On 15/05/2016 02:43, Rod Speed wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Rod Speed wrote:

I just don't believe that any law says that when something has failed
due to inadequate specs with a particular component like a cap or a
relay that there is anything to prevent someone repairing that device
from replacing the component which has failed with a higher rated
component, whether that is a higher voltage or temperature rating
on a cap or a higher current rating on the relay contacts etc.

You can believe what you want.

Same with you.
I'd rather believe Geoff, who does such things for a living.

Doesn't matter what he claims. What matters is whether
any law or regulation that prevents him from using better
rated components to replace the ones that have failed with stuff like
the temperature rating of caps and the
current rating of relays etc.
There is no such law or regulation.
If there was, someone would have listed it by now.

It's already explained to you, however, again.

If Geoff uses parts specified by the manufacturer and anything goes
wrong, then it become very difficult for a customer to make any claim
against Geoff for when his house burnt down.

If Geoff chooses non specified components, and the customer's house
burns down, the onus will be on Geoff to prove that the component he
used was fit for purpose.

The manufacturer will have a ream of paper to exemplify the due
diligence of the choice of component, Geoff won't. His insurance
company will be aware of that and will most likely make it a condition
of insurance cover to used identical components.