# Recalled fire sprinkler heads



## cda (Dec 13, 2010)

So what do you do when you somehow find out a building has recalled heads in it???


----------



## Marshal Chris (Dec 13, 2010)

Notify them in writing that all the heads are required to be replaced.  usually, i'll find a copy of the CPSC or other documentation to substantiate.  Then when they ask, who pays for it, I say it's up to the building owner.

I'd imagine that if they've had the same sprinkler company since the recall that they could be held accountable since 25 requires them to check for recalled heads.

5.2.1.1.6 Sprinklers that are subject to recall shall be replaced

per the manufacturer’s requirements.


----------



## fireguy (Dec 14, 2010)

Marshal Chris said:
			
		

> Notify them in writing that all the heads are required to be replaced.  usually, i'll find a copy of the CPSC or other documentation to substantiate.  Then when they ask, who pays for it, I say it's up to the building owner.  I'd imagine that if they've had the same sprinkler company since the recall that they could be held accountable since 25 requires them to check for recalled heads.
> 
> 5.2.1.1.6 Sprinklers that are subject to recall shall be replaced
> 
> per the manufacturer’s requirements.


If the owner refused to participate in the recall, the service agency is not accounable.  We have had 4 facilities refuse to take advantage of the recalls.  Two did have us replace the heads, but only after the recall was ended. One facility paid us $40,000.00 to do what could have been done for free.  They ignored 12 years of service reports.  Two facilities have  not had the heads replaced.  They get written up at each inspection.  Unlike the majority of you, we have no enforcement  authority


----------



## cda (Dec 14, 2010)

Does someone know what edition of 25 the language was picked up ???


----------



## mtlogcabin (Dec 14, 2010)

> They ignored 12 years of service reports. Two facilities have not had the heads replaced. They get written up at each inspection. Unlike the majority of you, we have no enforcement authority


Somebody with authority should be getting copies of your reports and follow up on the required corrections. That's part of my job.  It usually just takes a phone call to the owner or maitnance supervisor to get the ball rolling


----------



## Marshal Chris (Dec 14, 2010)

This comes from 02 version of 25.  There is no language in standard itself, just the appendix.



> A.4.1.4 Recalled products should be replaced or remedied.Such replacement or remedial product should be installed in
> 
> accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions and the appropriate
> 
> ...


And then this shows up in the 08 version:



> 5.2.1.1.6 Sprinklers that are subject to recall shall be replacedper the manufacturer’s requirements.


Fireguy, I agree with your statements, I was saying that the sprinkler company may be liable if they had no record of advising the building owner.


----------



## cda (Dec 14, 2010)

Anyone have the 05 version?

never mind I see that it jumped from 02  to 08


----------



## fireguy (Dec 15, 2010)

Marshal Chris said:
			
		

> Fireguy, I agree with your statements, I was saying that the sprinkler company may be liable if they had no record of advising the building owner.


I know some of will not believe this, but some jurisdictions see no value in inspections or service work of any kind.  And we work in areas that an AHJ who tries to enforce codes, gets to speak to the city mgr about being a team player and how business needs to make a profit, and when was the last time a furniture store/school/ALF/anything actually burned.  If an inspection results in problems, we do send service reports to management.  After a couple of months of no action, I send reports to the AHJ. Fortunatly, my company is  in a position of being busy taking care of those who think life safety is important.  For those who do not get serious problems fixed, I have the option of firing them and letting them make other arrangements.  And my techs have the same crappy attitude.


----------



## FM William Burns (Dec 15, 2010)

Thank goodness not all Fireguy!

Regarding recall items; in my opinion they are required to be noted on the inspection reports from the facility's service provider just like items including but not limited to......changes in storage comodities or operations that affect the existing protection scheme.  In places with limited manpower, one can't be everywhere and that's why the code references are written that way.  When the service provider needs, they know how to use us as we know how to use them.


----------



## permitguy (Dec 15, 2010)

If the recalled heads are noted on the report (which they should be), we require them to be replaced.  We gernerally inspect frequently enough to force the issue before a recall has ended, and the service providers know to get us involved if they have someone ignoring them.  The biggest problem we have faced recently is when they change service providers, the new tech finds something the old one either didn't find or ignored, and the recall has ended.  That puts the owner in a rough spot.  In those cases, we will work with the owner, within reason (within reason means the fire marshal approves a timeline - not me!).


----------

