[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fire Alarms Again

Subject: Re: Fire Alarms Again
From: "Jim" <alarminex@xxxxxxx>
Date: 1 Dec 2006 11:05:55 -0800
Newsgroups: alt.security.alarms
References: <HuWdnRiE3_4MdfLYnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx> <V0Xbh.9284$_H5.2341@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <W8qdnTdjAPmM_-3YnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx> <WHZbh.19329$k6.13413@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Bob Worthy wrote:
>
> What ever you find will only be the minimum code and standing on that alone
> will be a tough argument with your AHJ. It is his juridiction and he can
> require anything that meets or exceeds the code. It sounds like he has told
> you what he wants and it sounds like he is not being unreasonable. If I were
> you, I would try to make him happy. I have found out that when the AHJ is
> happy, everyone is happy, except the one that has to pay the bill. Use this
> as a lesson because the next AHJ may have a totally different requirement
> for the same type occupancy.


Which is the exact reason I stopped doing commercial fire.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fire Alarms Again
  - From: Bob Worthy
- Re: Fire Alarms Again
  - From: alarman

References:
- Fire Alarms Again
  - From: J Barnes
- Re: Fire Alarms Again
  - From: Roland Moore
- Re: Fire Alarms Again
  - From: J Barnes
- Re: Fire Alarms Again
  - From: Bob Worthy

Prev by Message: Re: 7845C in conjunction with a DSC 5020
Next by Message: Re: Fire Alarms Again
Previous by thread: Re: Fire Alarms Again
Next by thread: Re: Fire Alarms Again
Index(es):
- Message
- Thread

alt.security.alarms Main Index | alt.security.alarms Thread Index | alt.security.alarms Home | Archives Home