<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3c.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/loose.dtd">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3243" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=238253400-24012008>Thank
you - I was aware of that agreement and we have pointed the churchwarden in the
right direction. The EIG Checklist has a very unelaborate statement about
bells needing to be left down - it is only later in their documentation that the
actual policy gets an airing - too many pages on to have been discovered by a
churchwarden with a bee in his bonnet.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=238253400-24012008>Andrew</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=238253400-24012008>PS If
I am correctly informed, Happy Round Numbered Birthday!</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com]<B>On
Behalf Of </B>Andrew Wilby<BR><B>Sent:</B> 23 January 2008 12:22<BR><B>To:</B>
bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [Bell Historians]
EIG<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV id=ygrp-text>
<P>Andrew.<BR><BR>There is an agreement in place with EIG on the subject of
bells being <BR>left up which was negotiated betwwen CCCBR and EIG some years
ago and <BR>published in their policy documentation.<BR><BR>There is also now
regular contact between the Tower Stewardship <BR>Committee and EIG.<BR><BR>I
doubt that the Group Chief Surveyor, Ian Wainwright, would support the <BR>use
of the "we" in this case and you should refer to underwriter to his
<BR>company's policies and not indulge in debating them with
him.<BR><BR>Further support and assistance should be forthcoming from the
Tower <BR>Stewardship Committee. It is not in the interests of anyone that
local <BR>re-negotiation breaks out!<BR><BR>EIG "Guidance Notes for Churches"
- Section 3 - Health and Safety - <BR>Conditions of Use Applying to
Change-Ringing Bells<BR>[Page 12] applies<BR><BR>It would be nice to think
that an EIG senior Underwriter was familiar <BR>with his own
Guidance!<BR><BR>Hope this helps.<BR><BR>Andrew<BR><BR>Andrew Aspland
wrote:<BR>> Not history but would the learned list care to comment on this
quote <BR>> from an Ecclesiaistical Insurance Senior
Underwriter:<BR>><BR>> "The reasons that we prefer that the bells are
left in the 'down' <BR>> position are as follows:<BR>> "1. From the
material damage point of view, if the bells are left in <BR>> the 'up'
position and a fire actually gets up into the tower above the <BR>> bells,
then debris will fall down into the bells themselves, rather <BR>> than
just bounce off them and fall to the ground. <BR>> <BR>> "Then, the
weight of the debris and the bells combined could cause <BR>> serious
damage not only to the bells but also potentially damage the <BR>> bell
frame, if not to the structure of the tower itself, and bearing <BR>> in
mind that you have quite a lot of bells then it could prove a real <BR>>
danger to the structure of your church."<BR>> <BR>> This sounds like the
idea of someone who has no idea of what it is <BR>> like in a bell tower -
and the last paragraph describes such a <BR>> disasterous scenario that the
bells being up or down would have little <BR>> bearing on the matter.
<BR>> <BR>> Andrew<BR>> <BR>> <BR>><BR>> <BR>>
------------<WBR>---------<WBR>---------<WBR>---------<WBR>---------<WBR>---------<WBR>-<BR>><BR>>
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.<BR>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
<BR>> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.1/1220 - Release Date:
11/01/2008 18:09<BR>> <BR></P></DIV><!--End group email --></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>