# Warning all APF10 Axminster Powered Respirator users??



## Sawdust=manglitter (27 Jul 2017)

I bought my APF10 Axminster Powered Respirator about a month ago thinking it would protect me from all MDF and exotic hardwood dust... however I just read a post on a Facebook woodturning group which made me wonder. I've copied and pasted the post below...

_________________________________________________

"AXMINSTER APF10 EVOLUTION POWERED RESPIRATOR...

If you own one, or are interested in one, it might be useful to read this.

A month or so ago, someone commented on here to say they WEREN'T buying the Evo helmet as it wasn't suitable for hardwoods or MDF. I bought it believing it was, and have got to the bottom of it (with a shock) this week.

The Axminster Evo is a 'JSP Powercap Active IP' - that's well known. Having read the comment about being unsuitable for hardwoods, I checked the Axminster site and it is sold as "FFP2 respiratory protection to EN12941:1988 TH1P". And a quick look at their Knowledge forum (as I did) tells you FFP2 is good for hardwoods and MDF. I have used the APF10 for eleven months on that basis.

But the comment on here made me look deeper into this...and right enough, JSP themselves make no mention of the product being "FFP2", only it being "TH1P".

Not knowing what this meant, I read into it. 'FF--' in fact denotes 'Filtered Facepiece' - it applies to masks (inc disposable masks). Powered respirators fall under a different category, 'TH--', applicable to 'Turbo Hoods'. 

For machining hardwoods or MDF, the Health & Safety Exec (HSE) say TH2P - not TH1P - is a minimum requirement. The APF10 is only TH1P.

But FFP2 is rightly stated as being good for hardwoods and MDF...so what was going on?

The upshot is the product is NOT class FFP2; an error appears to have been made assuming TH1P is equivalent to FFP2. I gave all the above info to Axminster who were shocked, but on looking into it conceded I was correct.

-----

I bought mine specifically to protect me from hardwood dusts, which are known to lead to respiratory diseases and are a known carcinogen. I believed the mask had inadvertently been mis-sold, quoting the wrong protection level. That needed addressed.

Today, I received a refund in full.

As I would expect, the manner in which Axminster dealt with this was professional, prompt, polite and apologetic. Their service and quick resolution can't be faulted - hats off to them. They now need to work out what went wrong, but the refund was the right course of action. 

I'm sharing the info not to cause Axminster a problem, but to warn that the product may not be offering the protection you think; I figure most of us use hardwoods, and are power sanding - not what this respirator is for, it would seem.

Thanks to the chap who made the comment; had I not read it and delved into a mountain of info, I'd be none the wiser. I've only not mentioned him in case he'd prefer not.

Stay safe!


For reference, I understand the TH-- classes to mean the following (in layman's terms):

TH1P: exposure to less than 1/10th of particles in the air around you.

TH2P: exposure to less than 1/20th of particles in the air.

TH3P (the highest standard): exposure to less than 1/40th in the air.

The APF10 is an example of a TH1P product.

The Trend Airshield Pro is an example of a TH2P product; that's why it is classified as safe for MDF where the APF10 is not.

And 3M manufacture powered respirators to both TH2P and TH3P level, depending on model and filters used."


_________________________________________________


I've just looked up the facts of the above and everything I've seen backs up what's been said above. 

Has anyone else come across this? I'm now considering taking mine back!?!


----------



## Chris152 (27 Jul 2017)

I'd have thought this is a very serious mistake - shouldn't they be doing a product recall/ pro-actively correcting it? The very least would seem to be not a refund but replacement with a mask that does filter at the rate claimed.


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (27 Jul 2017)

I totally agree! I'll be contacting Axminster myself later today for a response.


----------



## AJB Temple (27 Jul 2017)

This looks like a bit of a demolition job. In your own opening line you state that you thought it would protect you from "all MDF and exotic hardwood dust" yet acknowledge further down that the level of protection you expected was at the TH2P level, which is far from "all".

This mask is clearly a consumer grade product and at a consumer grade price point. Whilst Axminster need to get their descriptions right, I suspect that the product is broadly beneficial. It is at a price point where people who may otherwise not wear masks at all will use it, and that has to be a good thing. Filtration is a trade off between effectiveness and usability. Particularly for amateurs. Extremely effective filtration requires more enclosure, better pressure regulation, and different filters. 

I use the Axminster respirator. It is easy and comfortable and since I was not looking for any particular level of filtering - just an improvement, I was not misled by the descriptions or marketing. I do not work with MDF and anyway my workshop has a high level of dust extraction. This mask is very good for turning and is my go to filter of choice when I am keeping asthma and hayfever at bay whilst mowing the lawn or using a knapsack sprayer!


----------



## Chris152 (27 Jul 2017)

If they've claimed the mask filters at a level it's not capable of, and this impacts an individual's health - potentially seriously - Axminster have a serious problem. It appears Axminster conceded that it was a mistake. I've no idea if it is, but can't see how raising this issue constitutes a demolition job.


----------



## CHJ (27 Jul 2017)

The problem occurs because of the masks inability to meet the higher face-head seal requirements to prevent dust being drawn in via the sides rather than through the filters.

The same problems as the original Power Cap models, I presume the air flow rates and seals have been improved over the years but I suspect the design still does not meet the best standards.

I came across this problem way back in 2008 *when I was using the Old Trend mask (which I still have and use when just wanting a face shield against chippings not dust) and was looking for a new mask.

*Note that review is for older versions of the respective products which have both gone through production or design evolutions in the last 9 years.


----------



## ColeyS1 (27 Jul 2017)

Chris152":1krxoyuq said:


> If they've claimed the mask filters at a level it's not capable of, and this impacts an individual's health - potentially seriously - Axminster have a serious problem. It appears Axminster conceded that it was a mistake. I've no idea if it is, but can't see how raising this issue constitutes a demolition job.


I agree ! 20 years down the line when people start coughing to death, I wonder if they'll admit responsibility then. Would have thought they've got enough people working there to check the facts !!!

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


----------



## skipdiver (27 Jul 2017)

Hmm, i have one of these and i do work with MDF whilst wearing it. Think i will need to look into this further.


----------



## CHJ (27 Jul 2017)

skipdiver":35hd86hn said:


> Hmm, i have one of these and i do work with MDF whilst wearing it. Think i will need to look into this further.



Well as mentioned by *AJB Temple* you have been providing yourself with a level of protection, only you can asses if your extraction at source setup, rigorous adherence to battery charge (supplying safe filtered air) etc. means it meets your needs.

The initial cost outlay is always the problem for the DIY'ers who do not have the benefit of being able to offset against profits, tax etc. and I guess small turnover self employed have a cash flow problem to contend with for the commercial versions.

I know I had to swallow hard before embarking on my latest acquisition but having now had it some 7-8 months I know it was the right move.


----------



## lurker (27 Jul 2017)

PPE standards are quite stringent and are constantly changing hence these new numbers: the Euronorms are actually set by a panel of experts (some of whom will be from industry), its not unknown that the standards are weighted in a favourable manner towards the big hitters. 
As for HSE advice, this assumes you might be using the mask 7 hours a day for the whole of your working life.
So.............my guess it the mask does not meet the standard mainly on a technicality.
And generally it will be fine; its a bit different if you have allergic reactions however.

At least Axminster have not lied nor stretched the truth; don't imagine many PPE suppliers are as honest. The problem is due to a bunch of new numbers that IMHO were forced in by the big boys to remove competetion from the likes of axminster who can't justify the re testing costs 

I'd not worry too much unless you are working on a woodwork production line.

After near 30 years of manufacturing H&S, I'd hazard a guess that 90% of folks here could not consistently get masks to meet their advertised standards anyway, as they are not fitting them correctly. In industry face fit traininig is required.

By the way ignore all that "particles in the air" rubbish, the only thing that matters is respireable dust is not breathed in and that's very fine. and that is the only reason why MDF is a problem; I assume we are all aware all the scare stories about MDF are based on stuff that was banned years ago.


----------



## AJB Temple (27 Jul 2017)

HSE regards masks as the last line of defence. EU rules restrict the content of EU produced MDF and formaldehyde concentration levels are very low now. You can buy formaldehyde free MDF. Not much EU mdf seems to use hardwoods (which is the other potential irritant). I don't use it because I prefer to use timber - but I am not making kitchens etc commercially.


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (27 Jul 2017)

Just received the following response from Axminster...

"After looking at the specification and description further with guidance from JSP the manufacturer, I can confirm the units are sold in accordance with the filtration specification.

Please find attached documentation that provides further description of the filtration guidelines"


And this is a screenshot of the document they attached...


----------



## ghettoblaster (27 Jul 2017)

Hardwood dust is just as much of a problem as MDF and is a known carcinogen! I'm talking beech etc. not even exotics.....
The axminster mask is not appropriate for woodturning of hardwoods, which is the main market the product is aimed at, and most turners work in hardwoods!

I don't have the product but if I had bought it for turning and found this info out then I would be after a refund!

The idea that the specs. have changed or that they are weighted in the favour of 'the big boys' is farcical. As is the idea that Axminster, or JSP, who they worked with very closely on the development of the axi mask can't afford the testing costs! JSP have been a pretty big player in the UK PPE industry for a long time now, hardly a small fish?!

Lurker. Please can you state proper references for the statements that you make? I think being so flippant with regards to the real dangers hardwood and MDF dust pose to our respiratory health is highly irresponsible and foolish. Take whatever risks you like but don't poo-poo industry wide safety standards without HARD evidence, of which you offer none!


----------



## AJB Temple (27 Jul 2017)

Good news then. All is well.


----------



## AJB Temple (27 Jul 2017)

Why is it not suitable for turning hardwoods? It has a protection factor of 10, which is equivalent to FFP2 and TH1. People can make a choice to have no facial protection, 4 times protection, 10 times protection (as here) or higher. 

HSE makes clear that other methods should also be used for those needing protection. If I am sanding on my lathe for example, I use the cyclone linked to a hood, which draws away most of the dust, an air filter that extracts air to outside, and the Axi face mask. Quite honestly this is ample.


----------



## ghettoblaster (27 Jul 2017)

It is not suitable because a protection factor of 20 is required for hardwood and MDF. The Axi mask only provides a protection factor of 10 yet in their marketing material they use pictures of people turning on a lathe (the majority of turners use hardwood) and emptying dust sacks, an activity that also requires a protection factor of 20!
It's here for all to read! 
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/hsg53.pdf


----------



## skipdiver (27 Jul 2017)

I'm happy that a protection factor of 10, along with dust extraction at source and my air filter running is enough to satisfy me. The visor also provides a level of face protection from any flying object, so all in all, i will keep this mask and carry on. I work with MDF infrequently anyway and hardly any hardwoods at all.


----------



## ghettoblaster (27 Jul 2017)

That's great for you skipdiver but what about others that bought it believing it was suitable for the activitys they were doing when, in fact, it is not? I would not be happy!


----------



## skipdiver (27 Jul 2017)

ghettoblaster":69uznmu5 said:


> That's great for you skipdiver but what about others that bought it believing it was suitable for the activitys they were doing when, in fact, it is not? I would not be happy!



I obviously cannot speak for others. If they are unhappy, then they need to take it up with Axminster/JSP. It seems from the earlier post that Axminster advertised the product correctly in the specs but the advertising pictures with it were obviously misleading to some.


----------



## Chris152 (27 Jul 2017)

ghettoblaster":lpamgrmm said:


> That's great for you skipdiver but what about others that bought it believing it was suitable for the activitys they were doing when, in fact, it is not? I would not be happy!


Agreed. I can't imagine what the discussion is about. It's not about who's happy with what, and it doesn't matter in the least what the HSE says about other forms of extraction. If I'm led to believe I'm buying 12 eggs and I get ten, I'm not happy. And if it potentially causes me to have long-term sickness, I take the seller to court.


----------



## skipdiver (27 Jul 2017)

I knew this mask was FFP2 rated when i bought it, which has been confirmed by Axminster, so i have nothing to be unhappy about. I have PP3 dust masks but i just can't get on with them, so tend not to wear them as much as i should, so a permanent 2 is better than an intermittent 3 to my mind. 

I wasn't expecting 12 eggs to start with.


----------



## ghettoblaster (27 Jul 2017)

It can't be rated as FFP2 as it is a powered respirator subject to different tests and specs to face half masks. It is rated to TH1P which offers a APF of 10, as does a FFP2. This is not a fair comparison and is misleading as APF20 is required for hardwood machining or sanding of ANY wood. Add to this the pic. of the guy emptying the dust sack. This also requires a APF20 device so totally misleading.


----------



## AJB Temple (28 Jul 2017)

No it is misleading to say that an APF20 device is "required". You are cherry picking from the HSE site. In a commercial environment the employer needs to provide suitable protection. The liability for failing to do that would not rest with the mask provider unless their marketing material was deliberately or negligently wrong. Axminster sell this as APF10 - it is neither misleading nor wrong. 

A non-commercial user makes their own decision about what level of protection, if any, they consider to be appropriate for them. In my experience, most wood turners use little or no respiratory protection when using turning tools (their choice), the reasoning being that few small particles are created, but may well opt for protection when sanding. 

A well set up workshop may well have (as recommended by HSE guidance) at least one other primary line of defence, such as direct extraction. I copied the set up that Axminster use on their turning courses, which is an extraction hood (and an extracted chute below as well in my case) hooked up to a cyclone. Plus I have an air cleaner in my workshop, and exterior extraction fans. My choice as it is my shop. And I wear the APF10 when I feel the need. This provides me with face protection and positive pressure dust protection. I am very pleased with the APF10 as it is comfortable to wear for long periods. 

This addresses the biggest problem for hobby or light trade users - not bothering with protection because it is either uncomfortable, ineffective (many people do not get on with face masks so don't bother) or unaffordable. 

This was my issue with the OTT "WARNING" headline here. The warning was issued before the facts were properly established and without suitable commercial v domestic context. 

The APF 10 is without doubt far better than doing nothing and far better than a poorly fitting mouth and nose mask. It is likely to get used. We need to get a sense of proportion here.


----------



## Chris152 (28 Jul 2017)

The device has an APF of 10.
This is a screen grab of the site:





and this is a screen grab of the HSE requirements for different woodworking jobs:





The web site does seem misleading to me, but I'm new to all this.


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (28 Jul 2017)

Thanks for that Chris!

In terms of what people should or shouldn't wear for their own protection, that's entirely up to them, but the facts are the facts, and being someone with sensetive lungs in the first place (asthma, hayfever and house dust allergies) I trusted the sales bloke in the axminster shop when he said it was suitable for MDF and exotics. And besides what he told me, as Chris has shown above it is false advertising!


----------



## skipdiver (28 Jul 2017)

I can see both sides of the debate and i can understand if some people think the advertising is misleading, but for me, i have weighed up all the pro's and cons and have decided that i am happy with my arrangement. I am a sole trader and have no-one to please but myself and as AJB says, i will wear this mask all day, whereas i wouldn't with a face mask as i just don't like them. I am also convinced that despite it being rated as a 10, the face mask feels to me that it keeps more dust at bay than a PP3 face mask does. My chest feels much clearer using the air hood than it does using a face mask and keeps fine dust out of my hair and eyes and beard. I also like the full face protection it affords.


----------



## JonnieScotland (28 Jul 2017)

AJB Temple":9nax2bk7 said:


> Why is it not suitable for turning hardwoods? It has a protection factor of 10, which is equivalent to FFP2 and TH1....Quite honestly this is ample.



You have answered your own question; see attached HSE regulations for wood dust. This very clearly states work with hardwood requires APF20, as does emptying a dust bag (an image Axminster was using to market the product until this morning, when it was removed). APF20 is TH2P while, as you say, the Evolution is TH1P. With all respect, people's speculative opinion of what is adequate is not relevant in determining if the product has been mis-represented; it is a PPE product being marketed for a purpose for which it is unsuitable for in the eyes of HSE. Axminster stated FFP2 is "suitable for hardwoods and MDF"; HSE says not so. There is no obligation for a customer to set that aside, although their prerogative if they choose to.

If Axminster was not mis-representing this product, you might fairly ask why their written specification has changed this morning on their website, and why the image of a man emptying a commercial dust extraction sack - an activity HSE says requires APF20 respiratory protection - has been removed as well. 

Ultimately, until today, the product was being sold with a written specification stating it was "FFP2 respiratory protection"; it does not carry that certification, and any claimed 'equivalents' to FFP2 are an irrelevance; a product claiming to meet a level of certification it does not meet is unlawful. If a buyer wants to judge it adequate for their needs, that's fine. But those who have bought it on the back of misinformation and would prefer a refund are due a refund. And right enough, several more full refunds have been offered this afternoon.

The devil's advocate view is admirable, but let's not advise people TH1P is fine when that position is desperately lacking any credible measure or evidence.


----------



## skipdiver (28 Jul 2017)

A very well written and argued first post Jonnie.


----------



## Doug B (29 Jul 2017)

All this has got me wondering what factor Rico Daniels hanky over his mouth & nose on The Salvager gives him :-s :-s


----------



## AJB Temple (30 Jul 2017)

Jonnie - your argument is well written but flawed. You refer to HSE "regulations". In fact, what you are talking about is guidance. 

HSE guidance refers to the commercial environment. It does not deal with domestic users and this is reasonable as exposure times and conditions will vary greatly. It is the employer who has the responsibility to provide suitable protection and guidance. The law is not in fact prescriptive about what is suitable, but indicates that following the guidance is likely to result in compliance with the law. 

The HSE page that deals with wood dust makes clear that the first line of defence should be extraction. The guidance also then goes on to say "For very dusty jobs such as sanding, additional protection may be needed and a suitable face mask should be worn as well as using the extraction". 

The only point I am making here is that there has been a tendency in this thread to extrapolate guidance, ignore the recommended first line so defence, and then treat guidance as if it is law (regulation) when it is not. This is, in itself misleading. The use of face masks should be put into proper context. 

The overriding point is surely that it is a good idea to wear face masks of some kind when appropriate to do so. I did not find the Axminster APF10 advertising or product description misleading. I was aware of the HSE guidance and that as a domestic user it does not apply to me in a legislative way and I am aware that better face mask systems are available (at higher cost) but chose one that I knew I would use. In fact I followed the HSE guidance anyway by installing proper extraction (that is the primary requirement), whole air filtering (secondary and using a face mask (third line or defence) when necessary. 

The APF 10 is a good product at a sensible price. In my opinion. It is clearly unwise (and not in accord with HSE guidance) to use a face mask system as the only or primary defence mechanism. That is the relevant context.


----------



## ColeyS1 (30 Jul 2017)

Additional extraction when emptying the extractor bags then. 

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


----------



## Chris152 (30 Jul 2017)

ColeyS1":3r1aq2ja said:


> Additional extraction when emptying the extractor bags then.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


Yep, that should sort it.


----------



## ColeyS1 (30 Jul 2017)

But then wouldn't you need additional additional extraction to empty the additional extractor? What you really need is a face mask suitable for the task [SMILING FACE WITH OPEN MOUTH]

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


----------



## CHJ (30 Jul 2017)

A little humour is fine but remember guys this is a serious subject involving personal safety.

I know from personal sensitivity to wood dusts that some must get through one way or another if masks and other extraction is not adequate.

I know for a fact that 99% of my reactions to wood have gone away whilst using my current setup, being lazy and spending a few minutes with a 'can't be bothered' attitude leads to discomfort, whether that's always due to ingestion of particles or just surface skin contact I don't know, but it's a trial regime I'm not prepared to take.

For me it's a very expensive must have if I wish to spin and sand bits of wood, and I'm still surprised at how much the mask filters still intercept when you see such quantities of dust streaming up the extractor pipes. 

As an aside on the subject of filter levels, I did have a word with one woodworker I visited who was cleaning his big shop air recirculating filter with a Henry Vacuum in his shed. He had not cottoned on to the fact his Henry had courser filtering than the unit he was cleaning up and was just re-distributing the stuff around the shed.


----------



## ColeyS1 (30 Jul 2017)

Apologies Chas. The point I was trying to make is people may have bought the mask based on the picture from Axminsters website. AJB Temple's post of saying it should be used aswell as using extraction doesn't really work when you want to use it for emptying extractor bags !

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


----------



## CHJ (30 Jul 2017)

No apologies needed *Coley*, valid point, have to move all my extractors out into the open air and note wind direction and wear mask when empting.


----------



## JonnieScotland (31 Jul 2017)

AJB Temple":18ppnof8 said:


> Jonnie - your argument is well written but flawed. You refer to HSE "regulations". In fact, what you are talking about is guidance.
> 
> HSE guidance refers to the commercial environment. It does not deal with domestic users and this is reasonable as exposure times and conditions will vary greatly. It is the employer who has the responsibility to provide suitable protection and guidance. The law is not in fact prescriptive about what is suitable, but indicates that following the guidance is likely to result in compliance with the law.
> 
> ...



AJB Temple - I think it's unfair to say my argument is flawed, not least given I made very clear hobbyist users were free to decide for themselves whether to overlook HSE guidance (i.e. employers not having the same freedom). 

That aside, what you are saying about the wider extraction/RPE topic overlooks that this isn't only about what purpose this product is fit for going forward - it is a question of whether it had been misrepresented, which would leave EXISTING owners with a right to a refund. The fact is Axminster have been selling the product as "FFP2 respiratory protection", and it is irrefutable that unless a product has been tested to EN149 'Respiratory Protective Devices', which this has not, the product MUST NOT be sold as carrying that certification. There can not be any debate on that point, as it is surely enshrined in consumer law? You can't say a product is Kite Marked when it's only CE marked, then just say they are equivalent. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 protects consumers from products sold 'Not As Described', and the debate over whether it might be adequate dependent on a number of other factors doesn't enter into that. Let's not forget, I was given a full refund without question, as were several other customers.

I don't remember saying a respirator should provide protection on its own, so you're incorrect in implying I have ignored the first line of defence. The Evolution was (as you advise) only one part of my dust control measures, but nevertheless one I expected to perform as it was sold to me ("suitable for hardwoods and MDF"). 
And when you say better respirators are available but at a HIGHER cost, actually the Trend Airshield Pro currently sells for a good bit LESS than the Evolution, but conforms to the higher TH2P level - that's twice as effective as TH1P, for anyone who isn't sure if these codes make a difference. Your view is the Evolution is a "good product at a sensible price", and that's absolutely your choice (and your opinion valid); but equally if someone decides that twice the protection for 10% less money is a no-brainer (TH1P being half as effective as TH2P), you can't fault that logic. I get that you can only protect yourself within the finances available, but it creates an interesting debate when higher protection (and near identical features) are available for less...you surely can't advise someone not to overprotect themselves?

This was never to cause an argument, or do a "demolition job" as I was accused of; I realised the product wasn't what I thought it was, worked out where I'd been misled, Axminster agreed, and I was refunded. As it turns out, countless other users were in the same position, buying the product on the strength of information/images which Axminster saw fit to remove from their website on Friday (read into that what you will).


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (31 Jul 2017)

Axminster have arranged for a courier to pick up my APF10 respirator on Wednesday. I'll be spending my refund on the Trend Airshield Pro and use the change to also buy spare filters and visor overlays. In fairness to Axminster they've offered refunds, however having happily spent thousands there in the last couple of years I have now lost respect for the company


----------



## ColeyS1 (31 Jul 2017)

Sawdust=manglitter":1ctu1z7a said:


> Axminster have arranged for a courier to pick up my APF10 respirator on Wednesday. I'll be spending my refund on the Trend Airshield Pro and use the change to also buy spare filters and visor overlays. In fairness to Axminster they've offered refunds, however having happily spent thousands there in the last couple of years I have now lost respect for the company


Similar to how they made me feel then. You read time after time about how excellent they are at resolving issues, so it was a no brainer to invest in a fairly expensive machine from them 5ish grand I think. It wasn't fit for use and after numerous things going wrong and their 'technician' making things worse,I asked for a refund- Nope can't do that, yada yada yada. Hit a brick wall, i was stuck with it. Spent numerous days fixing it myself in the end. 
Funny how they suddenly turn unhelpful when it's a nice big chunk of profit they stand to lose.


Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


----------



## iNewbie (31 Jul 2017)

Sawdust=manglitter":b1hze6n2 said:



> Axminster have arranged for a courier to pick up my APF10 respirator on Wednesday. I'll be spending my refund on the Trend Airshield Pro and use the change to also buy spare filters and visor overlays. In fairness to Axminster they've offered refunds, however having happily spent thousands there in the last couple of years I have now lost respect for the company



I'd hazard a guess that under their terms page http://www.axminster.co.uk/terms/ there'll be a clause saying they're not liable and its for the buyer to check the item is suitable. Which is perfectly reasonable as its up to the buyer to make sure an item is, and not rely on the sellers website, better to ask the manufacturer. 

My comment is not meant to come across as being harsh, most people don't double check and its times like these you find out there's been misinformation. Axminster isn't the horses mouth but might end up as the panto arrze end in a description, for whatever reason...


----------



## skipdiver (31 Jul 2017)

Is the Trend cheaper? Sure it was dearer than the Evolution when i bought mine. Didn't realise that the Trend offered more protection though and puts a different slant on things. I may well now think about pushing for a refund and swapping to the Trend. Is the refund from Axminster across the board, no questions asked? Bought mine in May 2016 for £199.


----------



## Sawdust=manglitter (31 Jul 2017)

skipdiver":qs1gybtw said:


> Is the Trend cheaper? Sure it was dearer than the Evolution when i bought mine. Didn't realise that the Trend offered more protection though and puts a different slant on things. I may well now think about pushing for a refund and swapping to the Trend. Is the refund from Axminster across the board, no questions asked? Bought mine in May 2016 for £199.




I have no idea if it's no questions asked. I contacted them for a response last week when all this first surfaced, but I only bought mine a few weeks ago in June. If you're concerned or would like a refund just try contacting Axminster. I've seen the Trend for less than £190, and it has twice the protection, so it's a no brainier for me


----------



## CHJ (31 Jul 2017)

skipdiver":b8map3sh said:


> Didn't realise that the Trend offered more protection though and puts a different slant on things. .



I think you will find if you check the specifications that the JSP is THP1

The Trend Pro is THP2. 

The main problem I had with the original Trend Pro when I tried it was the weight and balance in use, I have no experience of current incarnation of model.


----------



## skipdiver (31 Jul 2017)

Thanks chaps.

Funny thing is that i've already had mine collected by Axminster once early on when the battery wouldn't take a charge and they replaced it no problem.

Will have to look into this a bit more when i have some time. I'm stupid busy at the moment and the Evo is in use constantly.


----------



## AJB Temple (2 Aug 2017)

Jonnnie - I am fine with your rationale. I simply think you cherry picked and wrongly extrapolated from the HSE website. The debate has run its course. I also have the Trend product now with the waist mounted power unit. Personally, I find it quite uncomfortable to use (gives me a headache), and so I don't use it most of the time, except when spraying. Mine was a cast off from my brother.


----------



## pollys13 (2 Aug 2017)

Not been on forum for a week or so. Just read this post, just contacted Axminster.

Everybody wants a refund..... and.... I..... want..... one..... too


----------

