UKLPG comments

[LPGC]

Here's another eye strainer!

Again I'll first say no hard feelings towards Rosko or any replies, I welcome all comments. Rosko gets quoted a lot because he's asked questions about what I've written and I've replied to those questions etc.

[ref lies]
http://www.drivelpg.co.uk
... choose a UKLPG Approved Autogas Installer safe in the knowledge that their work has been independently inspected and standards monitored ...

Depends on your frame of mind when you read it. I have been independantly inspected/assessed, examination piece etc., and deemed fit to sign off.
My work is randomly re-assessed to monitor it.
I see no lie?

The discussions here show that clearly the system doesn't protect end users

Hearsay; show me?
I'm not being funny here; I haven't seen an unsafe job from another UKLPG installer. I'd agree I'm unlikely to be presented with one, they'll turn up elsewhere? People have been ejected from UKLPG so it must go on.

Other complaints about UKLPG have been shown to be false already (no forklift required) so let's not just take statements for granted.

It's not quite the old "you won't get insurance ..." lie they used to put out, but to most people it will mean the same.

Okeydoke, so no untruths there either?

[ref electrical works]
What really grates is that you can either use someone in a registered body who can certify through their trade body for a pittnce, or you have to notify your local building control department - who charge (in some cases) £400 ...

Interesting parallel, seems making laws and regulations to cut out the trade body and put the work in 'institutional' hands didn't pan out well?[/quote]

If their is a contradiction in these standards, won't that leave the government in the unacceptable position of having double standards?

Why, what standards are in conflict?

I don't know if there are any conflicts or differences between European and UKLPG's standards but I would assume there are - Otherwise, why don't UKLPG simply call the standards by the European names rather than re-naming them? Perhaps someone will answer if there are any differences? Maybe UKLPG correctly assumed that passing standards off as their own invention increases at least public perception of UKLPG's importance.

[ref lies]
http://www.drivelpg.co.uk
... choose a UKLPG Approved Autogas Installer safe in the knowledge that their work has been independently inspected and standards monitored ...

Depends on your frame of mind when you read it. I have been independantly inspected/assessed, examination piece etc., and deemed fit to sign off.
My work is randomly re-assessed to monitor it.
I see no lie?

Who assessed your examiner and going up the chain who assessed that persons examiner? "Safe in the knowledge that their work has been independantly inspected" is not an outright lie but is certainly misleading and probably designed to be misleading. I would suggest that a fairly reliable indicator of something that's designed to be misleading would be something that 'depends on your frame of mind when you read it.' A small number of most installers jobs will have been independantly inspected, the majority of most installers work will not have been independantly inspected. The chances of a particular customer's installation being independantly inspected are low.

The discussions here show that clearly the system doesn't protect end users

Hearsay; show me?
I'm not being funny here; I haven't seen an unsafe job from another UKLPG installer. I'd agree I'm unlikely to be presented with one, they'll turn up elsewhere? People have been ejected from UKLPG so it must go on.

Other complaints about UKLPG have been shown to be false already (no forklift required) so let's not just take statements for granted.

If it's hearsay it's hearsay originating from a lot of sources, which would contradict my personal definition of the word. The definition of protect doesn't need to mean anything dramatic like a car exploding, you can protect people against being sold incorrect advice and taking half-truths as truths - besides the real point though, the real point being that UKLPG's 'safety' message doesn't amount to much when it works as designed and can easily be dodged entirely by unscrupulous people. I've mentioned a simple and obvious method that can be used to dodge all UKLPG's safeguards below. There are at least two installers on this thread that have seen and will likely continue to see unsafe installs that are on UKLPG's database and/or have an LPGA cert. There are only a few posters on this thread in total. Scale those figures up to the total number of installers...

Other complaints (plural) or just a single 'complaint' that I got wrong regarding the forklift?
The forklift point was a minor one, I have admitted a mistake there even though I'm not totally convinced I was wrong. I am making bigger points that are proving hard to argue against:
1.Nothing is stopping people clubbing together to pay a single membership. There are obvious financial incentives for installers to share membership costs. Does anyone seriously think this does not happen? No finger pointing, but what about with the influx of foreign installers? I can assure everyone these clubs are common but I will not name names as (although it would be unlikely to happen) I could be leaving myself open to a liable case. Suppliers I have spoken to are well aware of this happening and I would've thought it obvious.
2.If one person in such a club gets kicked out of UKLPG they can continue to have their installs 'approved' by their mates who do have membership. There are practical incentives to clubbing together for memberships. People that club together to share the cost of a membership know they can rely on their mates to register their installations with UKLPG in the unlikely event they get kicked out of LPG. Granted this would mean another member of the club first has to become a member of UKLPG - no hard feat. If ten installer companies share one UKLPG membership, each pays 10% of the membership. Then, if that membership is revoked (they get kicked out) they have another nine chances thanks to their mates in the club. They would need to get collectively kicked out nine times before paying the price of a membership. That would be many years worth of getting away with unsafe installs, meanwhile all installs done are on UKLPG's database.
3.UKLPG have no way of knowing if the majority of converted vehicles that they have on their database or are going to put on their database are/will be safe - they don't independantly check most installs. Even if an installer is not a member of one of these clubs, there is no way of knowing if the majority of work they do is safe. We have on this single forum thread at least a couple of installers who say they see bad/unsafe installs that are on UKLPG's database - There are only a few people posting on this thread, scaling those numbers up would statistically give a vast number of bad installs done by UKLPG members. There are both unscrupulous and incapable people in all trades, this trade no exception. Points 1 and 2 make a mockery of UKLPG 'membership' and don't give any unscrupulous UKLPG members much of an incentive to do safe installs.
4. There is nothing UKLPG could do to prevent 1, 2 and 3 happening if they keep the current system.
5. Due to 1,2,3 and 4 there is little point to UKLPG's installation database, the message they use to promote themselves to insurers is false, the message they use to promote themselves to end users (customers) is false and the message they use to promote themselves to installers is false.
6. When UKLPG say that none UKLPG registered installs won't get insurance they are at best being intentionally misleading. This point deserves a point here in this list all on it's own.
7. 5 and 6 are detrimental to the business' of installers that are not UKLPG members. None members could sue for loss of business. Members of UKLPG may suggest none members take converted vehicles to them for 'inspection' - they would say that wouldn't they? It increases their own profits at the expense of none members. Why should a none member installer pay for an 'inspection' when there are points 1,2,3,4,5 and 6?
8. I am no big believer in conspiracy theories, but UKLPG seem to conspire less in the interests of safety, this business and member installers / none member installers alike. They seem to conspire more in the interests of their own profits (which come from installers), and self preservation.
9. UKLPG members have a vested interest in promoting UKLPG and repeating UKLPG's messages. If a customer can be made to believe they will only be able to get insurance for a UKLPG member's work, that a UKLPG install WILL be safe (sometimes with the insinuation that a none member installer might do unsafe installs and that might be the reason they can't/won't become a member of UKLPG), possibly that a UKLPG install will work properly, that 'proper' installers are members, then they are more likely to go to a UKLPG member for an install / service / repair. For these reasons, UKLPG members very often tow UKLPG's line. How many installers became members of UKLPG in order that a small amount of their work could be independantly inspected? How many joined UKLPG so they could pay UKLPG? How many joined UKLPG so they could repeat UKLPG's messages whilst privately agreeing with points 1 to 8?
10. UKLPG is a profit making company, could be considered a monopoly and the company's policies might be interpreted as an attempt to retain a monopoly.

And since an MOT test can pick faults with unsafe LPG installs

I don't believe it will, or rather won't find every problem - this all got done to death here
"What should be in an MOT check if LPG systems werein it"
http://www.lpgforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=9613
but there's actually more meat in this one
http://www.lpgforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=9232
there are things that need one-time checks (eg correct tank type) but would be ridiculous to perform every MoT

Wouldn't be too difficult to check tank type when checking tank condition for rusting / dents really. Having said that, I accept someone might come up with an example of something silly to check every MOT but I can't think of one at the moment! The pros of the MOT test outweigh the cons so far I reckon.

Nobody has commented much on UKLPG's failures regarding the 'clubs'.

Personally, I don't know anything about it. You seem to have inside knowledge of the fraud - should/has it been passed to UKLPG or police?

As it happens, I had a chat with a chap this afternoon - just bought a gassed car. Not on UKLPG database, but did come with "In accordance with CoP11..." paper. He rang the installer (I don't know who, can guess, but there is no fraud in this story) who told him "our company is not UKLPG registered but some of the fitters are". Which doesn't help him because its still not on the database ... he's sent off his bit of paper to his insurers, I'll be interested to see the outcome.

I seem to have inside knowledge...I talk to people in the trade so yes I do, but I am not a member of such a club. Report clubs to UKLPG? No, because if such clubs are involved in unsafe installs (thus damaging the industry thus damaging my business) I can balance this against the damage that UKLPG does to my business with misinformation and lies. I don't know for sure these clubs are all doing unsafe installs but I know UKLPG damages none members business. Regards the law and police, i reckon their line of thought would go: 'Does an install have to be done by a member'? No. 'Does an install have to be checked by a member'? Yes according to UKLPG rules. 'But not according to the law'? No. 'Hmm going just on that we probably wouldn't get involved then. Can a none member pay a member for the check by UKLPG rules then'? Yes. 'So why do you think a none member cannot help a member out towards membership costs'? Because they're saying they're members. 'No they're not they're just saying they can register installs on this UKLPG database'. But the checks aren't being done. 'Really? Even if you can prove that sir UKLPG certification and checks are not a legal requirement. Can you prove that sir'? No. 'I really can't see what the police can do about that then sir'.

Granted an MOT test doesn't need to involve a drive but is still far more likely to detect an issue with the driveability of a converted vehicle than a COP11 test.

Really, hows that?

I said more likely to detect a driveability issue, not that it definitely would detect a driveability issue. At an MOT test the vehicle has to be driven at least onto the ramps and at least manoevered for brake tests etc - Not by the vehicle owner or LPG installer but by someone qualified to do MOT tests. If the MOT tester has any doubts about the LPG system they might take the car for a drive. If the current system was changed to the MOT system, MOT testers would be more familiar with LPG systems - they might know that a Hemi engined vehicle fitted with an LPG system with a 100hp reducer and not capable of petrol addition won't respond when the driver needs the power. They might learn to check reducer diaghprams aren't leaking gas into the inlet manifold through the vac pipe - the kind of leak that can go undetected for a long time but can still be dangerous. They might learn that some none working installs are 'repaired' by removing the plunger valve from a failed solenoid.

Simon

[SimonHobson]

Back to the question of lies, and leaving out hearsay, my own personal experience some years ago pretty well summed things up. When I got my first V8 and started looking for a conversion, I picked some installers who advertised in the mags and rang them. IIRC, three installers, as far as I know with no connection whatsoever other than being (what was then) LPGA members, and in different areas. I asked several questions, but one was :

Q: Can I do some of the work, for example making brackets and mounting things ?
A: No, it's illegal.
Note the words were specifically "it's illegal". They didn't say it's against the rules they work to, they said "it's illegal". There is no "depends on your viewpoint" aspect to this - the responses I got were a complete and outright lie.
IIRC I was also told that it was illegal to sell me parts, or to give me any information whatsoever.
Note that one of the reasons for asking about bracketry etc is down to the fact that I didn't want to be paying someone to do a @!## job. Not necessarily @!## as in poor workmanship - but @!## as in me not being able to afford to pay them to take the time to do the job as I wanted (for example, my tank brackets were galvanised along with some other bits).

So, we could of course consider (rather charitably I think) that three unconnected independent businesses came up with the same lie independently. Or more likely they were told to say that by their trade body.

It was partly this "we want people to believe it's illegal and prevent leakage of information" attitude that made me start my website so as to get into the open what I'd managed to learn - so others wouldn't have to learn by experience (example, out of curiosity I took a reducer apart to find out what's in it and how it works - I couldn't find any information whatsoever online). I can tell you that my initial install was poorer for lack of information - I had the instructions that came with the kit, but backup was poor (the guy was nice guy, but LPG wasn't his specialty), and some aspects weren't quite right. Fixing the problems was made difficult by not being able to either a) ask people for advice, or b) buy parts openly. Some people who've been around the game for a while will know what I'm talking about - for newcomers, you don't know you're born !

[Gilbertd]

I don't know if there are any conflicts or differences between European and UKLPG's standards but I would assume there are - Otherwise, why don't UKLPG simply call the standards by the European names rather than re-naming them? Perhaps someone will answer if there are any differences? Maybe UKLPG correctly assumed that passing standards off as their own invention increases at least public perception of UKLPG's importance.

I rather suspect that CoP11 pre-dates the EN standard so UKLPG (or LPGA as it was then) can claim to have started things rolling by producing a 'standard'. There are differences but mainly that CoP11 has sections which are mutually incompatible e.g. a pipeline shall be installed in such a way as to protect it from impact but at the same time it shall be visible for inspection along it's length. The EN standard is better written but a lot more difficult to understand being written in legal speak.

If ten installer companies share one UKLPG membership, each pays 10% of the membership. Then, if that membership is revoked (they get kicked out) they have another nine chances thanks to their mates in the club. They would need to get collectively kicked out nine times before paying the price of a membership. That would be many years worth of getting away with unsafe installs, meanwhile all installs done are on UKLPG's database.

How? If ten installers club together and get one membership between them, then that one member certifies all installs done by all installers in the 'club'. If the installs are so bad that he gets kicked out, then they don't have a 'club' member who is registered. If it isn't an individual but a company that registers, and they all claim to be subsidiaries of that company, then they've still lost their registration. If it is that easy for another member to register, then so what? With this argument you seem to be advocating compulsory membership for all installers.

At an MOT test the vehicle has to be driven at least onto the ramps and at least manoeuvred for brake tests etc - Not by the vehicle owner or LPG installer but by someone qualified to do MOT tests. If the MOT tester has any doubts about the LPG system they might take the car for a drive. If the current system was changed to the MOT system, MOT testers would be more familiar with LPG systems - they might know that a Hemi engined vehicle fitted with an LPG system with a 100hp reducer and not capable of petrol addition won't respond when the driver needs the power.

The driver will no doubt to aware of this if he has tried to drive the car hard and will, as a number of the uninitiated that have appeared on here, accepted that this is normal for a car on LPG and switches it to petrol when he wants to overtake. While not ideal, it isn't something that is really anything to do with an MoT test.

They might learn to check reducer diaghprams aren't leaking gas into the inlet manifold through the vac pipe - the kind of leak that can go undetected for a long time but can still be dangerous.

Which would increase the amount of gas going into the engine so it would fail on emissions.

They might learn that some none working installs are 'repaired' by removing the plunger valve from a failed solenoid.

and if it only one out of a number, is it really that important? Older installs didn't have a solenoid on the tank, relying on one at the front. Unless all of them have had the plungers taken out, it's still safer than an old install.

Whether you have a problem with UKLPG or not, you do seem to be clutching at straws with a lot of your arguments.

[rossko]

I'm taking nothing personally

I don't know if there are any conflicts or differences between European and UKLPG's standards but I would assume there are

Okay, so this part is just daydreams then.

- Otherwise, why don't UKLPG simply call the standards by the European names rather than re-naming them?

Because they're not the same thing? Don't know exactly, which EU regs did you have in mind here?

Who assessed your examiner and going up the chain who assessed that persons examiner?

You know very well who. How is that relevant to "lies" et al? Is it something that MoT testing does better maybe, or you have some other solution?

"Safe in the knowledge that their work has been independantly inspected" is not an outright lie

Good.

I would suggest that a fairly reliable indicator of something that's designed to be misleading would be something that 'depends on your frame of mind when you read it.'

I said that as a polite way of indicating that the bloody-minded can read things that aren't written. For Simon (H) to see a lie there, he has to have Joe Public unable to tell difference between "has" and "will be".

A small number of most installers jobs will have been independantly inspected, the majority of most installers work will not have been independantly inspected. The chances of a particular customer's installation being independantly inspected are low.

Yes, fully agree. No lies there either.

If it's hearsay it's hearsay originating from a lot of sources,

Show me lots of sources

Scale those figures up to the total number of installers...

Your sample of two (well, three really although you won't like my third "no problems" report) extended to a national crisis?? It is certainly grounds for investigating ... which brings us back to 'show me (or them)'

Other complaints (plural) or just a single 'complaint' that I got wrong regarding the forklift?

Well, there was the equally trivial plastic pipe clip one. My point is that both were being used in an attempt to lampoon UKLPGA, and both were easily verified as untrue. You do yourself a disservice - stop trying to add-on stuff to make people look silly (risk of backfire), and focus on the important stuff.

1.Nothing is stopping people clubbing together to pay a single membership.

Right, I believe I've got a better understanding of these "clubs" now, it was worth clarifying it for me at least.

Nothing (assuming technical competency etc.) stopping people becoming LPGA approved fitters/inspectors, yep.
There's one business name and (at least) one technician with the approval.
UKLPG don't dictate their business terms - if they want to do jobs for competitors or Uncle Lev, that's their business.
If they choose to inspect competitors work, that's fine. It's their name on the bottom line.

2.If one person in such a club gets kicked out of UKLPG they can continue to have their installs 'approved' by their mates who do have membership.

If it's up to scratch, yes.

That would be many years worth of getting away with unsafe installs, meanwhile all installs done are on UKLPG's database.

That's a fair point. I don't know if UKLPG revisit the prior registrations of a member shown to have acted fraudulently or incompetently. Seems to me to be a good idea, even though there'd be practical difficulties.

3.UKLPG have no way of knowing if the majority of converted vehicles that they have on their database or are going to put on their database are/will be safe - they don't independantly check most installs.

That is correct, they operate on the basic assumption that someone who has to meet the standards to get in, will continue to operate to the same standards. Bit like MoT testing.

vast number of bad installs done by UKLPG members.

Show me.

4. There is nothing UKLPG could do to prevent 1, 2 and 3 happening if they keep the current system.

Of course there is, simple vigilance.

6. When UKLPG say that none UKLPG registered installs won't get insurance

Show me where that is said (yawn)

None members could sue for loss of business.

Ha, good one Then go fer the makers of diesel cars, yeh!

Members of UKLPG may suggest none members take converted vehicles to them for 'inspection' - they would say that wouldn't they?

Yep.

It increases their own profits at the expense of none members.

Yep. This is a common purpose of trade associations and unions.

Why should a none member installer pay for an 'inspection' when there are points 1,2,3,4,5 and 6?

Fine, don't do it. I'm not trying to persuade you. I am biting my tongue about this thread
http://www.lpgforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=12060
and wondering what kind of certificate that man expects.

9. UKLPG members have a vested interest in promoting UKLPG and repeating UKLPG's messages.

Yep. And UKLPG is there to serve them too. Was that a revelation?

10. UKLPG is a profit making company, could be considered a monopoly and the company's policies might be interpreted as an attempt to retain a monopoly.

Hehe, another cracker.
Financials were posted earlier, did you look at the profit line?
Do you understand what a monopoly is? UKLPG is a trade association, it doesn't actually trade in LPG or autogas conversions etc.
When you're lodging the complaint with the Competition Commission, don't forget to ask why there's only one of them too ...

someone might come up with an example of something silly to check every MOT but I can't think of one at the moment!

Yeh, checking tank markings. You'd have to remove it on some vehicles. Wer've done all this repeatedly before.

Report clubs to UKLPG? No, because if such clubs are involved in unsafe installs (thus damaging the industry thus damaging my business) I can balance this against the damage that UKLPG does to my business with misinformation and lies.

How's that work then? You seem to getting shot in both feet there.

I don't know for sure these clubs are all doing unsafe installs

Okay, any of them maybe?

Regards the law and police

Yes, it's much simpler than I first thought. No-one is pretending to be anyone else etc.

Granted an MOT test doesn't need to involve a drive but is still far more likely to detect an issue with the driveability of a converted vehicle than a COP11 test...
At an MOT test the vehicle has to be driven at least onto the ramps and at least manoevered for brake tests etc

Ha, very good! Okay you got me completely there, I did think it was a serious suggestion

So, we could of course consider (rather charitably I think) that three unconnected independent businesses came up with the same lie independently. Or more likely they were told to say that by their trade body.

[/quote][/quote]
Ah, more assumptions. Well, there's several LPGA and ex-LPGA installers reading this (eventually), so we could expect to see a photocopy of those orders from Illuminati HQ to their minions shortly.

[rossko]

Right, here we go (I was daft enough to do homework on other folks flights of fancy)
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/tran ... /r115e.pdf
UNIFORM PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE APPROVAL OF:
I. SPECIFIC LPG (LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GASES) RETROFIT SYSTEMS TO BE INSTALLED IN MOTOR VEHICLES FOR THE USE OF LPG IN THEIR PROPULSION SYSTEM

"1.3. This Regulation does not apply to the procedures, checks and inspections aimed at
verifying the correct installation of the retrofit systems on vehicles, since this
matter relies on the competence of the Contracting Party of Country where the
vehicle is registered."

Specific systems in this context means model-specific kits (old Powershift type approval style) and not the kind of one-offs we all deal in, so the regs out of scope anyway.

[Charlie Renard]

I think the point that is being missed in this (extremely) lengthy post is that the so called 'clubs' are NOT inspecting work for each other.
I have experienced this, mainly by businesses, shall we say, not of UK origin.
One business gets UKLPG approval (doesn't matter where in the country) and the others just ring them with the reg. number and details of the cars they convert with a ''stick it on the register mate'' - this completely and totally defeats the whole system.

[marek]

Ross,

E115 (the pdf you have quoted) is all about the maintainance of vehicle type approval if lpg/cng is installed on vehicles of categopry M and N or its sub-categories.

Its scope is:-
1.1 Applies only[/i] some [/i] lpg and[/i] some [/i] cng systems;
1.2 If you don't change the spec of vewhicle, it'll apply to that whole family group of those vehicles;
1.3 It doesn't apply to checks and inspections;
1.4 It does apply to category M and N - i.e. these are the specified bits relevant to 1.1 ;
1.5 There'll be emissions hoops to jump through.

It basically covers the high pressure side of the components e.g. tank, solenoids.
You will find references to it in UK legislation with respect to the requirements placed upon manufacturers of category M and N vehicles.

So unless anyone is planning on converting minibuses or taxis (i.e. passenger carrying vehicles) or is a small sportscar manufacturer (like TVR), it isn't going to be of relevance.

As you pointed out, it has nothing to do with verification of a safe installation or subsequent testing, but I'm just adding that it almost certainly is of no relevance to this thread any other way either.

The "scope" tells you what it's for and to whom it applies.

As I pointed out in a different thread a while back, E67 also has a scope:- it is there to stop certain lpg components from being offered for sale within the EU, i.e. it applies to wholesalers, importers, distributors, manufacturers from putting non E67 stamped components into the supply chain. In other words, it has nothing to do with safety or the fitting or use of non E67 components, but achieves much the same by proxy as it provides an umbrella over the trade (and eventually retail) market in defined lpg components.

Since we are dealing with a private company, the real question is:- Is this LPG certification company good value for money?
For an installer - does it get them more business?
For an end user - does it get them cheaper insurance?

kind regards
Marek

[billynoband]

In which case the Part P regs were doomed to failure from the start, the only way they would work is for every property in the land to have a detailed inventory and plan of the installation in that property so that any work done after that can be proved to have been done by the diy'r if they couldnt produce a certificate of safety for the work, there isnt nothing to prevent anyone from saying "its how it always was" if something goes wrong after they meddled with it, who is to say that the electrics wernt messed up before someone bought a property by someone else or the previous owner ??

That was the exact situation just before Part P came in. I bought a brand new house in 1977 which was fitted with a piddly little 4 way fusebox (with fuses), Lighting, Ring main, Cooker, Immersion heater, that was it. It was a job I'd meant to do for years but with Part P on the horizon, I replaced the fusebox with a proper consumer unit, RCD protected, trips and additional circuits so I could run a proper supply into the garage and garden rather than use the extension lead from the kitchen as I had done for years. I did this about a fortnight before the regs came into force. A few weeks later my neighbour knocked on my door and said, "You know how you've replaced your fusebox and put a proper supply into the garage? As my house is identical to yours, would you be able to do mine for me?" "Nope, not allowed to, it's illegal" and told him why.

Very resourceful chap managed to produce a time machine for me so I could do it the previous month........

Replacing fuse boards with second hand RCD boards pre 2005 is your best bet and they are better quality than new. I would like to think that the part P regs are changing because of my out of character moaning letters to the IEE or whatever they are now and the gov. They also de-qualified me in the 90s and keep saying if we take so and so course then I could still practice which was a lie. So I do generators instead and none of their self funding rules apply, mostly.
Just had to pay £90 odd to have my diy secondhand windows inspected by building control though.

[rossko]

others just ring them with the reg. number and details of the cars they convert with a ''stick it on the register mate''

Yep, who's going to dob the individual in for this fraud then? Don't tell us, just do it. You don't need hard proof to whisper - I'm sure the odd patterns of their registrations would show up under examination.

- this completely and totally defeats the whole system.

So how should this be prevented? We could look to MoT methods perhaps.

[lpg-cars]

So one of the main points raised here is that some non UKLPG approved installers are getting their conversions registered by forming a club because they can't afford to pay the £150 annual memership for an installer?

Should someone who can't afford to pay this really be running a business and more importantly, would you trust them with your car and money?

UKLPG installers work is randomly inspected. When we had paper certificates, we would get a call asking for customers contact details for certain certificate numbers and the inspector would go and inspect some of those vehicles.
With the online system, customers are asked to fill in their details if they are prepared to have an inspection. We have no control over which vehicle will be inspected or when so we have to make sure all instals are correct not just the ones for the inspector.

Any tradesman should have the tools and equipment to do his job. I can't see how you can accurately diagnose running issues without a 4 gas analyser. The lambda sensor may be showing a correct mixture but what if it is faulty? I don't think you can rely on a car failing the mot to raise issues with the emissions. If the mot is not due for 11 months, will the cat last that long?

Is that providing service and quality to your customer?

"Yes mate your is now running on gas, it might be down on power so you use more gas than you should and you might burn your cat out in a month but any problems bring it back and I'll blag my way out of it."

Very professional? Is that what you want for your hard earned money?

[Brian_H]

So one of the main points raised here is that some non UKLPG approved installers are getting their conversions registered by forming a club because they can't afford to pay the £150 annual memership for an installer?

Should someone who can't afford to pay this really be running a business and more importantly, would you trust them with your car and money?

The trouble is you generally find out that after its happened rather than before. Although I'd guess some of them you can have a feeling about that sort of problem.

[LPGC]

Not had time to come on the forum for a few days, barely have time tonight so have scan-read the posts made since I was last on here - apologies if I missed any points /questions.

It seems some people pick fault with points I've made by posting links to external sites and quoting legislation which they aren't very well versed in themselves. Where this has occurred it has been noted by others that quite a lot of those external links / legislation quoted is not relevant to the subject. Example: Someone has said LPGA's rules were out before Eu rules, someone has said there aren't any differences between UKLPG (old LPGA) rules and EU rules, someone has quoted something from a website that says EU member countries can have different rules to EU rules, someone else has said the last quote doesn't apply to this business.

Brain_h quote "Although I'd guess some of them you can have a feeling about that sort of problem" Are you saying you have a feeling I might not be a good installer Brian? If so, is that based on the fact that what I say and what I do are the same and are in accordance with my own beliefs, or do you get the 'feeling' from something else? The point is little to do with £150, it is largely to do with the principal of supporting an organisation that fails to deliver on their safety message, lies to consumers, benefits when their members spread those same lies, is aware other systems could improve matters but doesn't implement such other systems because that would mean less profits.

So one of the main points raised here is that some non UKLPG approved installers are getting their conversions registered by forming a club because they can't afford to pay the £150 annual memership for an installer?

Should someone who can't afford to pay this really be running a business and more importantly, would you trust them with your car and money?

UKLPG installers work is randomly inspected. When we had paper certificates, we would get a call asking for customers contact details for certain certificate numbers and the inspector would go and inspect some of those vehicles.
With the online system, customers are asked to fill in their details if they are prepared to have an inspection. We have no control over which vehicle will be inspected or when so we have to make sure all instals are correct not just the ones for the inspector.

Any tradesman should have the tools and equipment to do his job. I can't see how you can accurately diagnose running issues without a 4 gas analyser. The lambda sensor may be showing a correct mixture but what if it is faulty? I don't think you can rely on a car failing the mot to raise issues with the emissions. If the mot is not due for 11 months, will the cat last that long?

Is that providing service and quality to your customer?

"Yes mate your is now running on gas, it might be down on power so you use more gas than you should and you might burn your cat out in a month but any problems bring it back and I'll blag my way out of it."

Very professional? Is that what you want for your hard earned money?

So you think none UKLPG installers fob customers off, blag their way out of reported problems, burn cats out, calibrate systems worse or do anything worse more often than none members? Or you think having a 4 gas analyser is that much of a benefit? I see an equal number of issues from UKLPG members and none members alike, I'd say you were wrong on all counts there. You also missed the point about the MOT system - I wasn't strongly suggesting the case for any particular system but I argued the toss over the MOT test system just to play devil's advocate and see how anyone could argue it wasn't a superior system - that's just one system that would work. And in this MOT system, every car could be tested within a set time frame after an install. Here's another point I can add to the MOT system I put forward - it could be the vehicle owner's responsibility for the MOT test (which of course it is) and they could take their converted car to whichever MOT tester they wanted - not the installers mate.

ONE point is the membership fee, and that's just one point (you'll have read I made a lot of points, you're another installer who hasn't addressed my main points). But why should anyone pay £150 to be part of a 'safety' system that doesn't work - doesn't work because people can phone their mates up to have a car put on UKLPG's register.

Your point regarding 'Should someone be running a business if they can't afford to pay £150' backfires on itself like this - Anyone can afford to pay £150... Should a person running a business join a self-profit making trade body when they know that trade body's core procedures and the message it sends out are flawed and not the truth? Should that person then repeat the same things that trade body says? Can such a person be trusted or are they repeating the same things (which they know are not true) to make more profit? What is the advantage for anyone to pay £150 to be a member at the same time as their mate is a member? Given that disadvantages are a) paying £150. b) if there are a few of you doing dodgy installs, there is no need for UKLPG to know of your existence until your mate gets kicked out, then the other installer joins UKLPG and can resume UKLPG membership for himself and his mate who got kicked out. Anyone with £150 can pay £150 if they so choose. What about skills?

You fight UKLPG's corner now but since UKLPG is a profit making organisation it follows that they'd love a change in law to require ALL installers to be members of UKLPG. If they then change membership renewals to £10000 you will either pay that much or share a membership! Others already share membership and UKLPG have no way of knowing who does this.

UKLPG members work is randomly inspected? Yes.. But not often enough to prevent the poor installs we see that they have registered. Does anyone have figures for how many installers get kicked out of UKLPG? Apparently not many, and when an installer is kicked out, they can continue to have their installations registered on UKLPG's database with a phone call to their mate who is a member - What's the point?

Tools to do the job? What essential tools for the job do you have that others might not have... a gas analyser? I'll repeat not needed. If lambda (and fuel trims) are correct the mixture is correct or there is something else wrong that is not primarily mixture related. What would you do if you converted a vehicle and one of those 4 gases was wrong but fuel trims correct and vehicle driving nicely? How would you correct an emissions problem on LPG that wasn't there on petrol using a gas analyser? What changes could you make to the LPG system to correct emissions if fuel trims were already correct? Are you impartial or do you strongly want your own installs to pass? The pros on here are probably thinking you'd stick that analyser up the exhaust of another vehicle before I type it. A decent installer can tell if a lambda flick is slow / sticky / jumpy and advise/fit a new lambda, in which case a new lambda would be needed anyway. Any other problem needs engine work, again which will need doing regardless of LPG fitted or not. I'll advise you that turning individual cylinders on/off LPG/petrol and using lambda and manifold pressure readings is a better bet than your analyser, Do you take your analyser out in the car for a test drive too? Rolling roads cause higher under bonnet temperatures which can in some circumstances cause the mixture to be wrong.

More than a few respected garages bring any vehicles with problems that they can't diagnose themselves to me for me to diagnose the problem. They have gas analysers, I don't. One of the garages that most often uses my services for this is 40 miles away - and they don't just bring LPG converted cars, they bring unconverted cars too.

others just ring them with the reg. number and details of the cars they convert with a ''stick it on the register mate''

Yep, who's going to dob the individual in for this fraud then? Don't tell us, just do it. You don't need hard proof to whisper - I'm sure the odd patterns of their registrations would show up under examination.

- this completely and totally defeats the whole system.

So how should this be prevented? We could look to MoT methods perhaps.

There might be a pattern... Do UKLPG look for patterns though? Something they could do, but I doubt they do and it wouldn't work - Here's the flaw in that: A UKLPG member might do say 2 cars a week, that members mate might want a car registering with UKLPG, simple, just space out the registrations with UKLPG. If UKLPG might get suspicious, space the days of registration. Simpler still, tell UKLPG that vehicle was brought in for the check.

I've already said I wouldn't dob anybody for registering an install for someone else. I've also said I regard UKLPG's misinformation as a kind of fraud. What if I said I knew of a none UKLPG member installer who might be putting a converted vehicle on UKLPG's database next week with just a phone call and I passed all the information on to you.... then you reported this to UKLPG... What could UKLPG do ? Spend all week at the UKLPG members premises to see if any vehicles are registered that haven't even been there? It could simply be arranged to register the vehicle when UKLPG had left even if they were given the car reg number. But without the car reg number what could they do? Maybe go to the installer's premises and be told to leave or be in trespass, likely not even get the car reg? With the car reg number, yes they could go around to inspect the car at the owner's home (if the vehicle owner agreed). If they inspected the car and it passed, then what could they do? If the car failed then the UKLPG member might get a slapped wrist from UKLPG or might even get kicked out. If they got kicked out they could continue to register their installs on UKLPG database through one of their mates. If UKLPG had the vehicle reg it's likely everyone involved would be aware and decide to play this particular conversion by UKLPG's rules (i.e. the installer who might usually do a naff job does everything right and goes to a UKLPG ,member he doesn't know for registration on UKLPG's database.

Some of your comments might be stretching the friendly terms a bit! We're getting similar amounts of criticism and backup on points, noticed some other people's posts have backed up some of my boring/tiresome (yawn) 'daydreams' and gone against some of your web sourced information.

Simon

[Gilbertd]

Example: Someone has said LPGA's rules were out before Eu rules,

If you skimmed through it you'd have seen that I said that LPGA rules MAY pre-date EU regs. Thinking about it, they almost certainly do and would have been based on a BS standard that has since been superseded.

There might be a pattern... Do UKLPG look for patterns though?

They almost certainly would if someone reported the possibility that they are certifying installs that they have never seen.

I've already said I wouldn't dob anybody for registering an install for someone else.

So you are actively supporting the practice then? If it winds you up so much, do something about it or stop whining about it while doing nothing.

If the car failed then the UKLPG member might get a slapped wrist from UKLPG or might even get kicked out. If they got kicked out they could continue to register their installs on UKLPG database through one of their mates.

But following on from your rants about groups of installers clubbing together with only one being registered, which one of their mates? They've only got one in the club who is registered so if he gets kicked out, they don't have anyone.

Personally I think you need to stop now before you contradict yourself further. You obviously have a problem but aren't sure what it is.......

[Brian_H]

Brain_h quote "Although I'd guess some of them you can have a feeling about that sort of problem" Are you saying you have a feeling I might not be a good installer Brian? If so, is that based on the fact that what I say and what I do are the same and are in accordance with my own beliefs, or do you get the 'feeling' from something else? The point is little to do with £150, it is largely to do with the principal of supporting an organisation that fails to deliver on their safety message, lies to consumers, benefits when their members spread those same lies, is aware other systems could improve matters but doesn't implement such other systems because that would mean less profits.

Wasn't particually aimed at you actually so please don't think it was anything specific to you. Its more the stories you hear from people on here who have had nightmare installs where the installer is more interested in getting the customers money than making the system work. It isn't really aimed at anyone specific here as i doubt many of those posting here would fit into that bracket of people. I personally dislike the way uklpg operates as it seems to be based on misinformation and threats rather than a clear and consistant application of the rules (some of the vaguraties on this are more to do with insurance companies rather than uklpg but the two are obviously very closely linked).

The main reason i dislike them is personally I think they have done far more damage to the whole lpg business in this country as they seem to have made something which should be simple into a way to milk money out of end users at unexpected times and by changing systems of doing how they record inspected installations. Its that kind of behavour that really does damage unfortunately.

I'd wonder for example what would happen if you had a personal reg on a converted car with it registered and then transferred the reg to another car. Without knowing the back end of their system you couldn't tell for sure, but I'd say theres a fair chance it would not know anything of the change of vehicle and still show it as ok. Maybe someone whos more involved with that side of it could say otherwise?

I'm all for the installations being done in a safe way, but this seems like a fairly bad way of actually achiving that aim.

[rossko]

It seems some people pick fault with points I've made by posting links to external sites and quoting legislation which they aren't very well versed in themselves.

Yes, its generally better than just making assumptions. With the pointers, you can even do your own homework.

Example: Someone has said LPGA's rules were out before Eu rules, someone has said there aren't any differences between UKLPG (old LPGA) rules and EU rules, someone has quoted something from a website that says EU member countries can have different rules to EU rules, someone else has said the last quote doesn't apply to this business.

You do realise all of those can be true at the same time ?

lies to consumers, benefits when their members spread those same lies,

Show me the lies.

You also missed the point about the MOT system... see how anyone could argue it wasn't a superior system

What MoT system, you haven't really outlined anything yet? Can you outline it clearly without the rest of the chaff. I think your first step is to define what you are trying to achieve with it -
Installation safety?
Service condition safety?
Performance/suitability?

Does anyone have figures for how many installers get kicked out of UKLPG?

I don't suppose they make a song and dance of it, that wouldn't be good for confidence in the trade as a whole.
Does anyone have figures for how many unsafe-but-registered installs exist? Have those been verified as unsafe, or just thought they were because of say plastic p-clips i.e. misunderstanding of guidelines?

a gas analyser? I'll repeat not needed.

That's hardly professional. At conversion, we interfer with a cars emissions systems (merely by changing the fuel type). It's smart to demonstrate it still complies with the law before it goes out your door.
Ennyroad as non-UKLPG, you do as you wish, though it's hard to see why you have a problem with this.

The pros on here are probably thinking you'd stick that analyser up the exhaust of another vehicle before I type it.

Would you do that? Why expect others to do that?

Do UKLPG look for patterns though?

Don't know; they're not likely to broadcast all the means they use any more than say VOSA investigators use. My suggestion was to point the finger where they should be looking, but apparently no-one wants to do that.
There's no need for elaborate site visits etc. in the first place, all they need to establish from an end user is who converted the car. A reminder that it is quite legitimate for any installer to get a UKLPG inspector to inspect/register his work, but the suggestion here is that we have a vast network using a single non-inspecting 'inspector' fraudulently. A customer in Cornwall registered by a chap in Scotland should prompt further investigation.

[LPGC]

I know this is an old thread, clicked on it by accident but I'll add this.

There are suppliers and installers who have offered to put any car I want on the UKLPG database, without doing an inspection, without seeing any pics or figures. I know these companies do this for many other installers. I didn't approach them, they blatantly offered me the 'service'. Some called me specifically to ask me if I wanted any car putting on the database. They make a few quid by marking up the price of the UKLPG registration

I am a good installer and a safe installer. I see a lot of other installers work, both none UKLPG members and UKLPG members, and I reckon I'm among the neatest and safest, plus my installs are technically very good (which is a very different point entirely to tidyness and safety). I see some shocking workmanship and technically poor installs, often both on the same vehicle, from members and none members alike.

UKLPG spread misinformation at my expense. The misinformation they like my customers to believe is 'you may not get insurance if your conversion isn't done by a UKLPG member' and 'independantly inspected'. This misinformation can persuade customers to go to a UKLPG member instead of coming to me. UKLPG are not a government setup, I am breaking no law if I take up on these offers - Obviously being a none member I might not fully understand the way the inspection works... does it just involve giving someone a registration number over the phone? Why shouldn't I take these offers up if it's a deal breaker for a customer, especially considering many others do the same? As always, but especially since the influx of foreign installers, UKLPG database registration means nothing - UKLPG must be aware, but either don't have the will to do anything about it or do not have the means to do anything about it. Considering they are a profit making outfit, I'd suggest the answer is a lot of both of these reasons.

Simon
LPGC

[SimonHobson]

... I am breaking no law if I take up on these offers

Not too sure. IF the vehicle is definitely up to standard then probably not. However, if the vehicle weren't up to standard (even on some minor technicality) then it might be argued that it was being a party to fraud - the action would be to get the registration so that the vehicle owner could get insurance that he may not otherwise be able to get.

Obviously being a none member I might not fully understand the way the inspection works... does it just involve giving someone a registration number over the phone?

I assume that's a sarcastic question, as the answer is "no, it shouldn't just involve a phone call and no sight of the vehicle"


But you make a good, and in a way depressing, argument.

[LPGC]

This subject has come up again on a different thread which is now locked...

The thread was started by someone else, the original subject was a different topic, but UKLPG has been discussed at length on the thread.

The thread I refer to is 'Ecotec Manchester' - read there for plenty of argument on UKLPG.

Any replies etc to points raised on that thread will need to be posted on this thread.

I hope not to annoy the moderators etc for posting this, so mods, if this offends you please don't kick me off the forum, in that case just delete this post and send me a pm with an explanation please!

Simon
Lpgc

[linsdav8284]

Really surprised there haven't been more posts on this thread.

Many UKLPG members adverts / sales talk says 'you won't get insurance unless your car is converted by a UKLPG member'.
None members know the above statement isn't true.
None members adverts are listed alongside UKLPG member adverts.

Given the UKLPG 'safety' message, and given that UKLPG members have to pay a fee for membership (a fee that none members obviously don't pay) members would surely like the law to be changed so all installers have to be members? Or (considering the sales talk) would they?

Given the 'you won't get insurance' message that members would like customers to believe, none members might be a little peeved at UKLPG sales talk?

This discussion is commonplace and ongoing off the forum, why isn't it commonplace and ongoing on the forum?

Simon

Simon- We have 3 vehicles currently running on LPG. All three insurance companies wanted to see a UKLPG registration certificate before they would insure me.

[classicswede]

Simon- We have 3 vehicles currently running on LPG. All three insurance companies wanted to see a UKLPG registration certificate before they would insure me.

How did you manage to get a certificate as UKLPG don't do a paper certificate any longer and it is just an electronic database.
I register my conversions on the database and issue a installers certificate to cover both angles.