11-07-2009, 07:43 PM
|
|
CC Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane Australia,
QLD
Cobra Make, Engine: RMC under re-construction, GenIV with tremec 600, Jag 3.31 L/S diff
Posts: 3,318
|
|
Not Ranked
Quote:
Originally Posted by 400TT
Liam, sorry mate I'm just not concerned about ESC.
|
Craig, that is exactly the complacent attitude of manufacturers referred to earlier in this thread. Manufacturers should be concerned with any threat which may cause risk to their industry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 400TT
When the time comes closer, the engineers themselves will be an important aspect when it comes to discussions with the transport authorities.
|
And well they might. But their income relies on being recognized as an engineer by the authorities. Hence, in a way they become "servants". In any case, the object of the exercise is to encourage a formal exemption to the legislation before some poor ICV builder has expended the money and effort in building an ICV and now hoping his engineer can obtain an exemption.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 400TT
Unfortunately I have far more pressing work in respect to compliance.
|
Craig, I find this statement rather disturbing. Are you simply saying you don't have 5 minutes to cut & paste an email off to the minister?.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 400TT
I take registration compliance very seriously. It is my business.
|
I thought you did but your comments don't reflect that.
Craig, unless I have misread your comments I really do find your comments disturbing. You mention having spent "$10,000's dollars on compliance" which you either add to your clients costs or invest in "intelligence" for your business. Either way the cost will/can be amortized in some way in the business even if only via the tax system.
Are you expecting some poor individual to expend the same (ex pocket) if/when this legislation is not exempted for ICV's ?.
__________________
It's impossible to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys.
|
Threaded Mode
