I have been asked to offer an opinion in a sensitive situation.
>
>A machinist moved his shop across town and required some rewiring (3-phase
>outlets, conduit, etc.) in order to locate some machines where he wanted
>them.
>
>He hires a guy who's not a pro (and later discovers is not insured) but has
>done shop wiring before and had a good attitude and track record. The guy
>does good work. No complaints about the quality of his work.
>
>Owner throws the switch, all works fine.
>
>The story continues 4 weeks later when the very expensive CNC fries its
>controller PCB to the tune of $4000.
>
>Turns out the voltage in the shop was upward of 245 and the taps in the CNC's
>power supply were set for 220.
>
>What is the legal and moral responsibility of each party?
>
>What will not be helpful are replies about the character or intelligence of
>either of the players or their actions.
>
>Thanks.
The "electrician" is culpable as it was found that the wiring was to blame. That proof alone means that he would be culpable, regardless of his credentials, or lack thereof.
The owner should bear some blame (as in be lenient in court) for trying to economize costs in the wrong area (he should have paid the licensed and insured electrician).
Also knowing how to hook up systems well, and knowing how to do a proper requirements analysis are two different things and define some of the differences between the grunt pulling the wires and the supervisor laying out the plan and making sure that the machines and their power sources are matched. Since a failure mode did occur, it would be improper not to make a negative statement about the character of the installer.
Also, though it was not a lack of intelligence that compelled the owner to choose the riskier path, it does indicate a lack of wisdom, which I am sure has received a boost due to these events already.
PS Cross-posting is lame.