Hi all ,I would like to replace my tired (AGM)(7yrs old) house batteries in our M/H
They have not been able to hold charge for some time now.
Would appreciate feedback on good quality and make. Many thanks.
Craig1 said
07:33 AM Jan 26, 2024
Full River
Possum3 said
08:15 AM Jan 26, 2024
Check out the deals on Aussie Batteries and Solar 120AH Deep Cycle AGM $269
Link www.aussiebatteries.com.au/
Cuppa said
09:25 AM Jan 26, 2024
Fullriver or Ritar. DC series.
Note there are now new requirements in place regarding this which apply to both new fitouts & AGM battery replacements if going to Lithium. (Since Nov 23)
TimTim said
10:01 AM Jan 26, 2024
Possum3 wrote:
Check out the deals on Aussie Batteries and Solar 120AH Deep Cycle AGM $269 Link www.aussiebatteries.com.au/
X2 only because my 120Ah AGM from them wont die even though I abused it. It now sits in the garage until I can find a use for it.
Personally, depending on your circumstances, I would upgrade to LiFePO4. Plenty here happy to help you out if you decide to go that way.
Forget all the hype on here and various websites about having to install them to the latest Australian Standard. If you want to make to just change them over that is your choice but then again if you want to make alterations so that it is in accordance with the Standard, then again it is your choice. There is no legislation that enforces the Standard.
Good luck
Tim
-- Edited by TimTim on Friday 26th of January 2024 10:11:23 AM
-- Edited by TimTim on Friday 26th of January 2024 10:12:30 AM
I use gel batteries in my car for fridge. Look at 2v gel batteries. Weight is not an issue at home & you should get 20 years out of them.
At the end of the day having spare AH for those difficult periods, you have better back up than lithium.
Cuppa said
12:53 PM Jan 26, 2024
TimTim wrote:
Forget all the hype on here and various websites about having to install them to the latest Australian Standard. If you want to make to just change them over that is your choice but then again if you want to make alterations so that it is in accordance with the Standard, then again it is your choice. There is no legislation that enforces the Standard.
Good luck
Is your statement based on reading the new standards? I'm only going on posts made which interpret the standards which mention 'requirements' & refer to 'enforceable standards' which strongly suggests to me that there are standards which must be adhered to/not optional.
To the OP. I have purchased here. Good value and good service. https://www.batteryvalue.com.au/ Cheers, Peter
TimTim said
03:27 PM Jan 26, 2024
Cuppa wrote:
TimTim wrote:
Forget all the hype on here and various websites about having to install them to the latest Australian Standard. If you want to make to just change them over that is your choice but then again if you want to make alterations so that it is in accordance with the Standard, then again it is your choice. There is no legislation that enforces the Standard.
Good luck
Is your statement based on reading the new standards? I'm only going on posts made which interpret the standards which mention 'requirements' & refer to 'enforceable standards' which strongly suggests to me that there are standards which must be adhered to/not optional.
No Cuppa. The information I posted is based on the current legislation not some website that states that the Australian Standard is enforceable. Enforceable by whom and under what legislation.
Yet another website that provides incorrect information.
No one has yet been able to provide the link to the legislation that calls up AS/NZ 3001.2:2022. That includes myself and a few others.
Just to clarify something for you. Australian Standards are voluntary documents unless called up by legislation. It is only then that they become referenced documents and even then it may be just part of a Standard that is called up and not all the Standard.
Plenty of links around that give the correct advice regarding Standards
Is conformingtoStandards mandatory?
Standards are not laws, so there is no general requirement to conform to a Standard. However, conforming to specific Standards is mandatory if there is a law which says you must conform with it.
The WHS laws require conformance with only a small number ofStandards.
The above is from the Safe Work Australia web page.
Standards and the Law
On their own, standards are voluntary. There is no requirement for the public to comply with standards. However, State and Commonwealth governments often refer to Australian Standards® (AS) or joint Australian/New Zealand Standards (AS/NZS) in their legislation.
When this happens, these standards can become mandatory.
The above link is from Standards Australia.
Good luck
Tim
TimTim said
03:32 PM Jan 26, 2024
Peter_n_Margaret wrote:
Don't waste your breath Cuppa.
To the OP. I have purchased here. Good value and good service. https://www.batteryvalue.com.au/ Cheers, Peter
Peter, you refuse to accept what is correct just like you have on another forum.
Provide the links to the legislation that backs your statement.
To the OP. I have purchased here. Good value and good service. https://www.batteryvalue.com.au/ Cheers, Peter
Now into my 4 year with my Battery Valve batteries at about a half the cost of top of shelf batteries.
Very happy customer.
Cuppa said
06:42 PM Jan 26, 2024
TimTim wrote:
Cuppa wrote:
TimTim wrote:
Forget all the hype on here and various websites about having to install them to the latest Australian Standard. If you want to make to just change them over that is your choice but then again if you want to make alterations so that it is in accordance with the Standard, then again it is your choice. There is no legislation that enforces the Standard.
Good luck
Is your statement based on reading the new standards? I'm only going on posts made which interpret the standards which mention 'requirements' & refer to 'enforceable standards' which strongly suggests to me that there are standards which must be adhered to/not optional.
No Cuppa. The information I posted is based on the current legislation not some website that states that the Australian Standard is enforceable. Enforceable by whom and under what legislation.
Yet another website that provides incorrect information.
Tim Tim, You may or may not be correct, I don't suppose anyone here knows one way or the other, but why would anyone take your word for it that so many others, like Redarc are wrong? And if they are wrong how is it that this can be so. Do you think they are deliberately misleading folk for a reason, or perhaps that they simply don't understand as well as you do.
Whether standards are, or are not enforceable under law, if a caravan manufacturer built & sold a product which did not conform to the standards & which subsequently caught fire or caused other problems because of a battery installation issue then I think they would be in a spot of bother. Likewise if someone were now doing a self install & had similar sort of problems, I expect we could be quite confident that their insurance company would have sufficient reason not to pay out to cover the costs of the damage. If I am correct in that assumption it would make advising others to ignore the standards poor & potentially dangerous advice.
-- Edited by Cuppa on Friday 26th of January 2024 06:48:45 PM
BarneyBDB said
09:00 PM Jan 26, 2024
So what you are saying is that everyone must shell out their dollars to pay for access to the standards and ensure anything they do does not contravene anything in those standards??
I guess an alternative would be to engage a full time law firm to ensure I comply??
Cassie63 said
07:53 AM Jan 27, 2024
I have Camec 120amp batteries 2 yr warranty nation wide
Cuppa said
08:41 AM Jan 27, 2024
BarneyBDB wrote:
So what you are saying is that everyone must shell out their dollars to pay for access to the standards and ensure anything they do does not contravene anything in those standards??
I guess an alternative would be to engage a full time law firm to ensure I comply??
Whether you, I or anyone else disagrees with the new standards is irrelevant. They exist. Folk doing installs either choose to meet the standards or they don't.
If they don't and problems arise as a result then there are likely to be consequences.
Cupie said
12:13 PM Jan 27, 2024
Snip ...
Whether standards are, or are not enforceable under law, if a caravan manufacturer built & sold a product which did not conform to the standards & which subsequently caught fire or caused other problems because of a battery installation issue then I think they would be in a spot of bother. Likewise if someone were now doing a self install & had similar sort of problems, I expect we could be quite confident that their insurance company would have sufficient reason not to pay out to cover the costs of the damage. If I am correct in that assumption it would make advising others to ignore the standards poor & potentially dangerous advice.
-- Edited by Cuppa on Friday 26th of January 2024 06:48:45 PM
Whilst not expressing a personal opinion on this particular issue, it occurs to me that on this & perhaps other forums people often suggest that Insurance Companies may refuse claims in cases such as this and for example an often quoted case - overweight rigs.
Has anyone first hand experience of an instance of this.
I believe that it is mostly Urban Myth .. Please enlighten me.
RE the current issue about Standards .. In my experience it is a minefield for DIY persons trying to interpret Standards. It seems to me that you would need to consult a trusted expert in the particular field. BTW I have a reasonable background as well as training, in using & contributing to writing various standards, particularly those relating to Quality Systems & Communications systems in buildings, albeit 25 years ago.
Cuppa said
12:51 PM Jan 27, 2024
Cupie wrote:
Snip ...
Whether standards are, or are not enforceable under law, if a caravan manufacturer built & sold a product which did not conform to the standards & which subsequently caught fire or caused other problems because of a battery installation issue then I think they would be in a spot of bother. Likewise if someone were now doing a self install & had similar sort of problems, I expect we could be quite confident that their insurance company would have sufficient reason not to pay out to cover the costs of the damage. If I am correct in that assumption it would make advising others to ignore the standards poor & potentially dangerous advice.
-- Edited by Cuppa on Friday 26th of January 2024 06:48:45 PM
Whilst not expressing a personal opinion on this particular issue, it occurs to me that on this & perhaps other forums people often suggest that Insurance Companies may refuse claims in cases such as this and for example an often quoted case - overweight rigs.
Has anyone first hand experience of an instance of this.
I believe that it is mostly Urban Myth .. Please enlighten me.
RE the current issue about Standards .. In my experience it is a minefield for DIY persons trying to interpret Standards. It seems to me that you would need to consult a trusted expert in the particular field. BTW I have a reasonable background as well as training, in using & contributing to writing various standards, particularly those relating to Quality Systems & Communications systems in buildings, albeit 25 years ago.
Not first hand (thankfully) but secondhand. A few years ago a friend of mine cracked the chassis of his overweight 4wd on one of our country's iconic 4wd routes. First thing he was asked when he made a claim was "Was your vehicle overweight". He lied & got away with it because he was too remote at the the time to make weighing his vehicle a practical proposition. There was no doubting that had he been somewhere where his vehicle could be weighed that the insurance company would have denied his claim. Dismiss this as perpetuation of 'urban myth' if you choose, but anyone who chooses to travel overweight in my view risks a denial of a claim, particularly if they are on a gazetted road with a vehicle deemed not to be 'legal' . What anyone chooses to do themselves is their decision, but I don't think you need to be particularly 'risk averse' to endeavour to have a legal vehicle - particularly in regard to any accident involving injury to another party.
As to your comment about standards, I agree with you that it can be a minefield. Over the last 2 or 3 decades we have seen a huge reduction in self built RV's, & in part at least I think this reflects not only changes in applicable standards, but also in the difficulty of understanding them & interpreting them. However like that situation or not we have them, & no doubt every time they change there will be long periods of confusion & uncertainty until such time that they are widely understood.
Cupie said
07:27 PM Jan 27, 2024
Thanks for that considered reply Cuppa.
It is exchanges like this that give value to the forum rather than the often extreme and personal attacks on those with differing views.
Peter_n_Margaret said
07:50 PM Jan 27, 2024
Slightly different insurance case, but some years ago I bent the OKA badly when it rolled down a hill with no one inside. The insurance assessor came to inspect the vehicle and had this to say.... "I have to ask this.... did you not engage the hand brake properly, or was it not working properly? I should tell you that we insure for 'stupid', we do not insure for 'poor maintenance'".
Incorrect/inappropriate/non approved design or installation of electrical equipment would quickly cause the rejection of a claim, in my view.
Cheers,
Peter
TimTim said
07:53 PM Jan 27, 2024
Cuppa wrote:
Tim Tim, You may or may not be correct, I don't suppose anyone here knows one way or the other, but why would anyone take your word for it that so many others, like Redarc are wrong? And if they are wrong how is it that this can be so. Do you think they are deliberately misleading folk for a reason, or perhaps that they simply don't understand as well as you do.
Whether standards are, or are not enforceable under law, if a caravan manufacturer built & sold a product which did not conform to the standards & which subsequently caught fire or caused other problems because of a battery installation issue then I think they would be in a spot of bother. Likewise if someone were now doing a self install & had similar sort of problems, I expect we could be quite confident that their insurance company would have sufficient reason not to pay out to cover the costs of the damage. If I am correct in that assumption it would make advising others to ignore the standards poor & potentially dangerous advice.
-- Edited by Cuppa on Friday 26th of January 2024 06:48:45 PM
Cuppa, whether you or anyone else dont believe me it matters not but Im happy to stand by what I state and provide the relevant links so that people know they have a choice. The OP is changing a battery over and according to some on here and another forum he now has to make changes to comply with the new standard. Those statements are merely based some internet websites and the issue is more and more websites are following simply because of marketing purposes.
Do I think they are deliberately misleading people? No! Do I think they have not researched their information properly? Most definitely yes! From my career in having to deal with hundreds of Australian Standards and and a substantial amount of legislation, nothing surprises me.
lets take a look at that Redarc link.
When are they enforced from?
The new standards are enforceable from 18 November 2023.
Enforceable by whom? Under what legislation and what are the penalties?
I have provided the link from Standards Australia so not much more than I can do in that regard.
As for caravan manufacturers complying with the Standard that is a different matter all together. There is Consumer Law that covers that and a contract between manufacturer and purchaser. Caravan manufacturers have issues in building to legislative requirements let alone those that are not covered by legislation as I discovered with my own van.
As for insurance companies, I dont subscribe to the Urban Myth And scaremongering. Yes they may ask questions in an effort to avoid paying out and I have had Sorry we dont pay out on that. reply only for me to have to go through the PDS to prove that they were wrong. The PDS is the key to any insurance claim.
As for you stating that my advise is poor and dangerous, then that your opinion. Im merely point out the facts that counteract the false information and urban myths that are being banded about.
Cuppa said
08:12 PM Jan 27, 2024
Tim Tim, I agree with you that people have a choice. To comply or not to comply. Where I am taking a view different to yours is you appearing to advise or condone folk not following the new standards. Not all choices are good choices, & those that are not have potentially unwanted consequences.
Your argument about law sounds similar (to me) to the type of legal argument we hear from 'Sovereign Citizens' from time to time. Basically jacking up against authority because they can.
We have an environment where reports of lithium battery fires have become more commonplace & as I see it new standards are belatedly (as always) trying to address this & make RV installations safer.
I accept that some companies will interpret new standards in a manner to benefit themselves, but the new standards do exist. If you are correct about the 'enforceable nature' of the new standards, I see this as no reason for ignoring the standards if doing an install, including replacing Lead acid batteries with Lithium drop in's.
If info in the public domain is incorrect because of sloppy or biased research, or simply from misunderstanding of 'enforceability' it should not detract from the intended outcome of greater safety for users.
And it is this improved safety which anyone now doing new installs or replacements should, I suggest be aiming for, rather than what they think they might get away with.
Perhaps I'm reading you wrong?
TimTim said
09:17 PM Jan 27, 2024
Cupie wrote:
Whilst not expressing a personal opinion on this particular issue, it occurs to me that on this & perhaps other forums people often suggest that Insurance Companies may refuse claims in cases such as this and for example an often quoted case - overweight rigs.
Has anyone first hand experience of an instance of this.
I believe that it is mostly Urban Myth .. Please enlighten me.
Hi Cupie
The example you have asked about is entirely different as an overweight rig is a contravention of law. In many cases it may be almost impossible to determine if the rig was overloaded unless the police take everything away and weigh it, which they would do in a case of a fatality. But if an insurance company asked if your rig was overloaded Im sure only the dumbest would answer yes lol
Im current involved in an insurance claim for a person that was refused. It is not related to a caravan but it involves an Australian Standard that is not called up by legislation. The insurance company sent out an engineer some 18 weeks later to do an assessment when they realised that the insured was still complaining. Then they did a second refusal based on the work didnt comply with the Australian Standard. Interestingly the design engineers documentation does not specify what year for the standard so the insurance companys engineer decided that it was the current standard for when the work was undertaken.
The lady wrote to AFCA (Australian Finacncial Complaints Authority) and the insurance company responded with their engineering report. Just by chance it was mentioned to me so i took it on for a promise of a smile and a thank you.
I contacted the design engineer and he confirmed that his design was based on the earlier standard and not the standard at the time he did his design. Quite often in my career I came across circumstances like that but what was more interesting is the design engineer sits on the committee that writes that particular standard and has so for over 30 years. So the design engineer didnt even do his design to the current standard. Sometimes things are not as straightforward as they seem.
We have gone from a straightforward refusal to the question of whether we would accept a settlement. I think they were waiting to see what our response is to their 4th report of 96 pages that was large font to bulk it up lol.
Our response sent on Thursday 120 pages tearing apart their engineer and his arguments.
It probably helps when you have probably one of the best young engineers in the country working with you but it has been a learning experience for him in terms of Australian Standards, experts, insurance companies and life in general. Some of us dont run scared of insurance companies or listen to the urban myths.
Tim
Cassie63 said
09:24 PM Jan 27, 2024
Normally new standards are enacted from a certain date. Sometimes there is a grandfather clause. Just like the building act if your building was built in 1960 your house must comply with the standard it was built.
TimTim said
11:46 PM Jan 27, 2024
Cuppa,
Sorry but you lost me with your comparison to Sovereign Citizens.
Fortunately my knowledge of legislation and Australian Standards have helped 100s of people with their issues. Im more than happy in that knowledge despite your silly comparison.
Lithium Ion batteries catching fire. Do some research on the chemistry of which lithium ion battery are catching fire. There are no documented cases of LiFePO4 batteries catching fire. They are safer than lead acid.
What you are implying is that if someone takes out a lead acid battery and installs a LiFePO4 battery (which is safer than lead acid) then that person should upgrade the whole of theirs system because of some perceived risk.
Is there any data on deaths and injuries from these perceived risks? Or has someone decided it is just a good idea. What you perceive as a risk is different to mine. You probably do things I wouldn't do and I probably do things you wouldnt do. We are all different.
At the end of the day put out the whole truth so that people can make up their own minds and not be guided by ones desires.
TimTim said
12:20 AM Jan 28, 2024
Cassie63 wrote:
Normally new standards are enacted from a certain date. Sometimes there is a grandfather clause. Just like the building act if your building was built in 1960 your house must comply with the standard it was built.
Actually Cassie back in 1960 and up to early 1980s there was very little legislation on the building of residential properties. Very few references to Australian Standards too. Each state would have been different or had similar legislation where Councils controlled and regulated the construction of buildings. It was the Commonwealth Bank that put out a little book that became the Acceptable Standards of Construction. i know in NSW Councils often referenced that book in the building approvals they issued. But then again the legislation was written for them to be able to do that.
Now of course we have what is called the Building Code of Australia with one volume dedicated to houses. It is a good deal thicker than the old Commonwealth Bank book
Pommystuart said
06:22 AM Jan 28, 2024
LiFePO4 battery require a different charge pattern from lead battery's. If you van is old (pre LiFePO4) they may not have the correct charger.
A tow truck drive told me a couple of days a go that there insurance company has made them install scales to way the vans as they come in, wrecks or repair.
Bicyclecamper said
11:55 AM Jan 28, 2024
Whenarewethere wrote:
I use gel batteries in my car for fridge. Look at 2v gel batteries. Weight is not an issue at home & you should get 20 years out of them.
At the end of the day having spare AH for those difficult periods, you have better back up than lithium.
I also have gel's, only battery I will ever have, but weight is the issue for them, if you go big. All of my previous gels have lasted 20 years plus, plus you can draw down to 80% of the battery's charge, with lithium's you can go down to 93%. Agm's 50%. I did go the agm way once, never again. For my camper I only run a 38ah gel and I only use Dia Mec batteries( made in Sth Korea), as that is all I need because, I can draw it down further then an agm. Add up what power requirements that you need, and you may only need 2 X 50 ah gels Or one 100AH.
-- Edited by Bicyclecamper on Sunday 28th of January 2024 12:03:41 PM
Whenarewethere said
12:22 PM Jan 28, 2024
I have four 26AH DiaMec so they would fit in around the car, otherwise would have got a 100AH.
I use them basically for the fridge. Plus a handful of times to jumpstart other cars (360 amps for 5 minutes or 1040 amps briefly) handy!
When I need to replace them I see no need to go lithium.
If one draws right down a lead acid battery once a month, it's only 60 times over 5 years. It will make no difference to the life of the battery.
Plenty of AH for inclement weather is worth a lot.
Cuppa said
01:15 PM Jan 28, 2024
TimTim wrote:
Cuppa,
What you are implying is that if someone takes out a lead acid battery and installs a LiFePO4 battery (which is safer than lead acid) then that person should upgrade the whole of theirs system because of some perceived risk.
TT, at no time have I suggested that I agree, or otherwise with the new standards. I am not qualified to take either position. I, like most of us, have to accept that those making the standards have some idea about what the standards include & why they are needed.
You infer that you have sufficient knowledge to understand the standards, & that being the case I simply think it would make more sense, & be more professional if you addressed your concerns to the experts who are responsible for the standards rather than to lay people. Lobby to have the standards changed if you feel they are inappropriate rather than encouraging folk to ignore them.
-- Edited by Cuppa on Sunday 28th of January 2024 01:16:39 PM
Hi all ,I would like to replace my tired (AGM)(7yrs old) house batteries in our M/H
They have not been able to hold charge for some time now.
Would appreciate feedback on good quality and make. Many thanks.
Link www.aussiebatteries.com.au/
Note there are now new requirements in place regarding this which apply to both new fitouts & AGM battery replacements if going to Lithium. (Since Nov 23)
X2 only because my 120Ah AGM from them wont die even though I abused it. It now sits in the garage until I can find a use for it.
Personally, depending on your circumstances, I would upgrade to LiFePO4. Plenty here happy to help you out if you decide to go that way.
Forget all the hype on here and various websites about having to install them to the latest Australian Standard. If you want to make to just change them over that is your choice but then again if you want to make alterations so that it is in accordance with the Standard, then again it is your choice. There is no legislation that enforces the Standard.
Good luck
Tim
-- Edited by TimTim on Friday 26th of January 2024 10:11:23 AM
-- Edited by TimTim on Friday 26th of January 2024 10:12:30 AM
I use gel batteries in my car for fridge. Look at 2v gel batteries. Weight is not an issue at home & you should get 20 years out of them.
At the end of the day having spare AH for those difficult periods, you have better back up than lithium.
Is your statement based on reading the new standards? I'm only going on posts made which interpret the standards which mention 'requirements' & refer to 'enforceable standards' which strongly suggests to me that there are standards which must be adhered to/not optional.
Eg. https://www.redarcelectronics.com/au/discover/new-caravan-standards/
Don't waste your breath Cuppa.
To the OP. I have purchased here. Good value and good service.
https://www.batteryvalue.com.au/
Cheers,
Peter
No Cuppa. The information I posted is based on the current legislation not some website that states that the Australian Standard is enforceable. Enforceable by whom and under what legislation.
Yet another website that provides incorrect information.
No one has yet been able to provide the link to the legislation that calls up AS/NZ 3001.2:2022. That includes myself and a few others.
Just to clarify something for you. Australian Standards are voluntary documents unless called up by legislation. It is only then that they become referenced documents and even then it may be just part of a Standard that is called up and not all the Standard.
Plenty of links around that give the correct advice regarding Standards
Is conforming to Standards mandatory?
Standards are not laws, so there is no general requirement to conform to a Standard. However, conforming to specific Standards is mandatory if there is a law which says you must conform with it.
The WHS laws require conformance with only a small number of Standards.
The above is from the Safe Work Australia web page.
Standards and the Law
On their own, standards are voluntary. There is no requirement for the public to comply with standards. However, State and Commonwealth governments often refer to Australian Standards® (AS) or joint Australian/New Zealand Standards (AS/NZS) in their legislation.
When this happens, these standards can become mandatory.
The above link is from Standards Australia.
Good luck
Tim
Peter, you refuse to accept what is correct just like you have on another forum.
Provide the links to the legislation that backs your statement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBZ6GPCJcxM
www.cbos.tas.gov.au/topics/technical-regulation/electrical-standard-safety/performance/caravan-compliance-certificates
www.sa.gov.au/topics/driving-and-transport/vehicles/vehicle-standards-and-modifications/campervans-and-motorhomes/light-motorhome-conversion
www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/vsb1-revision-6-trailers-with-an-aggregate-trailer-mass-of-4.5-tonnes-or-less.pdf
Cheers,
Peter
Now into my 4 year with my Battery Valve batteries at about a half the cost of top of shelf batteries.
Very happy customer.
Tim Tim, You may or may not be correct, I don't suppose anyone here knows one way or the other, but why would anyone take your word for it that so many others, like Redarc are wrong? And if they are wrong how is it that this can be so. Do you think they are deliberately misleading folk for a reason, or perhaps that they simply don't understand as well as you do.
Whether standards are, or are not enforceable under law, if a caravan manufacturer built & sold a product which did not conform to the standards & which subsequently caught fire or caused other problems because of a battery installation issue then I think they would be in a spot of bother. Likewise if someone were now doing a self install & had similar sort of problems, I expect we could be quite confident that their insurance company would have sufficient reason not to pay out to cover the costs of the damage. If I am correct in that assumption it would make advising others to ignore the standards poor & potentially dangerous advice.
-- Edited by Cuppa on Friday 26th of January 2024 06:48:45 PM
I guess an alternative would be to engage a full time law firm to ensure I comply??
Whether you, I or anyone else disagrees with the new standards is irrelevant. They exist. Folk doing installs either choose to meet the standards or they don't.
If they don't and problems arise as a result then there are likely to be consequences.
Whilst not expressing a personal opinion on this particular issue, it occurs to me that on this & perhaps other forums people often suggest that Insurance Companies may refuse claims in cases such as this and for example an often quoted case - overweight rigs.
Has anyone first hand experience of an instance of this.
I believe that it is mostly Urban Myth .. Please enlighten me.
RE the current issue about Standards .. In my experience it is a minefield for DIY persons trying to interpret Standards. It seems to me that you would need to consult a trusted expert in the particular field. BTW I have a reasonable background as well as training, in using & contributing to writing various standards, particularly those relating to Quality Systems & Communications systems in buildings, albeit 25 years ago.
Not first hand (thankfully) but secondhand. A few years ago a friend of mine cracked the chassis of his overweight 4wd on one of our country's iconic 4wd routes. First thing he was asked when he made a claim was "Was your vehicle overweight". He lied & got away with it because he was too remote at the the time to make weighing his vehicle a practical proposition. There was no doubting that had he been somewhere where his vehicle could be weighed that the insurance company would have denied his claim. Dismiss this as perpetuation of 'urban myth' if you choose, but anyone who chooses to travel overweight in my view risks a denial of a claim, particularly if they are on a gazetted road with a vehicle deemed not to be 'legal' . What anyone chooses to do themselves is their decision, but I don't think you need to be particularly 'risk averse' to endeavour to have a legal vehicle - particularly in regard to any accident involving injury to another party.
As to your comment about standards, I agree with you that it can be a minefield. Over the last 2 or 3 decades we have seen a huge reduction in self built RV's, & in part at least I think this reflects not only changes in applicable standards, but also in the difficulty of understanding them & interpreting them. However like that situation or not we have them, & no doubt every time they change there will be long periods of confusion & uncertainty until such time that they are widely understood.
Thanks for that considered reply Cuppa.
It is exchanges like this that give value to the forum rather than the often extreme and personal attacks on those with differing views.
Slightly different insurance case, but some years ago I bent the OKA badly when it rolled down a hill with no one inside.
The insurance assessor came to inspect the vehicle and had this to say....
"I have to ask this.... did you not engage the hand brake properly, or was it not working properly?
I should tell you that we insure for 'stupid', we do not insure for 'poor maintenance'".
Incorrect/inappropriate/non approved design or installation of electrical equipment would quickly cause the rejection of a claim, in my view.
Cheers,
Peter
Tim Tim, You may or may not be correct, I don't suppose anyone here knows one way or the other, but why would anyone take your word for it that so many others, like Redarc are wrong? And if they are wrong how is it that this can be so. Do you think they are deliberately misleading folk for a reason, or perhaps that they simply don't understand as well as you do.
Cuppa, whether you or anyone else dont believe me it matters not but Im happy to stand by what I state and provide the relevant links so that people know they have a choice. The OP is changing a battery over and according to some on here and another forum he now has to make changes to comply with the new standard. Those statements are merely based some internet websites and the issue is more and more websites are following simply because of marketing purposes.
Do I think they are deliberately misleading people? No! Do I think they have not researched their information properly? Most definitely yes! From my career in having to deal with hundreds of Australian Standards and and a substantial amount of legislation, nothing surprises me.
lets take a look at that Redarc link.
When are they enforced from?
The new standards are enforceable from 18 November 2023.
Enforceable by whom? Under what legislation and what are the penalties?
I have provided the link from Standards Australia so not much more than I can do in that regard.
As for caravan manufacturers complying with the Standard that is a different matter all together. There is Consumer Law that covers that and a contract between manufacturer and purchaser. Caravan manufacturers have issues in building to legislative requirements let alone those that are not covered by legislation as I discovered with my own van.
https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/caravan-industry-on-notice-for-poor-treatment-of-consumers
As for insurance companies, I dont subscribe to the Urban Myth And scaremongering. Yes they may ask questions in an effort to avoid paying out and I have had Sorry we dont pay out on that. reply only for me to have to go through the PDS to prove that they were wrong. The PDS is the key to any insurance claim.
As for you stating that my advise is poor and dangerous, then that your opinion. Im merely point out the facts that counteract the false information and urban myths that are being banded about.
Your argument about law sounds similar (to me) to the type of legal argument we hear from 'Sovereign Citizens' from time to time. Basically jacking up against authority because they can.
We have an environment where reports of lithium battery fires have become more commonplace & as I see it new standards are belatedly (as always) trying to address this & make RV installations safer.
I accept that some companies will interpret new standards in a manner to benefit themselves, but the new standards do exist. If you are correct about the 'enforceable nature' of the new standards, I see this as no reason for ignoring the standards if doing an install, including replacing Lead acid batteries with Lithium drop in's.
If info in the public domain is incorrect because of sloppy or biased research, or simply from misunderstanding of 'enforceability' it should not detract from the intended outcome of greater safety for users.
And it is this improved safety which anyone now doing new installs or replacements should, I suggest be aiming for, rather than what they think they might get away with.
Perhaps I'm reading you wrong?
Hi Cupie
The example you have asked about is entirely different as an overweight rig is a contravention of law. In many cases it may be almost impossible to determine if the rig was overloaded unless the police take everything away and weigh it, which they would do in a case of a fatality. But if an insurance company asked if your rig was overloaded Im sure only the dumbest would answer yes lol
Im current involved in an insurance claim for a person that was refused. It is not related to a caravan but it involves an Australian Standard that is not called up by legislation. The insurance company sent out an engineer some 18 weeks later to do an assessment when they realised that the insured was still complaining. Then they did a second refusal based on the work didnt comply with the Australian Standard. Interestingly the design engineers documentation does not specify what year for the standard so the insurance companys engineer decided that it was the current standard for when the work was undertaken.
The lady wrote to AFCA (Australian Finacncial Complaints Authority) and the insurance company responded with their engineering report. Just by chance it was mentioned to me so i took it on for a promise of a smile and a thank you.
I contacted the design engineer and he confirmed that his design was based on the earlier standard and not the standard at the time he did his design. Quite often in my career I came across circumstances like that but what was more interesting is the design engineer sits on the committee that writes that particular standard and has so for over 30 years. So the design engineer didnt even do his design to the current standard. Sometimes things are not as straightforward as they seem.
We have gone from a straightforward refusal to the question of whether we would accept a settlement. I think they were waiting to see what our response is to their 4th report of 96 pages that was large font to bulk it up lol.
Our response sent on Thursday 120 pages tearing apart their engineer and his arguments.
It probably helps when you have probably one of the best young engineers in the country working with you but it has been a learning experience for him in terms of Australian Standards, experts, insurance companies and life in general. Some of us dont run scared of insurance companies or listen to the urban myths.
Tim
Cuppa,
Sorry but you lost me with your comparison to Sovereign Citizens.
Fortunately my knowledge of legislation and Australian Standards have helped 100s of people with their issues. Im more than happy in that knowledge despite your silly comparison.
Lithium Ion batteries catching fire. Do some research on the chemistry of which lithium ion battery are catching fire. There are no documented cases of LiFePO4 batteries catching fire. They are safer than lead acid.
What you are implying is that if someone takes out a lead acid battery and installs a LiFePO4 battery (which is safer than lead acid) then that person should upgrade the whole of theirs system because of some perceived risk.
Is there any data on deaths and injuries from these perceived risks? Or has someone decided it is just a good idea. What you perceive as a risk is different to mine. You probably do things I wouldn't do and I probably do things you wouldnt do. We are all different.
At the end of the day put out the whole truth so that people can make up their own minds and not be guided by ones desires.
Actually Cassie back in 1960 and up to early 1980s there was very little legislation on the building of residential properties. Very few references to Australian Standards too. Each state would have been different or had similar legislation where Councils controlled and regulated the construction of buildings. It was the Commonwealth Bank that put out a little book that became the Acceptable Standards of Construction. i know in NSW Councils often referenced that book in the building approvals they issued. But then again the legislation was written for them to be able to do that.
Now of course we have what is called the Building Code of Australia with one volume dedicated to houses. It is a good deal thicker than the old Commonwealth Bank book
A tow truck drive told me a couple of days a go that there insurance company has made them install scales to way the vans as they come in, wrecks or repair.
I also have gel's, only battery I will ever have, but weight is the issue for them, if you go big. All of my previous gels have lasted 20 years plus, plus you can draw down to 80% of the battery's charge, with lithium's you can go down to 93%. Agm's 50%. I did go the agm way once, never again. For my camper I only run a 38ah gel and I only use Dia Mec batteries( made in Sth Korea), as that is all I need because, I can draw it down further then an agm. Add up what power requirements that you need, and you may only need 2 X 50 ah gels Or one 100AH.
-- Edited by Bicyclecamper on Sunday 28th of January 2024 12:03:41 PM
I have four 26AH DiaMec so they would fit in around the car, otherwise would have got a 100AH.
I use them basically for the fridge. Plus a handful of times to jumpstart other cars (360 amps for 5 minutes or 1040 amps briefly) handy!
When I need to replace them I see no need to go lithium.
If one draws right down a lead acid battery once a month, it's only 60 times over 5 years. It will make no difference to the life of the battery.
Plenty of AH for inclement weather is worth a lot.
-- Edited by Cuppa on Sunday 28th of January 2024 01:16:39 PM