ARTICLE: Online Budget Gear - The Perils of the Bargain Buy

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Aoneky Rock Climbing Rope - Safety gear apparently made for climbing and mountaineering is being sold online in the UK, despite failing to meet the necessary certification standards. Paul Sagar investigates.

Read more
 TMM 18 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Thanks for taking the time to research and write the article.

Did you share your findings with Amazon?

I think they should have a right to reply so that we can judge them by their actions once they have been again alterted to the danger and misrepresentation of products on their platform. I think I can guess what their response will be but they need to be accountable for the sale of goods facilitated by their website. 

Post edited at 14:05
 Alex Riley 18 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Good article.

The other thing to watch out for is counterfeit equipment, I saw the other day a website called aliexpress. com selling knock off dmm kit. 

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

That's a very good article that makes a number of salient points regarding safety.  I too would be interested to see Amazon's response.  If one isn't forthcoming, send the article on to one of the TV consumer watchdog programmes and see what they do with it.  I'd also be curious to hear what the BMC have to say too.

Because gear safety is critical, but it is something that you need to know a bit about climbing to understand the who what why of the standards covering it and so is, as you said, something that people new to climbing might not be aware of, perhaps this article, or a revision of it, could become a 'sticky' post in the forums or a brightly coloured 'Read Me' article on the site especially aimed at those beginning to assemble their kit.

T.

 James Oswald 18 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Excellent article, thank you.

In reply to TMM:

Thanks for that. Yes we'll be sending this to Amazon - I've no idea what they'll say

 LGraham 18 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

This is different, but related. 

When something is sold as ‘Fulfilled by Amazon’ by multiple companies it is possible that all of the stock from all of the companies goes into one bin, so you could buy a harness from a legitimate seller, but be sent a counterfeit harness from another seller. 

More info here https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law/publications/l...

 Iamgregp 18 Jun 2019
In reply to Pursued by a bear:

That's a good shout - there ought to be something in the forum that's easy to find for people starting out as it's those people who may be most at risk of buying bad gear.

I'd say it's a good idea to suggest that beginners go into a shop and speak to experienced staff to get help and advice before they buy anything for the first time.

Even as a (slightly) more experienced climber the only time I buy anything online is when I'm rebuying a product I've owned previously.  

In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com:

Offer the company a free review, then send the gear they send you to a test house? 

 Frank R. 18 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

 

And the fakes are also damaging small garage companies, like this crag approach map producer...

https://www.climbing.com/gear/counterfeited-how-illegal-knockoffs-harm-outd...

Amazon seem to have a lot of problems with counterfeits and responsibility. That usually happens if one company controls such a major share of the retail market and can get away with nearly anything...

https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/31/fulfilled-by-amazon-counterfeit-fake/

https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/19/18140799/amazon-marketplace-scams-selle...

(hope the links to other articles elsewhere are ok here in this context)

 Paul Sagar 18 Jun 2019

Thanks all - it was alarming just how easy it was to find dodgy gear on Amazon. I should also say that I reckon it would have taken only slightly longer to do it on Ebay. There is a big problem opened up by the way third party platforms work. From what I can tell Amazon are actually pretty good at taking stuff down that is fraudulent/misleading/counterfeit/illegal - but the way their platform works is that they have to put out fires that have already started and can only do that once they have been told that the fires are there.

I'm no lawyer but I'm pretty sure the in both the US and the UK Amazon is not liable in any sense for what is sold by it as a third party platform, so there is no legal question for Amazon to answer here. (Let's none of us write anything in the comments that Amazon might think their legal team should know about...) There is a separate issue about whether it is morally right for Amazon to host these products - but that's something else entirely, and not really worth getting in to IMO. The facts are what the facts are: let's guide newcomers to the specialist shops where they can talk to people who know what they are doing.

Thanks Frank R for posting the article in Climbing magazine about the counterfeiting, I found that really helpful when trying to work out the technicalities of the above when researching this piece.

Post edited at 15:43
1
 TMM 18 Jun 2019
In reply to Paul Sagar:

> Thanks all - it was alarming just how easy it was to find dodgy gear on Amazon. I should also say that I reckon it would have taken only slightly longer to do it on Ebay. There is a big problem opened up by the way third party platforms work. From what I can tell Amazon are actually pretty good at taking stuff down that is fraudulent/misleading/counterfeit/illegal - but the way their platform works is that they have to put out fires that have already started and can only do that once they have been told that the fires are there.

> I'm no lawyer but I'm pretty sure the in both the US and the UK Amazon is not liable in any sense for what is sold by it as a third party platform, so there is no legal question for Amazon to answer here. (Let's none of us write anything in the comments that Amazon might think their legal team should know about...) There is a separate issue about whether it is morally right for Amazon to host these products - but that's something else entirely, and not really worth getting in to IMO. The facts are what the facts are: let's guide newcomers to the specialist shops where they can talk to people who know what they are doing.

> Thanks Frank R for posting the article in Climbing magazine about the counterfeiting, I found that really helpful when trying to work out the technicalities of the above when researching this piece.

Thanks again for highlighting such an important issue with such obvious safety implications which are most likely to impact on the technically niave or those working to a limited budget.

I agree on the legality but I feel that this is an example of legislation not keeping up with commercial development. The FBA programme means that Amazon positions itself a merely a platform and that it is up to users of that platform to adhere to its rules as well as the laws and regulations in which the sale is being made. The opportunity for these third parties exists because the platform exists.

I would like to see a far more stringent legal framework in which platform providers, whether Amazon or Facebook, are fully and legally culpable for the content on their platforms.

Given the reputational risk to their brand I am surprised that Amazon is not being more pro-active in policing this. These are fairly niche products with small sales. What would be the cost to Amazon if there was a fatality as a result of someone using one these products after purchasing them via their platform?

Nick Barnard 18 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Cheers for the article. The mad thing is that none of those products is cheaper than you can get at either go outdoors or decathlon.

 galpinos 18 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Great to have the issue highlighted but the section "Note on Terminology" and the associated Rock and Ice article contains some incorrect information. A quick effort at explaining it:

CE/CEN/EN - What do the letters mean?

CEN - The European Committee for Standardisation. They write the EN Standards.

CE - A CE mark means the item bearing the mark conforms to the relevant EN standard. It will be followed by a number which the identifying number of the relevant notified body that undertook the testing. (1)

EN - These are the standards to which the item has been tested to. They will define the testing methodology and the criteria required to pass as well as other things such as marking etc. Unfortunately, these are not freely available to the public but can be bought from the British Standards Institute (BSI). These standards are written by the CEN/TC 136/WG 5 working group which is a mix of national delegates, European manufacturers and notified bodies/testing houses(2).

In summary, when looking at the label attached to your kit it will have the CE Symbol, the number of the notified body and the relevant EN standard. Taking a Petzl rope as an example, the technical note attached to the rope:

https://www.petzl.com/GB/en/Sport/Ropes/PASO-GUIDE-7-7-mm

if you download the technical notice in the top left is says:

CE 0123 EN892:2016

This means it holds a CE mark, was certified by TUV in Germany to EN 892 Mountaineering equipment. Dynamic mountaineering ropes. Safety requirements and test methods

UIAA

This is the International Climbing and Mountaineering Federation (Union International des Associations d'Alpinisme originally). Created before normalised European standards they were the front runners in creating the original standards for climbing equipment. These standards are created by the Safety Commission. This is a group with delegates from climbing associations from all over the world as well as global manufactures and notified bodies/testing houses. They are a global standard, often slightly more onerous than the EN standards but are a voluntary standard that is not enforceable by law, unlike the EN standard within the EU.

The UIAA is a lot more open than CEN and all the Safety Standards are accessible by everyone:

https://www.theuiaa.org/safety-standards/

The brands that hold a UIAA Safety Label:

https://www.theuiaa.org/safety-label-holders/

The list of UIAA accredited testing houses:

https://www.theuiaa.org/uiaa-safety-label/accredited-laboratories/

(1) The list of CEN notified bodies and there corresponding numbers can be found here:

http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/nando/index.cfm?fuseaction=notif...

In the case of the Suntime harness, the label says CE361 however there is no notified body with the number 0361.

In the case of the NewDoar quickdraw, they have CE0194 which is INSPEC International Ltd. in Salford. I have e-mailed them to confirm that they are the notified body and to what standards they were certified against. The marking is suspect as the krab is to EN 12275:1998 when it should be to EN 12275:2013 and there is no date next to EN 566 on the dogbone (it should be 2017). However, the lack of a UIAA mark does not mean it's not fit for purpose.

(2) The Rock and Ice article linked states "the UIAA defines climbing standards for the CE". This is incorrect. The original EN standards were based on the existing UIAA standards at the time but now are independent and are written by the relevant working group. Having said that, a lot of the WG5 members sit on the UIAA Safety Commission too.

Post edited at 17:22
 Martin Haworth 18 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Very good article, highlights a worrying trend.

One thing that made me laugh was when I looked at your profile picture , is that head band UIAA rated?

In reply to TMM:

> I agree on the legality but I feel that this is an example of legislation not keeping up with commercial development.

> I would like to see a far more stringent legal framework in which platform providers, whether Amazon or Facebook, are fully and legally culpable for the content on their platforms.

> Given the reputational risk to their brand I am surprised that Amazon is not being more pro-active in policing this. These are fairly niche products with small sales. What would be the cost to Amazon if there was a fatality as a result of someone using one these products after purchasing them via their platform?

Excellent article on the perils of buying brand X from Amazon. These vast firms (Amazon, Ebay, Facebook, Google etc) are all doing much the same thing as far as I can see: paying far, far less tax than they should be, not being especially bothered about laws on safety, handling stolen goods etc, ignoring consumer rights legislation, and making it virtually impossible to get anything done about the problems they cause as they make it practically impossible to complain. They need to be made to obey the same laws that the rest of us do and should be made totally responsible for everything on their websites. 

Last year we had two expensive bits of kit (a pair of BD Cobra Axes and a Petzl Crevasse Rescue Kit) stolen from us by means of two separate fraudulent phone orders within a few weeks. After a few enquiries, I found one vendor on ebay selling a handful of non-climbing items, a pair of BD Cobra Axes and a Petzl Crevasse Rescue Kit - what are the chances of that? Bang to rights as the Police would have said once. Now they say, "Sorry Guv, you have to report that sort of thing to Action Fraud." Or No Action Fraud as one retiring Chief Constable called it recently. Complaining to ebay was only possible if you were a registered ebay seller (why?!) and even then was a total waste of time. They just were not in the least interested. It's very frustrating and it means now that we are very reluctant to take phone orders which is tough on legitimate customers.

None of that sort of thing would have happened if you were dealing with a proper auctioneer, be it Mitchell's in Cockermouth or Sotheby's in London. No reputable climbing shop in the UK would sell dodgy kit. The internet is currently an unregulated wild west that urgently needs taxing and regulating properly.

Post edited at 17:14
 danm 18 Jun 2019
In reply to Pursued by a bear:

I'd also be curious to hear what the BMC have to say too.

Here you go -

We wrote an article on this a while back, and yours truly even appeared on BBC's "Fake Britain" to highlight the issue: www.thebmc.co.uk/buying-climbing-equipment-gear-online

This UKC piece is a very good article, my only (very minor) quibble is the idea it gives (to me at least) that the CE mark is some kind of sub-par certification mark. It is not, the issue is that on its own it means nothing, what really counts is the certification to the correct EN standard. An additional UIAA Safety Label is a nice bonus.

The fakes and cheats are getting more sophisticated, for sure. In the past, they would be totally unmarked and unlabeled. Then fake CE marks started to appear, along with brand names. Now, some items come with false labels and fake certification documentation. Some even, when tested, turn out to be good enough to have passed the standard if they'd gone through type approval (this is the process by which a CE mark for PPE is obtained).

This leaves the consumer, even the educated one, in a tight spot. We've tried, believe you me, to get Amazon and eBay to pull fake equipment listings from their sites. It's like pulling hen's teeth, and like the Hydra, once one head is cut off and a sales listing is shut down, another springs up. Even Trading Standards do not seem up to speed on the task at hand - if they are alerted to non-compliant product, they insist on buying samples and then looking for a test house to do slow and expensive testing on it, when I can simply tell them it does not meet the required standards and should therefore be pulled from sale.

As you can tell, I'm rather exasperated by the whole thing! Given the authorities don't seem to be much help, I'm pleased UKC have chosen to write a piece on this, as every bit helps. Since many beginners start of in walls, my next step will likely be posters to go into climbing walls to alert newbies of the dangers.

TLR The BMC is on the case, only so much we can do.

Post edited at 17:19
In reply to danm:

Cheers Dan, much obliged.  Posters in climbing walls seems like a good idea.

Someone with whom I used to work had a tale from when he was doing some things with RAF pilots.  One such pilot had, on the inside of his locker door, the famous (infamous!) poster of the tennis girl scratching her naked bottom, over which he had writen "Never assume, always check".

I think we're in a similar position here.

T.

Post edited at 17:28
In reply to danm:

Thanks for that Dan! I must admit I was baffled with all the acronyms - and I'm a gear Ed. What hope does a newbie have? 

 Paul Sagar 18 Jun 2019
In reply to Martin Haworth:

It's a buff! I need to wear it to keep my silly long hair out of my eyes! 

Also it looks well cool. Obviously.

 Paul Sagar 18 Jun 2019
In reply to danm:

Thanks Danm for the clarification on CE and EN numbers; it's all a bit of a minefield. I was quite disappointed that there isn't the CE equivalent of the UIAA database whereby you can go and check if a product's CE number is real - seems like such an obvious thing for the EU to provide, though I suppose the initial set-up would be a hassle for whoever was tasked with doing it.

Then again maybe by November we'll be able to form new trade deals with whichever gear companies we choose and impose our own British safety standards and...oh shit, I did the Brexit thing. Sigh. Hitler! The Nazis! Bingo complete. Stand down, all.

 9fingerjon 18 Jun 2019
In reply to danm:

I remember seeing the fake britain it can still be found here - with the climbing section from 28:40ish onwards.

youtube.com/watch?v=EjMRxPkunYk&

Pretty worrying that nothing has really changed since 2017 or whenever that show was first on (not putting any blame on Dan or the BMC who have clearly had a good go at combating it). Good lesson to stick to reputable retaillers who understand climbing.

 galpinos 18 Jun 2019
In reply to Paul Sagar:

> Thanks Danm for the clarification on CE and EN numbers; it's all a bit of a minefield. I was quite disappointed that there isn't the CE equivalent of the UIAA database whereby you can go and check if a product's CE number is real - seems like such an obvious thing for the EU to provide, though I suppose the initial set-up would be a hassle for whoever was tasked with doing it.

What do you mean? The number after the CE mark tells you the notified body who certified the item.

http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/nando/index.cfm?fuseaction=notif...

The UIAA safety label holders list tells you which manufacturers hold a safety label, but that is not relevant to all the products they sell, just to those they certify against the UIAA standard. they may sell 20 karabiners on the european market, all CE marked to EN 12275:2013 but only 2 tested to UIAA 121. They would appear on the manufacturers list for UIAA Safety Label Holders, but that would only matter for 2 of the 20 krabs.

> Then again maybe by November we'll be able to form new trade deals with whichever gear companies we choose and impose our own British safety standards and...oh shit, I did the Brexit thing. Sigh. Hitler! The Nazis! Bingo complete. Stand down, all.

Current advise is that we will stick to all EN standards. One can only hope..........

 jimtitt 18 Jun 2019
In reply to galpinos:

> Great to have the issue highlighted but the section "Note on Terminology" and the associated Rock and Ice article contains some incorrect information. A quick effort at explaining it:

> CE/CEN/EN - What do the letters mean?

> CEN - The European Committee for Standardisation. They write the EN Standards.

> CE - A CE mark means the item bearing the mark conforms to the relevant EN standard. It will be followed by a number which the identifying number of the relevant notified body that undertook the testing. (1)

> EN - These are the standards to which the item has been tested to. They will define the testing methodology and the criteria required to pass as well as other things such as marking etc. Unfortunately, these are not freely available to the public but can be bought from the British Standards Institute (BSI). These standards are written by the CEN/TC 136/WG 5 working group which is a mix of national delegates, European manufacturers and notified bodies/testing houses(2).

> In summary, when looking at the label attached to your kit it will have the CE Symbol, the number of the notified body and the relevant EN standard. Taking a Petzl rope as an example, the technical note attached to the rope:

> if you download the technical notice in the top left is says:

> CE 0123 EN892:2016

> This means it holds a CE mark, was certified by TUV in Germany to EN 892 Mountaineering equipment. Dynamic mountaineering ropes. Safety requirements and test methods

> UIAA

> This is the International Climbing and Mountaineering Federation (Union International des Associations d'Alpinisme originally). Created before normalised European standards they were the front runners in creating the original standards for climbing equipment. These standards are created by the Safety Commission. This is a group with delegates from climbing associations from all over the world as well as global manufactures and notified bodies/testing houses. They are a global standard, often slightly more onerous than the EN standards but are a voluntary standard that is not enforceable by law, unlike the EN standard within the EU.

> The UIAA is a lot more open than CEN and all the Safety Standards are accessible by everyone:

> The brands that hold a UIAA Safety Label:

> The list of UIAA accredited testing houses:

> (1) The list of CEN notified bodies and there corresponding numbers can be found here:

> In the case of the Suntime harness, the label says CE361 however there is no notified body with the number 0361.

> In the case of the NewDoar quickdraw, they have CE0194 which is INSPEC International Ltd. in Salford. I have e-mailed them to confirm that they are the notified body and to what standards they were certified against. The marking is suspect as the krab is to EN 12275:1998 when it should be to EN 12275:2013 and there is no date next to EN 566 on the dogbone (it should be 2017). However, the lack of a UIAA mark does not mean it's not fit for purpose.

> (2) The Rock and Ice article linked states "the UIAA defines climbing standards for the CE". This is incorrect. The original EN standards were based on the existing UIAA standards at the time but now are independent and are written by the relevant working group. Having said that, a lot of the WG5 members sit on the UIAA Safety Commission too.

Indeed, I was going to write to correct the impression given in the article but siitingin the sun with a beer won (30° here today).

One minor point is the UIAA "standard" one can read is only a vague indication of what the requirements are, to get the SafetyLabel a product first must be certified to the relevant EN which is considerably more detailed.

 galpinos 18 Jun 2019
In reply to jimtitt:

Agreed, if there is a relevant EN. However, some UIAA standards are “standalone”.

I do think the pictorials they do are good as a simple way of showing the main requirements.

In reply to galpinos:

Brilliant, thanks for that. The clearest and most succinct explanation I've read. We've amended the info box in the article accordingly

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

There's still confusion in the article:

"Indeed, it appears from the product description on Amazon that this karabiner only has CE certification – which falls short of the safety standards of EN and UIAA ratings."

Genuine CE certification & marking says that a device has been tested to, and meets or exceeds the requirements of the appropriate EN standard. The 'CE logo' is a short-form marking; the certification body that performed the testing should be identified by their identification number, e.g. CE 0123, as well as the EN standard which the product has been tested against.

To re-arrange galpinos' excellent explanation:

CEN: the group of standards bodies

EN: the group of standards CEN produce

CE: the group of registered certification bodies that test products against ENs

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

But it's a timely reminder; I was thinking only the other day that direct sales from China must be a nightmare for Trading Standards, as they have no means of policing imports. The stuff that can be bought is terrifying; from li-ion batteries (nice explosive device?), 500mW ultra-violet laser diodes (fried retinas, anyone?) to dubious content vape liquids, etc etc...

I'll stick to underwear and cheap electronics, I think.

 Pinch'a'salt 18 Jun 2019
In reply to captain paranoia:

and just to add some extra info to addle the brains more...

the CE mark will only be followed by the notified body number for Category 3 PPE - yes that includes most of our climbing gear but not helmets for sport climbing/alpinism (Category 2).

And an alternative explanation for what the CE mark indicates is:

"conforms to the requirements of European Regulation 2016/425" (which replaced the previous directive 89/686)

... but not necessarily to an EN standard - this is not mandatory as it is possible that there is no relevant standard for the equipment to conform to - perfect case in point for this is the Grigri - when the original Grigri was released it was not certified to an EN as it was the first device of its kind and no relevant standard existed.

In reply to Pinch'a'salt:

> and just to add some extra info to addle the brains more...

oh bugger...

 Mike_Gannon 18 Jun 2019
In reply to TMM:

Amazon take the attitude "buyer beware" which I think is wrong. If someone is trading on your platform then they have a duty of care to ensure the reseller is legitimate.

Amazon is not eBay. Its a trusted brand. Its like the fake businesses paying for space on Google. Google were happy to take the money for ad revenue with no concern for its own reputation and suffered for it.

 Paul Sagar 19 Jun 2019

thanks for the clarifications above regarding EN/CE/UIAA Danm and Galpinos - i did try to work all this out when researching the article but as you can see I didn’t really succeed! In a way that is revealing though - if both myself and Dan, a gear editor, didn’t get it right then what chance somebody new to the sport?!

Post edited at 07:52
 jimtitt 19 Jun 2019
In reply to captain paranoia:

> oh bugger...


So you won't want to know about the gear that must be to EN but not permitted to be CE marked........

 jimtitt 19 Jun 2019
In reply to Paul Sagar:

> thanks for the clarifications above regarding EN/CE/UIAA Danm and Galpinos - i did try to work all this out when researching the article but as you can see I didn’t really succeed! In a way that is revealing though - if both myself and Dan, a gear editor, didn’t get it right then what chance somebody new to the sport?!

The question is whether it's relevant the newbies understand it all. The system is designed to work the other way round and the CE/EN is to tell the retailer it is permissable to sell the product for rock climbing, not some kind of buyers approval. The retailer commits the offence, not the manufacturer or purchaser.

That the government doesn't have international trade under control is another debate.....

 MischaHY 19 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

> What is required is for climbers to look out for each other. If you know somebody getting into climbing, and looking to build up their gear collection, encourage them to use only reputable outdoor climbing outlets, and not generalist or discounting websites acting as third-party platforms.

I actually had to do this. 

I was at the local gym (I live in Germany) and spotted two girls climbing with an incredibly bright blue rope with white/red pattern. One of them had just lead a route and set up a top rope for her friend, who then started to climb. Around 4 metres up she said 'take' and sat into the rope, then proceeded to deck due to stretch. The pattern on the rope was almost identical to the Beal Iceline so I assumed they must be climbing on a half rope hence the stretch. 

I wandered over to have a look as I feel it's generally good to make people aware if something they're doing isn't safe practice - I asked if I could have a look at the rope and it became immediately apparent that it wasn't a climbing rope - it had a totally different internal structure that an experienced climber would feel straight away. I asked the girl where she'd got the rope from and she said it was a birthday gift but purchased on Amazon. There was no safety spec on the rope itself, just a brand name - a quick search of this name revealed the rope and the accompanying spec - it was rated to just 3KN. It also claimed to be perfect for climbing, caving, etc. 

I explained the situation to her and recommend that she simply put it in the bin, or try to return it as mis-sold. Thankfully I work for an online shop so was in a position to offer her some discount on a proper climbing rope. She called up next day and I sorted her out with an actual Beal rope. 

I've rarely seen a man go so pale as when the manager of the wall saw the rope and heard that it'd been used for lead climbing already. Personally there's no doubt in my mind that it wouldn't have held a proper fall. It was so soft that you could roll the internal fibres around between finger and thumb. 

Post edited at 08:24
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

As a great piece of marketing for my favourite gear manufacturer, why not buy all the questionable items, and then send them to DMM for testing? I'd love to see the results as I'm sure everyone else would.

1
 derf 19 Jun 2019

An important article, for sure, but I’m surprised by the claim that it is illegal to sell belay devices in Europe without CE certification, as I’ve always understood this wasn’t the case. A quick Google search brings up several non-CE belay devices currently for sale by major European (including UK) retailers.

 jimtitt 19 Jun 2019
In reply to Frank the Husky:

> As a great piece of marketing for my favourite gear manufacturer, why not buy all the questionable items, and then send them to DMM for testing? I'd love to see the results as I'm sure everyone else would.


A truly crap idea actually. Any manufacturer that starts testing anorhers gear and publishing the results is doomed, either they say the rivals is better which isn't in their interests or they rubbish it and are wide open for others to attack their products.

I've privately tested  a fair amount of stuff like no-name karabiners for buddies and would never release the results, some of them put high-end Euro manufacturers to shame. And counterfeits that are better than the originals?

 danm 19 Jun 2019
In reply to derf:

Links please?

 jimtitt 19 Jun 2019
In reply to danm:

Best of luck there, report back when you have a definitive answer from the EU over selling old stock!

 NBR 19 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

OK I know this makes 'that guy' who brings up the B word but I think this is a geniune point.

Does anyone know what the UK plans post Brexit concerning CE marks and EN standards and how it will affect climbing kit?

Edit: I see others got there first sorry I was watching the Fake Uk video didn't finish reading comments until after posting.

Post edited at 18:58
 Pinch'a'salt 19 Jun 2019
In reply to derf:

Yep - prime case in point is any braking device for climbing that is of the friction plate style (ie Petzl Reverso, Verso, BD ATC etc) which are certified to EN 15151-2 but are not CE marked, because they are not PPE (no 'fail-to-safe' mode - ie if I let go of the rope I die...) hence not covered by Reg 425.

 gethin_allen 19 Jun 2019
In reply to Alex Riley:

I'd take care searching for "dmm" on Ali express as it appears to be a brand of Chinese sex toys.

 Andy Goldie 20 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

It's a great artical that needs sharing to all involved in climbing. Be aware that there is still a lot of Wild country nuts being sold second hand on EBay, that bear the markings of the nuts that were recalled around 2010/2013 due to load test failures.

these codes are AG, AH,Bll and JBE.  

Buy safe, Climb safe, Home safe.👍

 m0rjc 20 Jun 2019

One place I've bought in the past is Berghause - often quite cheap, EU seller so hopefully legitimate selling reputably branded kit. My Beal outdoor rope came from one of these places. Avenues like this may disappear in a few months time, though I've found that as a member of a climbing centre I can take advantage of discounts both in the centre's own shop and in places like Cotswolds. The discounts make these places more competitive with the online retailers. 

 Toerag 20 Jun 2019
In reply to Andy Goldie:

>  Be aware that there is still a lot of Wild country nuts being sold second hand on EBay, that bear the markings of the nuts that were recalled around 2010/2013 due to load test failures.

Why on earth don't the vendors simply participate in the recall and get free new ones?!  I wonder if Wild Country know how many sets never came back in.

 Blue Straggler 21 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Paul, great article. 

A couple of only half-informed comments from me, hopefully others can flesh these out. 

Both regarding the CE mark, and my incredibly limited "knowledge" about it. 

The CE mark has a very specific spacing between the letters. The CE mark on the harness that you mention first in your article, is not "right", the spacing between the C and the E is too much. This is a common ploy by companies to trick you into thinking there is a CE mark, but without apparently impersonating the actual CE mark. 

AFAIK, companies may "self certify" a genuine CE mark, and take ultimate responsibility/liability. My previous employers used to do this on inspection systems they sold. In that case, it was legitimate, as the inspection systems were well made, safe etc, and my employer had a proven global reputation / track record. However I daresay that in the murky world of "shell companies" or whatever the term is, it is easy to sell a thousand dodgy harnesses with correct CE marking, self-certified, in a month - and then fold the company and start a new one, leaving nobody liable for legal action after a tragic climbing incident. 

As I say, I am not 100% on either of these points and perhaps someone can helpfully correct them or flesh them out. I am only posting because that CE logo on the first harness was clearly "not a CE logo"

 DanC1985 21 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

It’s not just Amazon that are selling non UIAA, CE and/or EN equipment. Saw yesterday whilst scanning through my Facebook feed that on ‘Wish - Shopping Made Fun’ I can get a ‘climbing’ rope from just £1! Fairly ridiculous and very  irresponsible as the picture with this advert depicts a climber sport climbing.  My 80m sport rope from Mammut was around £170 (before my discount) so to think people will see this advert and try to compair these so scary!

Always check your gear has a UIAA, CE and EN standard and go for a CLIMBING manufacture that professional recommend, I only buy from brands and companies I personal know, this is your PPE that your relaying on keeping you safe whilst climbing.  Even then if it sounds too good to be try then do some research, we’ve found harnesses being worn by customers that had an CE mark but when we Googled this it was for another product (some electrical appliances if I recall) - should have CE0082 for a climbing harness. 

 jimtitt 21 Jun 2019
In reply to DanC1985:

Read the thread properly, CE0082 is nothing to do with harnesses. It is something with a CE mark and the notified body is Apave in France.

 jimtitt 21 Jun 2019
In reply to Blue Straggler:

> Paul, great article. 

> A couple of only half-informed comments from me, hopefully others can flesh these out. 

> Both regarding the CE mark, and my incredibly limited "knowledge" about it. 

> The CE mark has a very specific spacing between the letters. The CE mark on the harness that you mention first in your article, is not "right", the spacing between the C and the E is too much. This is a common ploy by companies to trick you into thinking there is a CE mark, but without apparently impersonating the actual CE mark. 

> AFAIK, companies may "self certify" a genuine CE mark, and take ultimate responsibility/liability. My previous employers used to do this on inspection systems they sold. In that case, it was legitimate, as the inspection systems were well made, safe etc, and my employer had a proven global reputation / track record. However I daresay that in the murky world of "shell companies" or whatever the term is, it is easy to sell a thousand dodgy harnesses with correct CE marking, self-certified, in a month - and then fold the company and start a new one, leaving nobody liable for legal action after a tragic climbing incident. 

> As I say, I am not 100% on either of these points and perhaps someone can helpfully correct them or flesh them out. I am only posting because that CE logo on the first harness was clearly "not a CE logo"


Some product categories (most) are self-certified for the CE mark but climbing equipment not.

You don't need to set up companies then fold them. If the company was based in Europe you couldn't avoid the liability anyway and if, like most of the stuff on Amazon it's actually being sold from China then they have no liability.

Something the article should have made clear is that if someone buys for example the harness shown which is being sold by a Chinese company then the PURCHASER is liable, both for any civil claims and for illegally importing it, 5 years and up to €100,000 fine if I remember rightly.

Until Amazon are forced to operate as an importer/retailer rather then a pseudo-marketplace then nothing will happen.

 Pinch'a'salt 21 Jun 2019
In reply to Blue Straggler:

> AFAIK, companies may "self certify" a genuine CE mark, and take ultimate responsibility/liability.

In terms of CE marks on PPE this is only true for category 1 PPE (protects from minor injuries), for Cat 2 and Cat 3 there are different leveles of involvement of a notified body to validate.

 danm 21 Jun 2019
In reply to Blue Straggler:

Sorry to say that this is an urban myth. If you are unsure whether the item you've bought conforms to the correct standards, ask the following questions:

1. Was it bought online from a retailer you've never heard of and who do not have  a bricks and mortar retail presence?

2. Was it amazing value, perhaps less than half price other similar looking products?

3. Does it have the correct EN standard (where applicable) associated with the product marked on it, and come attached with labels including user instructions, certification details and the like?

If the answers are Yes/Yes/No then be very wary.

Bear in mind a TV remote can have a CE mark on it, all that means is that it should have no sharp edges that cut your hand when you use it, and not electrocute you. The actual logo can vary a bit given it has to be applied to many different products by many different manufacturers.

What's different about PPE including most climbing gear, is the CE mark has a number next it, which as said earlier, is the number of the test house/notified body who've independently certified it. If you are really worried you've bought fake kit, use this number to contact the notified body, who have a list of everything they've certified.

 Blue Straggler 21 Jun 2019
In reply to jimtitt, Pinch-a-salt and danm:

Thanks for your polite and well-informed corrections. Much appreciated especially on a thread of this nature. 

 jimtitt 21 Jun 2019
In reply to Pinch'a'salt:

> In terms of CE marks on PPE this is only true for category 1 PPE (protects from minor injuries), for Cat 2 and Cat 3 there are different leveles of involvement of a notified body to validate.


And to confuse the punters even more there´s the Cat 0 stuff like I make that doesn´t and may not carry a CE mark

 Blue Straggler 21 Jun 2019
In reply to jimtitt:

> And to confuse the punters even more there´s the Cat 0 stuff like I make that doesn´t and may not carry a CE mark

I have early Kouba wired tri-cams that are CE-marked but not UIAA rated. Recently placed two as my first pieces on a route I was leading with someone from the OP's climbing club as my second. She was delighted  

 Paul Dyer 21 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

I have to work within the world of CE certification, so I’ve been reading this discussion with interest.  I may have some things I can add to or clarify.

Regarding self-certification, anything that’s protection against ‘falls from a height’ is level 3 PPE and MUST be certified by a notified body.  This will cover virtually all climbing equipment so if there is no notified body number it’s not properly certified.  Self-certification only occurs for level 1 which are things like washing up gloves.  The new regulation moves some of the categories, for example hearing protection is now level 3 but even reputable manufactures seem to have missed this as it’s buried in annex 1 of the regulation.  In anyone fancies some light reading it’s here:

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32016R0425

Another tool for identifying incorrect goods is that under the new PPE regulation the EC declaration for each product must be available to the user.  This means a copy must be with the goods or it must be on the manufacture’s website.  No EC declaration and it’s not properly CE approved.

To throw another spanner into the works, CE marking is only required in the EU, elsewhere there are other processes, a good example is the USA where high quality and safe products may not carry CE marks.  These would be illegal to sell in the EU but I’ve seen it happen. 

Regarding the liability, the PPE directive talks about the ‘placing of the goods on the market’ as where the liability rests.  So in the examples in the article it’s the importer that is breaking the law by placing the goods on the market in the EU.  I don’t know enough about Amazon’s terms to say if this is Amazon or the company Amazon are fulfilling for.  However, I don’t think the purchaser is breaking any laws by buying uncertified goods.  One issue with this is that if the goods are being purchased directly from outside the EU then the PPE regulation is essentially unenforceable as the importer who has placed the goods on the market is not governed by EU law! 

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Update 21/06/19 Amazon have told us that all the following items have now been removed from sale. They offered us this statement:

"All selling partners must follow our selling guidelines and those who do not will be subject to action, including withholding of funds and potential removal of their account. The products in question are no longer available."

1
 9fingerjon 21 Jun 2019
In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com:

That’s a start and good that they at least responded. 

But a quick search of “climbing rope” on there brings 30,000 results- I’ve not looked beyond the first page but many are similar to the rope in the article. 

For example- https://www.amazon.co.uk/Selighting-Professional-Rappelling-Carabiners-moun... 

In reply to jimtitt:

> A truly crap idea actually.

Hi Jim. No, it isn't a truly crap idea at all. It might be if I was suggesting that DMM tests Petzl or WC  gear (some of which they themselves make) but I'm suggesting they test gear that is made by dodgy companies who are producing stuff that's clearly substandard in many cases.

I don't suppose for a moment that DMM would have the slightest problem with another company testing their gear because their gear is - as you know - very high quality. Sigma 3 and all that.

Why are you keeping your test results secret? Surely there should be no secrets when people's lives are on the line. I appreciate that upsetting Black Diamond or whoever might not be to your liking from a commercial point of view, but I don't see secrecy in this matter as being anything more than a truly crap idea.

2
 Jamie Hageman 21 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Coming off the Ben this winter, I found a single bright blue crampon lying by the path.  The link bar had snapped.  I took it down and identified it as a BRS aluminium crampon, sold on Amazon.  Now I realise alu crampons aren't the toughest, and I don't know what sort of boot this was attatched to, but to have the link bar break at an obvious weak point (poor design in my eyes) is not great.  They looked brand new and I'm guessing it was their first outing.  Here they are -

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Crampons-Outdoor-Climbing-Aluminum-Professional/dp...

 jimtitt 21 Jun 2019
In reply to Frank the Husky:

DMM aren't an accredited testing lab and if they tested products the same as they produce would be wide open to legal action. We all test competitors equipment to see what's about but publishing is another matter.

If the BMC or UIAA want equipment tested there are plenty test labs in Europe. Otherwise your local Trading Standards Office is the correct destination as they can demand to view the technical file for the product and have it tested if required.

 lithos 22 Jun 2019

UIAA have just published a page with some good links for checking (and references this article)

https://www.theuiaa.org/uiaa/is-your-equipment-really-certified/

 BrendanO 24 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Ebay - I wasted half an hour looking at dodgy gear on Ebay yesterday. I reported 3 or 4 items out of curiosity and found reporting is quite tricky- dropdown menus, so you have to choose from ebay's options (guess whst the options don't include?). I have reported under various "near-enough" options, but would be handy to have "not certified for EU" or "dangerous to personal safety".    Very frustrating.

Also wrote a note to one "UK" seller of £13 climbing rope (6mm!!), got a reply this a.m. thanking me and saying they would "improve quality". Ate, right.

 tdan0504 25 Jun 2019

A while ago I was involved in getting some hardware (not climbing) manufactured in China. We asked about CE certification to which they replied "Yes we can print that on the packaging if you want."

Just don't buy unknown makes as star ratings and labels are meaningless when it comes to products manufactured in the Far East. Don't cheapskate with your life.

 Effy_yeomans 29 Jun 2019
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

This is really good, and as a complete mess who relies almost totally on word of mouth and friendly advice, I'm really struck by how much I didn't know about the gear I use (relieved to say their advice on brands has paid off!). One thing I'm now thinking about is how someone with little to no knowledge of the sport would tell these apart from legitimate listings, or even find the CE/UIAA certification. And that's a problem even for established gear brands, which makes people new to the sport even less likely to spot questionable gear.


Take this: the Positron Screwgate karabiner, bought from the actual Black Diamond store. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Black-Diamond-Positron-Screwgate-Carabiner/dp/B078...

The pictures don't show any of the certification or any codes on the karabiner itself, nor does the description mention it. If you didn't do enough research and lack experience or brand name recognition to help you, you wouldn't necessarily spot the difference between that and an unknown, uncertified piece of gear. I'm sure you could find more perfectly reliable gear where the information on Amazon is lacking.

I think there's a real place here for reputable and established climbing brands to agree a best practice code for selling on Amazon, whether that's through their own seller profiles or through third parties. It could be really simple: a few lines on why certification matters, and then the relevant info clearly displayed for each product, ideally complete with some form of linked evidence. That would make it very hard for dubious gear to blend in with the legitimate stuff.


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...