Jump to content

Fines for non compliance


Recommended Posts

I have followed some of the threads in this forum with interest and thanks to all for sharing such vaulauable information.

Knowing how well-informed some people are on the topic of non-compliance, I am keen to know, since the introduction of the legislation, how many pool owners/giteurs (and the like) have been penalised this year and what has been the value of these fines.

Many thnks in advance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot answer your

question definitively.

All I know for sure is that the regional governments are employing inspectors

to check pools for compliance.

I am guessing that this will commence some time in the new year after the

introduction of the law for domestic users. Hence It would be reasonable to

assume that in the absence of personnel to get around the pools, both

commercial and domestic, then there would be no cases brought to justice as

yet. But again I don't know.

There has been some muttering from the DDASS that there was 'information

exchange' as they do have regular inspections of commercial pools to check

water quality. So I am sure that there Authorities know who is and is not

complaint in the commercial arena but as yet would not know about the domestic

scene. This will surely change, as the protagonists of this law Messers Sarkozy

et al. are not shy about imposing their will.

If I were to wager when and how many, I would say that its likely to be

sometime in January or February when the first charges are levied, as to who,

that is too long a bet, but I'm tending toward commercial as there would be no individual

there to vilify. A business will be more able to pay whereas an individual may surely

face bankrupsy with the imposition of 45,000 euro fine for the infringement. So

the first prosecution will be a very carefully chosen so that public side with

Government and demand , the vile infractor must be crucified, they must see the

blood of the dilatants. From there, all others will be old and less important

news but nonetheless significant for those who are caught

Concominently, we are facing a period of change where the swimming pool

industry in France in being dragged into line with the standards of that of

exemplar countries. I cannot see a weakening of this position as there would be

harder for the government than pressing ahead..

Andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
We will all know when it happens because there will be a lot of

publicity - but this is probably not the main issue at the moment.

There seems to be a gathering consensus in the industry that

alarms  do not work - and I agree.  Unfortunately it is very

likely that sooner or later a child will drown and the pool alarm will

either be found to have been  deactivated because it was going off

at random times at day and night or it just did not work!

The alarms will then be removed from the approved list and everyone

will have to have an approved cover or a fence - and they cost several

times what an alarm costs.

The law is also up for review - this year I believe - and fences may even be removed then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Will Witt"]and the pool alarm will either be found to have been  deactivated because it was going off at random times at day and night or it just did not work!

[/quote]

Ours has just gone off for the 4th time this morning.  The pool is covered by a heavy bache, pulled taut by strong elastics all round, and there's nothing in the pool that shouldn't be there.   It's pretty breezy today, so I guess that's what it is.

We're going out this afternoon, so do we switch it off and leave the pool (in theory) unprotected, or do we leave it on and seriously annoy the neighbours?

Waste of 400 euros, but our only option to be legal!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saligo Bay

Do I read correctly that you have an alarm (complaint I suppose) in

your pool and a winter cover over it. If that is the case and the cover

touches the water then you are not complaint at anytime in my opinion

as the alarm will not operate as it was designed to.

If I have got it wrong then I guess that you are having difficulty with

the sensitivity setting of the alarm, in which case I should recommend

that you seek technical assistance from the place of purchase.

Switching the alarm off though I cannot see is a viable option as you

are not compliant, a pointless exercise.

Will, underlines the point that these are not the best solution for

this obligation which now faces pool owners, which has been my position

for some time. Any economy they might offer is, in my opinion more then

offset by the aggrevation, annoyance and lack of coverage they provide.

For those who have purchase I can only suggest that you regard them as

a stop gap measure whilst funds may be sort for a more effective

measure as I too do not beleive that they will be listed as an option

for very long.

Andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have thought that if alarms (on which many of us spent €1000 in order to be bonnes eleves) and even fences are removed from the list of approved measures then the legislation will be widely viewed as risible and will therefore fall into complete limbo.

Which would be a shame given what it was designed to do (save lives).

But maybe such an echec will sharpen up the need to re-establish parental responsibility by demonstrating the futility of legislating on matters best addressed in other ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....which slightly changes things.  Shows I read your post carefully though!

Even so,  if punters like me (miles from the nearest house, but who have stumped up to be "legal",  unlike most of our French friends to date) find that €1000 hasn't brought us into line with the law I think there will be a mass disobedience movement.  Unless the government would like to refund us our money so that we can put it towards a new security system.

My feeling,  which I know conflicts with others on here,  is that the enforcement part of all (at least for private owners) this will be quietly forgotten.

But time will prove me right or wrong!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least you "only" paid €400.   I continue to seethe at the fact I paid the wretched Chirac €196 in TVA alone for the pleasure of complying with his law.    If it was really a question of child security the VAT would have been 5.5% or zero.  

Like you I have a winter cover over the pool,  which I now gather invalidates the alarm.   It's probably shrieking now:  I am in Devon,  it is in Perigord.

Personally I think a child who had wandered from the nearest house 700 m away would stand more chance of surviving and crawling to safety with the cover in place.   An alarm that no-one can hear isn't going to save it.      (In fact yer nearest actual child is over 1 km away)

I shall start worrying about the fine when our French friends start worrying about it.  In the meantime I have installed an alarm.   Pointe finale.  

Déclamation extravagante finie.

And yes ours seems more sensitive to wind than waves!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was really a question of child security the VAT would have been 5.5% or zero. 

No,  5.5% never applies to luxury items, and though it may be a question of safety the pool and anything connected to it will always be a luxury.

Thats why anything to do with pools are specifically excluded from the 5.5% rules.

Im afraid that if you enjoy a pool you pay for it and the obligations that come with it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well indeed that may be the excise law but it doesn't make me feel any better.

Chirac has made - I guess - about €200,000,000 on VAT from this across the Hexagon.  Hardly a proud record..........

A safety device is a safety device not a luxury in my book.

But tax is there to make us all suffer,  not to be sensible!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That about sums it up; You can import the fence from wherever you like, but as far as I know there you won’t find any outside of France that has the AFNOR label.

There was a debate on this a while ago following a programme on M6 (Capital) that showed how much more expensive some approved alarms were compared to American equivalents. As usual the debate tailed off, but could be summarised thus: you can install an equivalent non-AFNOR safety precaution, but if the day ever came when there was an accident then the book would duly be thrown at you.

I’m afraid the pool laws are a bit like speeding; you are OK unless there is an accident or if you are caught. The difference with speeding in France is that at present the law makes no provision for any inspections, only post accident enforcement. This is why the majority of French pool owners are proceeding on an “it won’t happen to me” basis. In other words exactly how they used to treat speeding until a couple of years ago.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

replies to two points raised earlier.

1. Alarms - Will is quite right about the growing consensus in the industry about the effectiveness of alarms.

There were several instances last summer where a child nearly drowned in a pool equipped with an approved alarm. In each instance the alarm had been deactivated, as per the instructions, for the family to swim. In the period between leaving the pool and the alarm automatically resetting itself the children fell in. As the water had not settled from the swimming the alarm was still dormant so did not go off. This is clearly a problem area that the authorities have to deal with.

In the USA, and everywhere else with common sense, an alarm is seen as the final layer of security to be used in conjunction with a fence, or other passive physical barrier. After all, an alarm doesn't keep your child out of the water, it alerts you to the fact that your child is either drowning or is already dead.

I do not know of any other country with pool safety laws where an alarm is considered sufficient security by itself.

2. Importing fences. There are a couple of fencing products manufactured outside France (in the USA where all this started 20 years ago) that are AFNOR approved. They are of course available in France through a network of agents as no company will go to the trouble of obtaining approval (and it is long winded and expensive) without ensuring that their product is available in the marketplace.

There has been a lot of discussion about inflated prices of fencing on this forum, but in actual fact the installed price of these products in France, before the TVA ! is roughly equivalent to the installed price in the USA despite the additional costs of freight, customs duty etc. So, even if you buy elsewhere, when you add in airfreight, duty & TVA (on the purchase cost plus the freight cost) you'll finish up paying more than buying locally.

As far as ignoring the legislation, BJSLIV is right. Until inspections are mandatory lots of people will ignore the law. Tragically kids will die because of this. In 2003, June to September alone, there were 172 drowning incidents in private pools reported to the authorites, which resulted in 52 deaths...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

http://www.destinationsante.com/article.cfm?ContentID=15020

You will see from the above article (16 May 2006) that questions are being asked about the reliabilty of alarms after the death of some children despite the presence of alarms.

A report is expected by the end of the month, ......the government will have to decide ............then the law wiull need to be changed......and then time for implemantation.........

But we all knew from the start that many of the approved alarms were of questionable worth and they were really only a matter of ticking the box.of compliance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Richardh"]So, even if you buy elsewhere, when you add in airfreight, duty & TVA (on the purchase cost plus the freight cost) you'll finish up paying more than buying locally.[/quote]

But the fact that people are even thinking about importing fences, does that not mean that French prices are too high?   I mean, they're buying elsewhere because it's cheaper there.   There's no two ways about it, prices are too high, considering French wages and cost of living. 

[quote user="Richardh"]As far as ignoring the legislation, BJSLIV is right. Until inspections are mandatory lots of people will ignore the law. [/quote]

As they ignore many other laws.   I thought that's what people found attractive about France?  [:)]

Swimming pools are still a whole lot safer than the roads - 392 deaths on French roads in April alone.

But yes, alarms are a tick in the box, they're useless.  1. They go off in a gust of wind.  2. You can jump in and be half way down the pool before the alarm goes off.    Complete waste of 400 euros.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be most appreciated if anyone can provide those of us with

AFNOR certified pool alarms where it is stated that they have been

removed from the list of AFNOR approved pool security devices. 

Since Auchan was just advertising several in their latest summer sale

brochure (two weeks ago), it seems they too haven't been told.

Please advise.  Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.destinationsante.com/article.cfm?ContentID=15020

As I said, if you read this link from earlier this month a report will be out soon, it will then be a question of whether or not the law is to be changed. They can't just become unapproved overnight because they are approved by statute. At present alarms are legal, its just that they are useless.

Removing alarms would make it much easier to impose a sanction if there were to be a fatality. It would be much easier to pin the blame on someone if the a gate had been left open or if the lid wasn't closed. At present an alarm might fail, or nobody happened to respond to the alarm etc etc.

The sooner they go the better as far as I am concerned.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what happens to all us mugs who shelled out 700 euros for an aquasensor alarm?

Yes I agree with everybody that they are useless, but we did not all know that when we were sold them.

But if one pays out a lot of money to comply with some ill thought out legislation, then surely there must be some form of compensation so we can put in a proper system for security.

Rant over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What

BJSLIV
says is correct.

I understand that the meeting was to be help last week after being

posponned from the week before. The Committee will decide to exclude

alarms from the list or not.

It has been sponsored buy the revelation that there have been three

deaths of toddlers in pools with alarms on them since the law was

introduced. The conculsion should be that they are not effective and so

should be considered for removal from the list. This is not new, it was

mooted last year, but the law passed as is with ammendments(but not

that one). I think that this law will be changed a few times in the

coming years to make it more workable.

In the mean time I can offer no comfort to those who only have alarms,

other than to consider another form of security whcih will provide a

better level of proetection.  I have never thought that these

should remain as the sole level of protection. But in service with an

automatic compliant cover, then I do beleive they have a place.

Andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...