But

We're not on about the SALE of something by an individual as secondhand goods.

Were on about the PURCHASE of something as new goods and their then use.
Unless any of you are doing a bit of 'grey' importing that is?

The general consensus of opinion (we check this sort of thing you know..) is that the changes in the global market place have currently outstripped legislation and consumers (i.e. US) are getting caught out as in some cases it's very easy to be purchasing items from a location we're just not clear on.
Eventually the market, legislation and the route to market providers (i.e. your favourite online auction sites) will have to get this resolved and we'll be sorted.

But it hasn't happened yet.

In the meantime the BRCA will continue to give advice where we can, if you don't like it then ignore it if you like - but don't come running when it bites you on the bum.

However it's statistically much more likely to be something outside of model car racing that does this anyway, our market is very small (read - minute..) compared to most and generally the products are sold worldwide and comply with all the relevant tests anyway.
Just in the odd area the odd one doesn't and this incident was certainly that!

[Liamprice25]

Hi everyone! After reading all about this incident and everyone else's thoughts. I think that everyone is missing the bigger picture. This guy who had this accident was probably in this sport for fun and was trying to keep competitive in the economies climate may only be able to afford lipos/parts etc from abroad and may I say the far east make some rather outstanding bits of kit. But back to the point, which is. He set out on a budget for fun but everything in and around the EU has become rediculisly expensive. I started this sport about 6 months ago and have almost given it up as it's stupid how much some of the parts costs. If it keeps going that way then more and more people are gonna buy imported goods.

It's only a hobby and supposed to be a fun day not about cost. Safety does and should come first but until the so called better companies drop their prices then expect more little incidents in the future.

Ok rant over

[hashiriya]

I don't think blaming the prices on stuff in the EU or from more reputable brands isn't the solution to this situation.

I've always felt that RC racing is a bit like fashion. People will market the latest and greatest thing from a big name and then something similar will come out of many less well known names with claims such as "it comes out of the same factory" or "it's the same, just cheaper" If you believe it then pay less and get "the same", if you don't believe it pay more and get the "better" product.

Either way, the risk of Lipo fires exist no matter who made them and what label is on them. The laws that Exist in the EU try to protect as many people as possible but this costs some money along the line, if you try and avoid that to save money, maybe its worth thinking about what else you are also avoiding.

[peetbee]

Originally Posted by Liamprice25

but until the so called better companies drop their prices then expect more little incidents in the future.

If you read my posts you would have seen the comment I put about importers/distributors having to pay for public liability insurance.

That cost has to be passed onto the customer somewhere, one of the reasons that buying from outside the EU is cheaper is that you are avoiding that cost, plus the import duties and VAT that the importers/distributors also have to pay.

As a follow up to my post above regarding the exemption from public liability, what Jim says appears to be very true that the importer (even as in individual) is not exempt, but if they subsequently sold the item on as used then they would be.

[dodgydiy]

regarding lipo sacks and their safety, i dont own one yet, have been using an ammunition box for charging, it is fireproof but obviously is not permitted at brca meetings, surely the brca should allow more effective means of containing a possible fire . now why isnt balance charging compulsory too, that way individual cell voltages are controlled, surely that is more likely to avoid a fire than a sack is to contain one

[SlowOne]

DCM, the LiPo sack recommendation is based on energy and risk. The drive batteries have more energy in them so should anything untoward happen, they can give rise to longer and more energetic incidents. From a risk perspective, there are more dedicated chargers around for receiver and Tx batteries so the availability for users to make an incorrect setting is less.

Dodgydiy - where does it say in BRCA guidelines than an ammunition box is not allowed? If you turned up at a 12th National with one of those it would be subject to inspection prior to use, but never thrown out unilaterally.

[DCM]

Most people transmitter and receiver pack chargers are for nimh's and nicads, not LiPo, so they will end up on a normal charger. Risk is not about how 'energetic' the reaction will be, but the perceived capability of a random event happening, thats my understanding of 'Risk'.

[truggy lover]

just wonderin if this how the batteries turned up



with no connecters easy to short the pack out i would have thouht , bad idea if you ask me

[coolcars782]

Originally Posted by truggy lover

just wonderin if this how the batteries turned up



with no connecters easy to short the pack out i would have thouht , bad idea if you ask me

But they have been heatshrinked on the ends so they cant be accidently shorted, it would have to be forced to make the wires touched, which would then be there own fault..

[mark christopher]

Originally Posted by SlowOne

DCM, the LiPo sack recommendation is based on energy and risk. The drive batteries have more energy in them so should anything untoward happen, they can give rise to longer and more energetic incidents. From a risk perspective, there are more dedicated chargers around for receiver and Tx batteries so the availability for users to make an incorrect setting is less.

Dodgydiy - where does it say in BRCA guidelines than an ammunition box is not allowed? If you turned up at a 12th National with one of those it would be subject to inspection prior to use, but never thrown out unilaterally.

well i would have said since the rule clearly states "lipo sack" then an an ammunition box is not a "lipo sack" itf it was it would not be called a ammunition box!!!