Author Topic: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014 (Read 235434 times)

Badger · « **Reply #615 on:** February 17, 2017, 11:39:38 AM »

The other backlash to the shortage of tradesman......a flood of newbies......

Supply and demand......when these new guys have helped build the shortage of housing....what are they going to do?....well when we have a surplus of tradies wages go down....and today we can demand a bit more because of the shortage.....

If only we could all see the big picture....what's good for one side (employee's/employer's) today is bad for the other and vice versa tomorrow.....

If you want to grow something strong and durable you do it slow and steady with as little fluctuations of extremes as possible......those that over fill their pocket today rob the future.....

I thought it was for those that govern, to steady the ship.....not rob its hull.

I would be happy to address this in a public forum and discuss the corruption that appears to attempt to cover up a near fatal explosion in his back yard of Nelson and have him put his point of view forward, in front of the people who he appears to refuse to represent with regards to the risks inflicted upon his constituency, in front of that constituency.

Perhaps an opposition member could join us and we could all air our concerns at the Nelson Market.

Got until September to arrange, anyone want to hold the camera....

Badger · « **Reply #616 on:** February 18, 2017, 03:45:59 PM »

So as you can all see I can prove that I did nothing wrong, think about it.....even in a biased and weighted hearing I could prove 42 out of 44 trumped up charges were just that, totally trumped up...

My case, showed the massive ignored omitted information/altered certs/faults....even certs with twink on them and different colour inks showing what was added after signature.....basically the PGDB maladministration of the "safety" cert system entrusted to them, that resulted in the disclaimer of accuracy....

My case uncovered huge relationships and conflicts of interest....

Another fraud and manipulation of certs by yet another person, other than Darnley on the West coast.....

I was lied about and lied to.......

My family suffered massively because of this.......

So now the new guys just ignore me......I think that speaks volumes of what any one of you can expect to get.......blatantly f****ed over then ignored.....

What do you think will happen when, that's when.....the even bigger holes start to appear in our new joke of a system?

Will they put their hand up and say...oh we made a mistake.....we'll shoulder the blame for that one......

Or will they say .......righto, bend over lets see how far this goes in.......

This new crew, that I thought had some moral fibre......they are like a flock of geese......when the one at the front gets tired or totally f****s up....they just change the one at the front and keep flying the same pre-determined destination...... to their condo down south for the winter, all financed by us.....

Paul Gee <plumbngas@gmail.com>

Feb 14 (4 days ago)

to Martin

Martin,
Please can you do me the common courteously in confirming receipt of my recent emails. I have made requests under an OIA and so can expect an answer to my request within 20 working days.

I can assure you that my request is neither frivolous nor vexatious. As loosing my business, home and reputation to a corrupt process and hearing whilst my wife was terrorised is very serious. I would hope you would think so too.

A good ethical test of a situation is whether you can tell your wife and family what you have done and be proud and hold your head high, I have the full backing of mine.

Paul

Paul Gee <plumbngas@gmail.com>
Feb 13 (5 days ago)
to Martin

Martin,

Please see link below, so that you are aware of my posts on the Plumbers forum, I feel it fair to let you know that this is where I have posted the inaction by the PGDB in not looking into the corruption surrounding and permeating through my case and in doing so protecting John Darnley at the very real risk to the NZ public.

I will also place this email on the same thread and your reply, if I receive one.....please can you write it as though you are talking to the industry as a whole, if you decide to ignore this email then I would put it to you that you are happy to ignore corruption and how it effects the industry.

http://www.plumbers.co.nz/forum/fellow-practitioners-update/41/fellow-practitioner-issue-236-dated-12-december-2014/1810/msg10677#msg10677

Yours so very sincerely Paul Gee

Badger · « **Reply #617 on:** February 18, 2017, 03:57:37 PM »

I did not realise that corruption had a sell by date.....if I joined an organisation like this and saw the levels of corruption and ineptitude I would not want it swept under the carpet and help cover it up....I would air it for the sake of its diminishing integrity.....

For me, just in my opinion I would feel like a liar and a hypocrite every time I pontificated in public about safety and I certainly couldn't bring myself to say.....

“What consumers need to know is, a certifying gasfitter must provide a signed gasfitting certificate where restricted work has been carried out in this scenario. Consumers should stay safe and ask for a copy of this at the time of purchase or modifications – it is peace of mind that the gasfitting work has been conducted in a legal capacity”.

I would feel a fraud to utter this statement above in red, when I was in full knowledge of my case and the safety risks to the people of Nelson, all done by Darnley under the empowerment of the PGDB, and conveniently covered up by them to boot....a total and utter fraud, that's how it would make me feel personally.

But some people can just take it in their stride I suppose, ignoring the world that they are helping to establish for others....

Badger · « **Reply #618 on:** February 20, 2017, 09:40:57 AM »

So this is a synopsis of how dodgy the findings are against me, these are the findings Martin Sawyers won't talk to me about.....you take a look and go get the lube ready for when the utterly ludicrous cert system we work under now goes terribly wrong.....

I wrote this some time ago and have presented it to people in power......no one even the Ombudsman thinks my case needs looking at......good luck guys, you are about to run the gauntlet....

Paul Gee PGDB Disciplinary Hearing

Summary of Charges

You could be forgiven for thinking that the hearing and process I was subjected to was a fair and unbiased procedure, based solely on its outcome.

44 charges were laid and I answered 42 charges. Being found 95% innocent of any wrong doing is a very good result, but if this other 5% of charges were “up-held” (and were aided to be up-held by the investigators mate chairing the hearing, who then stopped the hearing just as we were questioning the investigator specifically about this very 5% of the charges). And it was all done as a last grasp at keeping a 100% conviction rate (openly boasted about by the PGDB), and done to save face and justify a $220 000.00 price tag, with still no one held accountable for a near fatal explosion….. Well it is reprehensible and a true reflection of the arrogance and the lows these people will stoop to protect their ego's, positions, salaries and reputations.

My business was already shutdown before the so called hearing by the totally untrue letters sent by the PGDB to all the sites of charges (except the explosion) that alluded that I was selling illegal certs in Northland and other upper North Island areas, places I have never even visited let alone sold certs of even carried out any work in. The PGDB have admitted these untrue letters could give the impression I was capable of selling illegal documents......rescinded/apologised for after the hearing and after my business was kaput.

Please before you read this summary of charges below, please read and bear in mind these points and then the 3 documents listed below and attached.

•   Nearly 50% of the charges were amended at the last minute, application for amendments made on 1/2/11, the hearing on the 3/5/11, after over 2 years of investigation.

•   Evidence, photos and notes were withheld and misrepresented.

•   Huge conflicts of interest ignored and witnesses added just days out from hearing.

•   Mr Bickers, who later became Board Chair (but resigned for personal reasons) was on the panel for my hearing and he witnessed what I am about to tell you about in these charges first hand. Of note Mr Bickers runs a course called the “Role of the Processional Witness”, specifically about a hearings procedure and its goal of achieving a proper and fair outcome.

Doc 1. Mr Bickers further sullying of my reputation in my local news paper, just days after the hearing. See attachment B1, (B1).

Doc 2. The so called “apology” from the Board, signed by Mr Bickers. This letter referred to in the apology, in my opinion, prejudiced all additional sites prior to my hearing, all sites other than the site of the explosion, with a very “un”- truth, implying that I was capable of acting in an unlawful manner. It was sent to areas spanning my whole business history, with the Mot high school, right in the middle, which I believe was no mistake.(B2).

Doc 3. All or at the very least 3 years of my work was audited, this is evidenced by the time gap in the investigation and also a letter from a Board lawyer and a comment on an MPs letter, but the investigator states only 10 % was audited. (B3 & 4)

See below for the Charges and how they were dis-proven. I ask you will this “justice” help our country, industry or protect the public. I kept my licenses, but lost my reputation, home and business, and now nearly 50% of licences are being uplifted for this year, almost half tradesman not bothering.

Please note, it is not an exhaustive list of proof and concerns, and I have tried to be brief.........

Milton Street chipshop.

1.   This is the site of the explosion that started this whole affair. I proved that the initial install of pipe work had in all probability been altered along its entire length from how I had originally installed it. I installed a “pre-pipe” under instruction from my then boss John Darnley. All evidence for the person responsible for these alterations I believe pointing to Darnley or someone under his direction, but he was never asked about it.

2.   The bayonets were lowered, as evidenced by the withheld photos showing screw holes of previous position and the pipe falling from the corner of the room to the position of the Bayonets which is contrary to all the other “audit” photos of my work. These withheld photos were taken by the forensic expert, these photos only became apparent to me at the hearing, but were available to the investigator very early on and reaffirmed what I had maintained for two years. Over 120 photos were taken with only about 11 made available.

3.    I had completed my involvement with the installation on the 15th, as evidenced by the date of the leak test date (of note the 15 of this test date being in a different colour ink to the rest of the cert, and not in my hand), but the offending fryers were delivered on 24th . (B5 & 6)

4.   There was a pizza oven installed half way along, one year later. The cert for the pizza oven being the one that wasn't registered by Darnley, as per the Board. This “pizza” cert lacked any information entered into the gas leak test field on all available copies (all copies available are totally in Darnley’s name). The Board were aware of this “non” registration, just 9 days after the explosion, well before receiving the DOL complaint that specifically mentions this cert by number. Of note there appears a copy of this cert on the PG&DB electronic register, a total impossibility if not registered. (B7 &

5.   Three hoses were sold for two fryers, the offending hose had split so near to completion of the job that it was part of the original invoicing. But when the owner told the investigator, he told him it didn't interest him, Mr Clark told me this. (B9)

6.   The cylinder station/bottle bank had been altered to feed off both gas cylinders simultaneously, in all probability to accommodate the added extra load of the pizza oven. This is evidenced by the fittings sold and invoiced for in the initial billing and the different fittings present in the photo's taken just after the explosion.(B10 & 11)

7.   Not one part of my initial install went unaltered, from the start at the cylinder station, the middle where the pizza oven was installed, to the end where the bayonets were lowered (not by me) with the fryers added (not by me) after my initial “pre pipe” job.

8.   It appears to me that the bayonets were lowered to allow the fryers to sit further back to the wall, as the fryers have a cavity underneath, and this lowering and turning of the fitting was why the hoses failed after pinching against the floor. And probably would have been done when the fryers were installed, not by me. My involvement is also evidenced by the job card, showing no fryers, and with the words “install bayonets and test”, in my hand. (B12). The entry for the fryers on the front of this Job card, not in my hand, but same as the hand writing on the certificate . All this known to the investigator very early on when I told him in my voluntary interviews, in all probability when he had the withheld photos. This handwriting added, although denied by Darnley and ignored by the investigator....has been shown to be very probably Darnley's hand writing by the only handwriting expert in NZ.

9.   The comment by the forensic expert that the sheath had been cut away from the hoses, again not by me.(B13) made at the time of the explosion.

10.   Still to this day one has been held accountable for this explosion, with all, if not most, of this referenced evidence available to the investigator. (B14)

Main Rd, Havelock

1.   Even though the investigator had said to me at interview that the site had been unaltered since my initial install of a fryer in 15th Jul 03,(the appliance at the focus of the charge), there were a further two certs issued for this site. Both these certs 629404 and 623527 were for work in the kitchen, with one dated 4th Sept and 29th Jan both in 09.

2.    The audit being done on 3rd Sept 09 (C1). The cert date for 629404 was the day after the audit. The work signed off in this cert 629404 for 4th Sept is considerable and would not be done in a day and would involve moving all my work.

3.   Of note the hand writing of the word “fryer” on this Allgas job sheet is identical to the word “fryer” on the Milton Allgas Job sheet and the appliance is drawn in, which isn’t drawn in the Milton St job sheet. Of note this would probably have been written by an office worker who passed out the work, but no one from the office was interviewed. (C 2, 3 &4)

4.   The work in these certs, in all probability, would have involved moving my original install, but I was unable to check because all work had been removed when I had the gone there to check after I had the charges laid.

5.   All this information of certified work would have been available to the investigator if he had done a cert check on the address, which I think he should have before making any comments about it being unchanged or pressing any charges. In all probability the work was either still in progress or very recently completed.

Greenwood St Motueka

1.   I had installed the water heater and gas cylinder station, but the cooker was installed at a later date and added to the certificate, not by me. But in saying this, the kitchen wasn't there when the cooker was installed and the customer stated his friend had removed the restraining chain on the cooker (the basis for the original charges), when this was pointed out to the inspector he requested and was granted for the charges to be amended to focus on the pipe in the wall and not the clearances to the worktop and the absence of a restraining chain. (D1)

2.   Then at the hearing the owner said on testifying, he remembered someone else coming back to fit the cooker. (D2)

3.   The blue carbon copy shows a differing of pressure on the carbon sheet for the line written for the cooker and when taken into account the other certs with writing present on the pink master copy, but absent on the carbon copies and other alteration (all available to the Board prior and dismissed as vexatious by Kern Uren (D 3 & 4, also see H.B. 9), I believe the cooker was added after my initial install to both the site and the certificate.

4.   Someone else at Allgas had no problem acting in my name, as evidenced in the letter issued in my name to alter a cert, 3 months after I had left (H.B.5), ironically this letter has “never seen this or authorised it”, written across the top of it in my hand writing, done when I became aware of it.

5.   Basically if I was found not guilty of installing the cooker, who did? The Board did not pursue this either.

6.   I was told, by Darnley, from day one to fill out a job sheet, the office staff would then take the info from the job sheet to fill out the certs, for me to then sign.

7.   I was told by Darnley that they would file the copies and register with the Board. It was the biggest mistake of my career, if not my life. I trusted them to do what they had said. When I handed back the certs signed and with all 4 copies still together, the 3 carbon copies still attached to the master copy, with no handwriting of my own, only my signature, I had made the gravest judgment and regret it to this day. I believed the company would do as they said. From my time of leaving Darnley’s employment, I spent the next 6 years trying to warn about dodgy certs covering dodgy work, up until the explosion nearly killed someone.

8.   I know of another contractor who had a similar experience, when he notified the Board, HE was audited!!!,

8 Ball Unit Motueka High School

1.   Another set of charges amended just prior to the hearing. (D1) Amended to better fit after I had told the investigator that I did not know the cage was to be fitted, the cage that was fitted not allowing enough ventilation, which was the basis for these charges.

2.   When the charge was amended to “I should have known it was to be fitted” because of the exposure to cars, I showed an aerial photograph that proved the car park had been altered considerably since the original install, which led to the witness, brought in just days out from the hearing, to exclaim that had she seen this aerial photo she would never had signed the statement. (E1).

3.   This photo graph was obtained by me from the Tasman District Council and proved beyond doubt what I had told the investigator.

4.   Of note the witness statement was prepared by the investigators lawyer after he had in his own words, briefed the witness, also of note is some of the other witnesses refused to sign their “own” statements.

Dommett St Westport

1.   The letter from the owner reflects the attitude of the investigator, and is quite damning about the investigators behaviour. (F1)

2.   But regardless of the window being secured, I still believe it to have been safe even with the window being open; the charges were for the clearance to the opening window to the flue of the water heater. (F 2, 3 &4)

Powick St Westport

1.   This is one of the charges that concern me the most, other than the site of the explosion, not because of the persecution of my self.....but the total inaction after the hearing. (and yet another set of charges amended to better fit just before hearing)

2.   I was charged with placing cylinders on a deck, as I was the last person there, which I was not.

3.   This charge is quite complex, but can be boiled down to just one set of facts and invoices. Ignoring the reasoning offered by the investigator as it is nonsensical because the unit wasn't even manufactured when he says it was installed (as evidenced by the serial number on the side of the unit) and the original cert, not issued by myself.

4.   The set of facts are born out by invoicing from the local Caltex who sold all the water heaters involved.(G1) 3 units, with only 2 being accounted for in the certs.

5.   This invoicing shows that, initially, a 24 ltr model was sold and fitted on the 26/7/2001 as collaborated by the cert 207367 issued at that time (not by me) and this Caltex invoicing (G1 & 2)

6.   But then 9/10/2001, some two months later, the 24ltr was returned and a 32 ltr sold, replacing the unit insitu, but with no other cert issued for this new 32 ltr unit.(G2)

7.   Then further 24ltr unit sold 14/1/05, 6 months after my visit mentioned below, which corresponds to the serial number on the unit on site, but makes the first original cert for a 24ltr unit redundant, I believe this was when the gas cylinders were placed on the deck. (G1)

8.   Now bear in mind that I was brought in only to relocate the 32ltr unit and not move any cylinders, on the 20/7/04 (6 months before the second unit was sold, mentioned in point 7 above), as is backed by my invoice, job sheet and cert 319000, marked as alteration only.(G3 & 4)

9.   My concern is that, as with the explosion at Milton Street and the adding of a cooker at Greenwood St, no one has thought to pursue this potential fraud and find anyone accountable for this substandard work and manipulation of certs.

Malvern Ave, Nelson

1.   This is the one and only site where charges were found to be substantiated; of note it is also the only site to where I freely admitted to all work and certification. The charges were for clearance to an opening window from a power flued water heater.

2.   I believe this was the charge that they held on to just to keep their 100% conviction rate boasting rights and their attempt of justifying a $220 000.00 prosecution cost.

3.   I drew a diagram of how I knew the fumes to act, blown away from the building some 3 metres before rising (H 1)

4.   Please see also available at the hearing –

•   My 2 x diagrams from the Hearing (H 1).
•   Photo of the “offending” heater (H 2)
•   Rinnai Doc (H3)
•   Statement of owner, saying no fumes entering the building (H4)
•   Hammonds comment if the fumes were not entering it was safe(H5)
•   Contradictory nature of table 16, with amendments. (H6)
•   Numerous statements from NZ 5261, stating the use of overseas regs and the non mandatory and mandatory sections.(H7)

And since the hearing….. None of which was allowed to be adduced at high court (although the Investigator applied and was allowed to adduce a document giving weight to the Board’s “expertise”), I was restricted by Board policy, but this below further proves it was safe-

•   British Standard, known to me but not mentioned at my hearing (H8)
•   Hardy’s British history, being the only certifying gasfitter at my hearing and on the panel for the Board at my hearing (H9)
•   Email from co-author of NZ 5261 (H10)
•   Emails of explanation of other gasfitters. (H11)
•   Email from the owner, after my hearing. (H12)

1.   If it is safe, it is safe and I still, to this day, believe this job was safe, I offered far more proof of this safe operation at the hearing, the only evidence offered by the investigator was the amended table 16 from NZ5261, which is contradictory in application, re- spa blowers and amendments.

2.   NZ5261 was co-authored by the investigator, and he would in all probability, not want it to fail.

3.   If this charge had not been held to have substance then I would have been 100% innocent. I think it wrong that you are guilty until proven innocent.

The PGDB later ignored a unit fitted even closer than mine and issuing in to a more enclosed area, the elderly couple who were very stressed about the smells they were getting in their home (a bathroom by the look of the photos I have seen).....and had actually complained were told to close the window when they use it....

As well as the 3 points I asked you to read above before reading the charges, points 3.1 to 3.3 under heading “Summary of Charges”, please also bear in mind-

•   I did an “assessment” and not the, proscribed by the Board, “course of instruction” as my punishment and I was found to be in the top 10% ever assessed by the Board appointed assessor. Out of principle I did this with no preparation, revision or study.
•   I had also for 6 years before the explosion warned about dodgy work being covered by dodgy certs.....warning against none other than Darnley, the man who was empowered by the “impartial” investigator, Tony Hammond, after just one oral exam, years before the explosion and with Darnley never sitting a plumbing, never mind gas fitting apprenticeship.
•   It was Hammond who was appointed impartial investigator to attend a hearing overseen by his very well known colleague Stephen Parker Executive Director of GANZ, who he presented seminars with under the GANZ banner, Hammond playing as a technical adviser to Stephen Parkers as a top executive of GANZ. Hammond being nominated by GANZ to co-author NZ5261 and organising the Kennedy Trust together with Stephen Parker for many years.
•   Hammond AND Parker being appointed AFTER my protests to Hammond’s impartiality at a stay of proceedings hearing. The old excuse, that a small plumbing community is bound to have people who know each other…..which is an insult to capabilities of the other 6 million kiwis.
•   I have been told that Darnley was a member of numerous gas industry groups, as is Hammond and Parker. Darnley, Parker and Hammond are members of NZIGE, Darnley “resigning” just weeks after the explosion.
•   Hammond having a very long history in NZIGE, which is an arm of IPENZ, and he also previously served on the PG&D Board for 15 years.
•   Mr Bickers has a long history in IPENZ. These long histories of both men are similar in length of time and the standing/position achieved in their respective Institute in that time as members.
The worst part about this, apart from the very destructive and stressful effects on my family, it emboldens those with “contacts” to thumb their nose at the safety and responsibility entrusted them.

This will not help the industry or protect the public going forward.

And now we have the ' anyone can print off all you want certs, with no new installs being registered anywhere" system...........sadly we haven't even seen the tip of this ice burg yet..............This is the one we are leaving our kids FFS.

I ask you again, do you think these people will admit any wrong doing if YOUR arse is on the line?

Please don't think that a lack of evidence is any protection to you....(only the PGDB can withhold evidence to protect them selves).....so "not being able to locate a cert" will not save you....again, "not being able to find a cert" (even if it appears on their electronic register) only protects the PGDB......

On top of all this........it is the NZ public who are at risk......and when, that's when it goes wrong it will be the fitter who carries the can and the blame and you could lose your home/business /reputation being forced to work away from your kids and wife.... perhaps even have your wife terrorised with child sexual abuse case notes(as was my wife)....I was lucky my missis stayed by me, god knows why, but she did.....

Good luck guys.......you are most definitely going to need it.........

Corruption is corruption is corruption....to ignore it taints you, to cover it up (in my opinion) makes you complicit in that corruption and gives a very good indication of what you will do in the future faced to similar circumstances....So MARTIN SAWYERS what are you going to do about this.....

.

Badger · « **Reply #619 on:** February 20, 2017, 10:33:06 AM »

Sent today......to Martin Sawyers PGDB CEO......with nearly 50 thousand reads, on a plumbers forum I think we can say it is public and within the industry's view.....he ignores us and the corruption apparently done by the PGDB......wouldn't you as CEO address this.....

I am a big guy and make for a real trip hazard under a carpet, so I will not be brushed under one.....I will say it again....

I ain't going any where and will only up the anti leading into the up coming elections....Martin you can fix this today......give me a ring you got my number....

How does that make you guys feel and what does it bode for our future?

Paul Gee <plumbngas@gmail.com>

Attachments10:25 AM (0 minutes ago)

to Martin, Wal

Martin,

Please see a post attached and available on the plumber forum link below-

http://www.plumbers.co.nz/forum/fellow-practitioners-update/41/fellow-practitioner-issue-236-dated-12-december-2014/1810/msg10697#msg10697

Martin, my case that you appear to ignore needs addressing for the sake of the industry. I am about to engage a lawyer to address this and need from you to whom I contact at the PGDB or at your insurance company.

I want to ensure that you are totally aware of my case. I ask you to read this attachment and direct you to the reams of information available at the PGDB of how I was undoubtedly set up as a scapegoat to protect the PGDB's maladministration of the certificate system and the flippant issuing of gas licenses to those who are connected and are still this day protected by the PGDB.

You said to me in person that "I was only after money".....I feel I must correct you there......what I want is to put my sons through university, I want my wife to live in a nice home and I want to hand down a viable business to my sons. As I had all this before the PGDB set me up and carried out/witnessed a witch-hunt against me family, all I am asking is for the PGDB to put me back to where I was before the corrupt process destroyed my life.

Martin, I was mortgage free in a recently totally renovated home, I had zero debt (except my materials account), with a viable business and a very good reputation in the gas industry as well as locally with my customers. All I want is to go back to where I was before I was levelled by corruption.

Again I will post this on the same Plumbers Forum and say to you that you are publically, in the face of the industry, ignoring corruption and protecting the real person who nearly killed someone by altering gas work that resulted in an explosion, if any of this is true (and I have good reason to believe it is) this could make you appear as a pontificating hypocrite every time you do a press release as below in red.

“What consumers need to know is, a certifying gasfitter must provide a signed gasfitting certificate where restricted work has been carried out in this scenario. Consumers should stay safe and ask for a copy of this at the time of purchase or modifications – it is peace of mind that the gasfitting work has been conducted in a legal capacity”.

I ask you in all honesty and with integrity to apply this to my case. I understand none of my case is down to your "watch", but the PGDB is a continuous membership Board that has recently celebrated 100 years of being, not its 100th incarnation. It is down to the present day members to leave there mark, what will your legacy be, to cover up corruption or address it, fix it and make sure it doesn't happen again?

Paul

Badger · « **Reply #620 on:** February 20, 2017, 10:46:44 AM »

I think Martins response, or lack there of, can give you all a good indication of how you and the NZ public are being protected and/or represented by the PGDB and its cronies....

As I said before guys I wish you all the luck in the world, you are most definitely going to needs a lot of it....

Imagine this you have done a job, issued your print off all you like certs, gave one "copy" (which it isn't any more as we have lost the carbon copy) to you customer and you put one "copy" in your shoe box in the garage.....

You lose your copy, or your lap top fails.....the customer gets a guy into fix a small section of pipe, a part of installation which you haven't photographed.....

It explodes, your name is involved...perhaps the last guy to work at the explosion is more connected than you are.......

Now where do you want this case inserted? will your missis stay if you lose your house? are you willing to work away for the foreseeable future while fighting a witch hunt? do you want to raise your kids over the phone? are you prepared to be "the guy who installs explosions?.....think I am exaggerating? been there got the full wardrobe.....

.

Badger · « **Reply #621 on:** February 20, 2017, 11:00:55 AM »

And people wonder why the numbers of certifying gasfitters uplifting their license is in free fall......duhh....

Here's why....the certifiers with even a tiny bit of sense can see you are up for a massive amount of responsibility/accountability....you can not guarantee you will be the only person to work on your installs and if it goes wrong you are f****ed....

If you run a business and sign off other fitters.....f**** me you need your head read....just read the supervision parameters....you got to weigh up the guys ability and even mood, then organise your time and work load around this......and here is the clincher.....you got to get this right 110% of the time because if it goes bang......you are as f****ed as though you had installed it yourself.....

Then you got the guys who are in the middle, protecting the business owners, you get paid an extra dollar or two and hour, get to walk around like he's top of the heap because he signs every one off.....you are a muppet mate...ask your self, you are stuck between your boss and the PGDB.....you are royally f****ed...

I hope you all inspect every inch of install, you organise your guys weighing up ability, experience and mood against work load....because we all know the work coming in will be balanced across your team, one easy job for numb nuts and two mediocre jobs for your middle of the field guys and only one complex job for your top of the range tech......what I have noticed is numb nuts goes every where..... because the work don't play fair...

In this climate, in this industry, in this work load......if you sign anything off, in my opinion you are nuts....

Even if you do all your own gas, and you only sign off your self......how do you make sure it stays as you left it?

Gas company's should also be concerned, as numbers drop so do the profit, not to mention the quality, I will say it again the public will go electric with every incident....wake up.

.

Jaxcat · « **Reply #622 on:** February 20, 2017, 04:03:35 PM »

Badger I agree that anyone who signs off someone else's work is crazy. You couldn't pay enough money to someone to take this level of responsibility on wages unless you could go inch by inch over the whole job. What's worse is we have certifying gasfitters out there who are "selling" their ticket to guys in business who are not certifiers but are doing the work and the connections.

The only thing you can do to ensure that the job as you left it is what is certified is to take photos of the installation. This is the best we can do to provide evidence of how we left the job. We load these up into the job management systems and they stay there, cloud based, for all time. It isn't fool proof but it offers some form of evidence that could be viewed if the installation is changed - and we always take a photo of the badge plate and put the serial number on the gas certificate that way if the appliance is changed out. We do a lot of these things now because of what happened to you - and although this is no consolation to you - I am sure a lot of gasfitters will have had a long hard look at how they do things and how they would protect themselves if they were accused of something. Your case has provided a blue print for that.

Badger · « **Reply #623 on:** February 20, 2017, 05:49:18 PM »

Jax mate and I truly mean this I am glad if my case can be used to help....its basically a "how not to" guide for dealing with incidents.....

WRT the dickheads signing others off.....mental really....

But this is the problem.....you will always have some people who will always put profit over safety, especially their own profit over other peoples safety......this is a constant.

That is why we need a robust system and it is why it is a necessity to go after the real culprit in the explosion and the actual dodgy people who sat by and watched this happen, the PGDB present chair and deputy chair watch this all go down.....do you think we have an integral system with them at the helm.....I don't believe you have. Jackson and Hardie were at some or all of my hearings and couldn't be bothered to stand up and cry rat.....we should ask them why? or were they too busy nibbling cheese and filling their bellies?

We, the NZ public included, need a robust system administered with integrity and no bias.....basically one we can all trust in....with this giant lump of my case under the office carpet you can't have trust.

Unless the PGDB put their hand up, pull all the actual guilty out in the open, then run a fair trial into their corrupt actions to act as a deterrent to anyone in the future who considers doing this to some one else......then I don't think we have a system we can trust in.....ever.

Otherwise all we have learnt is how not to carry out a trial, not how to, unless the massive mistakes in my hearings are addressed and taken ownership of we have learnt nothing about how to run a trial with no accountability where the people presiding over it can shaft people with impunity......this is wrong.

If the state of affairs had got better after my case I could understand them wanting to keep going like nothing happened, it has gotten gradually much worse since.....just look at the mess of a cert system that we work under today......

60 thousand houses short in a housing shortage....that's 60,000 houses that potentially will require gas......

60,000 homes with gas installed where, apparently could be installed by muppets buying certs off other muppets.....who don't need to register those bought certs anywhere but at home.....remember the ones mentioned above putting profit over safety....hmmmmm....

What moral fibre do you think these sellers of certs will have in an explosion? Perhaps Martin Sawyers et al can explain this to all those effected by carbon monoxide or an explosion next time.....hopefully its not a chip shop with lots of kids queuing up outside, as was the case at the site of the one at Milton Street explosion if it had exploded just one hour earlier......

I don't know how these people sleep.....oh wait there it is in silken sheet and expensive houses....that probably takes the edge off......twats.

.

Jaxcat · « **Reply #624 on:** February 21, 2017, 06:32:17 AM »

The Gas Certificate system as it operates now is simply inept. We have less quality control than we have ever had. There appears to be no audit system under Energy Safety of the gas certificates at all. ANYONE can produce a certificate as there is no barrier to entry. What I mean by this is any member of the public, whether licensed or just Joe Smith can download a gas certificate and fill it in. In the old days at least you couldn't even get access to a blank certificate unless you were a currently licensed certifying gasfitter.

The decision to take the gas certificates away from the PGDB and give them to ESS to be consistent with electricians was an MBIE/Government decision and one that appears to be far from sensible. There is little if any monitoring. Gasfitters themselves still do not appear to understand the difference between low, general and high risk certificates. Some are certifying everthing (something I favour as it appears to minimise the risk of getting it wrong), some still think you don't have to certify like for like (you do need to), some thinking new gasfitting is high risk but additions are general (wrong - it's the other way around) - the necessity to enter things on the high risk data base (in a slightly different format to the actual certificate - again another moronic thing). Why you simply can't upload the actual certificate is beyond me.

This current system affords the public no safety - in fact I think it opens the whole system up to more corruption - it increases the ability of those that want to rort the system and makes them even less traceable.

I agree there should be one robust system administered with integrity and no bias - one with a random auditing system - and with barriers to entry (either licensed or certifying). One which doe snot unduly load up heavy administration on the tradesman too. One thing I can say is that Energy Safety is not the entity that should be looking after it. They are in fact simply a vault where all this is kept with no one looking over it at all.

Badger · « **Reply #625 on:** February 21, 2017, 06:58:37 AM »

So they, the powers that be, learnt nothing from my case.....when my case highlighted the totally inept administration of the cert system by the PGDB, they just moved it somewhere else where it is just not administered, just stored.

My case showed that the PGDB misplaced lots of certs, one that even appear on their electronic register, the max the muppet stated in a 33 pg report that the only evidence that the cert for the last work at an explosion, was that there is a copy on the electronic register, even had a date of entry, but that's it......do you need any other evidence?.....but they pontificated to me about the importance of the certs and how I kept copies.....apparently one rule for us and one rule for them......

More like .....one rule for them..... and one rule for us.......then no f****ing rules for Paul Gee

I say this because it was a directed assault on me, just me......

What about the offences that were highlighted by my case, if they were bad enough to lay a charge but it wasn't me......then were are the prosecutions against these other jobs, what about the fraud at Powick Street, see my other post below.

Why did they spend 220k chasing me and 30k "chasing" Darnley.....who faced a charge for the explosion but it disappeared.

Why didn't Peter Jackson and Graham Hardy go after the fraudster on the west coast, these are the present chair and vice chair, the present team Martin Sawyers and the investigation manager won't even talk to me about these past offences, why is that?

Surely an offence is an offence......you think things have changed?......I KNOW it hasn't......

We got the same type of people at the Board who are policing the cert system remotely, a system as bad as the system described by Jaxcat below......

I feel for you guys just trying to earn a crust and having this on your back, it must be terrible....I have run that gauntlet and come out the other side, lost a lot including my trade......

What are you prepared to lose guys.....

.

.

Badger · « **Reply #626 on:** February 21, 2017, 07:35:28 AM »

Even by the PGDB own reckoning 44 charges were laid against me.....I proved it was not me on 42 charges.....

The offences are still out there today for 42 charges.....not altered and not prosecuted.....

I asked what was done at the Powick St one mentioned below I have a letter stating that the only contact with the people at this address is the letter they received telling untruths about me, that I was issuing illegal certs in Northland, you know the letter that they had to apologise for.....this was sent well before the hearing.....those cylinders are still mounted on the deck and the cert fraud that placed them there goes un-investigated....

Read through my summary of charges listed here, by address in my previous posts.....all those offences that were "of grave concern" went totally un-investigated or chased up by the PGDB......bad enough to chase me for, but just not bad enough to pursue after my hearing.....the PGDB know about this (in their own words) dangerous work.....but do nothing Martin Sawyers won't even discuss it with me, nor the new investigator.

Wonder how you get 44 charges out of 7 sites.....they had back up charges of differing levels or seriousness so that if I answered one set they could go after me with the other set......these charges were amended, or changed in plain speak, just weeks out from a hearing, after a two year investigation......half of them were altered, and a witness added just weeks out......

The ventilation problem at a high school for the gas cylinders........nothing done, because they couldn't get me for it......

And this still stands today.......new people same old direction......

All that dangerous work, 42 charges worth, nothing done........and my only charge that they made sure stuck..........

The PGDB told an elderly couple to just shut the window when they used the califont.....it was nearer than mine and the owners had complained.......

Oh and the califont that they did me for, the 2 charges out of 44.....still there.....as I installed it.......

All of this dangerous work.....its still there.....nothing done but chasing me........

COULD BE ANYONE OF YOU NEXT........

Do you think this moronic cert system will be shown for what it is.......or will they try to blame the tradesman?

I KNOW the answer........

.

robbo · « **Reply #627 on:** February 21, 2017, 10:53:05 AM »

Hi guys, Badger its started already, this from B/Crack today, cheers
…
New oven
Stove / Oven — Halswell, Christchurch
Remove gas hobs so that I can get electric cook top

Badger · « **Reply #628 on:** February 21, 2017, 04:46:02 PM »

Luckily Robbo mate......

As the industry is in such good hands with robust systems.....

Who ever does this work can't make it look legit by being able to print off a professional looking cert and the customer can check if its actually legit by looking it up on the cert register.........

Oh wait the f**** there.....

Can you believe I can seriously write such drivel.....and it is true......

By the way....just had a letter from Martin Sawyers stating he can't look at my case because the "PGDB have already dealt with my case"......

By "dealt" I suppose he means that 42 charges go un-investigated and no-one is held responsible for a near fatal explosion and a certificate fraud goes unanswered........what a crock.....

Now I am a just a MERE PLUMBER (there you go now PGDB I have actually said it) but to me that isn't dealt with......I go no law degree like Mr Sawyers but just in my fair minded layman's terms that is total bullshit and even may I suggest utter bollox........

For me guys...... if your full of shit, then your full of shit........to the brim by the look of it.....

Badger · « **Reply #629 on:** February 21, 2017, 04:52:57 PM »

Lets see what comes of this little doosey.......

I am going to run a book on it, any one fancy a wager, a sweepstake, my 5 bucks is on an excuse not to produce it because I am being vexatious....(a new word to me, I have learnt so much from these guys, I thank them for that).

Come on guys make a call, put your 5 bucks in and post what you reckon his response will be.....

Registrar <Registrar@pgdb.co.nz>

11:29 AM (5 hours ago)

to me

Dear Mr Gee

This email acknowledges receipt of your request of 9 February 2017 under the Official Information Act for a copy of all correspondence between the Department of Labour and the Plumbers, Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board about the gas explosion at the Milton Street Fish and Chip Café.

Unless an extension of time is required under section 15A of the Official Information Act, a response to your request is due by 9 March 2017.

Martin Sawyers

Chief Executive/Registrar

Plumbers, Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board

Subject / Started by	Replies / Views	Last post
Fellow Practitioner Issue 235 Dated 5 December 2014 Started by Wal	5 Replies 2979 Views	December 10, 2014, 09:43:07 AM by Jaxcat
Fellow Practitioner Issue 184 Dated 6 December 2013 Started by Wal	2 Replies 2515 Views	December 06, 2013, 02:13:52 PM by Jaxcat
Fellow Practitioner Issue 185 Dated 13 December 2013 Started by Wal	5 Replies 3094 Views	December 13, 2013, 04:01:14 PM by robbo
Fellow Practitioner Issue 186 Dated 20 December 2013 Started by Wal	1 Replies 1762 Views	December 23, 2013, 06:39:28 AM by Watchdog

In a forum (BBCode)	[url=https://www.plumbers.nz/fellow-practitioners-update/41/fellow-practitioner-issue-236-dated-12-december-2014/1810/]Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014[/url]
In a site/blog (HTML)	<a href="https://www.plumbers.nz/fellow-practitioners-update/41/fellow-practitioner-issue-236-dated-12-december-2014/1810/">Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014</a>

Author Topic: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014 (Read 235434 times)

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Jaxcat

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Jaxcat

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

robbo

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Badger

Re: Fellow Practitioner Issue 236 Dated 12 December 2014

Share Topic

Similar Topics

Fellow Practitioner Issue 235 Dated 5 December 2014

Fellow Practitioner Issue 184 Dated 6 December 2013

Fellow Practitioner Issue 185 Dated 13 December 2013

Fellow Practitioner Issue 186 Dated 20 December 2013