Burning Brick Tad

General discussion of recent news events. Get as off topic as you wish. Please observe proper netiquette. Sensitive topics may be edited or removed entirely.

Burning Brick Tad

Postby sparky » Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:31

Apparently being contracted to commission apparent ULC listed monitoring allows you to tamper with private property as well as tamper with a life safety system. Under our electrical safety act sir you shouldn't even be inside or past the dead front of a fire alarm control panel. Let alone disconnecting loop conductors of a fire alarm installation. I suppose after you tampered with that junction box you have now had that entire system verified to ensure operation.
sparky
 

Re: Burning Brick Tad

Postby FIRETEK » Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:00

As part of commissioning a fire alarm communicator, I am required to transmit trouble, alarm, and supervisory signals to the central monitoring centre. I have a number of means at my disposal to accomplish this considering I have training over and above the usual security company technician that would install these things. I find your comment about my not being qualified to go past the dead-front amusing. It's the same argument you put forward in another forum topic.

This issue isn't about ME, but about an individual engaged in the practice of Verification of a life safety system that fails to recognize a substandard (in this case - FAILED) installation and even goes so far as to pass it. Mr. Bukala is a Mircom trained technician and I would venture to say isn't qualified to verify the changing of a light bulb in a table lamp let alone a Mircom FX-2000. Mr. Bukala's "certification" (and a number of other individuals that have been the subjects of ASTTBC investigation and Burning Brick Awards http://www.firetechs.net/Burning_Brick_Awards/burning_brick_award.asp) allows him to continue to engage in these substandard practices.

And you have the nerve to call ME unqualified!
Frank Kurz
http://www.firetechs.net
1 (888) 340-3473
FIRETEK
Site Admin
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:10
Location: Vancouver, B. C., Canada

Re: Burning Brick Tad

Postby sparky » Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:38

If you are not qualified to touch the fire alarm panel or access past the dead front to commission your "apparent'" ULC fire monitoring then you must contract someone who is qualified to. Unless I am wrong with you having zero qualification. Please explain to me otherwise if this is so the case. Why you feel the need to be so vindictive toward obvious parties Frank, whom I am certain just either had a run in with you in the past, or didn't allow you to be trained, or are bitter that they are trained and you are not is mind blowing. Your attitude keeps people "away" from you (*comment edited*). Have you ever performed a verification for ace Frank with your company Anubis? Everyone would like to know.
sparky
 

Re: Burning Brick Tad

Postby FIRETEK » Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:36

Interesting the way you twist things away from the subject of this thread. You say I am not qualified. I have no idea where you got this idiotic notion. Anubis Systems Technologies has been in business since 1996. I own the business. I also work for a number of contractors in the Lower Mainland. The terms of the contractual arrangements with any company I work for aren't open for public discussion (although I have posted a few rates on the website at http://www.anubissystems.com). I can also assure you that nothing I do violates any laws, Codes or Standards (if this is what you might be inferring with your comment about Ace).

The Burning Bricks are not an attack on the industry (or any particular individual). You are, however, not alone in the opinion you expressed regarding the "The Burning Brick Awards", but you do happen to represent a radical departure from the usual detractor I encounter. You seem to be the only one that has elected to pursue a defence of individuals (and companies) that take advantage of the so-called "certifications" they have been entrusted with (and which I have demonstrated they grossly misrepresent). I find this completely indefensible (and I'm certain I'm not alone). Mr. Bukala is obviously someone you know (either as a friend or who may have worked with you in the past). I would hope that, in the latter case, he carried out his obligations somewhat better than what he's demonstrated in the articles posted here. If the former, perhaps you should get together with him and suggest he undertake to review the installation manual for the FX-2000 to start with and then proceed to CAN/ULC-S524-06 (Installation Standard for Fire Alarm Systems), CAN/ULC-S537-04 (Standard for Verification of Fire Alarm Systems), and BCBC 2006 & 2012.

Your personal and unqualified attacks violate the terms of use of our message board. You have yet to update your email information and continue to post anonymously (which happens to be another violation of our terms of use). I invite you to reapply and provide valid contact information whereupon you can elect to continue this discussion. I don't mind your using a pseudonym, but I won't tolerate anonymous slurs (just as I'm sure you wouldn't either).

Your account has been suspended. Please email or call me if you would like to have it reactivated. Please ensure you read and understand our terms of use before you do however.
Frank Kurz
http://www.firetechs.net
1 (888) 340-3473
FIRETEK
Site Admin
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:10
Location: Vancouver, B. C., Canada


Return to In the News.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron