Hi

Let me start by giving some background first.

About 2 months ago I had one of my 2 Hubble AM2's (the slave in my configuration) sent back to Hubble as I noticed the capacity overall was significantly lower than usual. My installer came round and found that the battery had a dead cell. It was sent to Hubble and remained there for over a month (a number of reasons from Hubble). When it came back the battery was reinstalled and I left them to charge up again (I think the slave was at about 60% and the master was 40%). 

My installer checked both and found no issue on the master or slave. They were both fully charged overnight. Even from full, the slave would always drain down at a slower rate than the master, with the master always being completely empty while the slave had about 4 LEDS left (from the 6 below each battery). I tried to drain them both down to 20% and tried charging again. No luck. I tried Hubble's battery reset method, but the problem remained. They were also charged individually, and I found that when the inverter was showing around 30%, once disconnected, the master was around 7% while the slave was around 30%. I even had the firmware upgraded again (although my installer had already done this previously) but still the problem remained.

 

Keep in mind that the slave that was returned seems to be behaving quite well now. It is now the master battery that is giving the issue.

Now for my query.

My installer has kindly taken the master battery back to Hubble, but now they are asking for a COC. Why would there be a need for them to be asking for it? I do actually have the COC after the installation was completed, I just find it strange that they would want that. Surely anything out of the ordinary would already be logged to the BMS? Has anyone else been asked for their COC?
 

This is standard practice. They trying to weed out a poor installation etc. Also it can also be a weed out a claim based on no CoC. 

18 minutes ago, Steve87 said:

This is standard practice. They trying to weed out a poor installation etc. Also it can also be a weed out a claim based on no CoC. 

I'm afraid so. Batteries are expensive equipment, so the sellers try everything to avoid expensive repairs or replacements.

However it looks to me, that unless it is explicitly mentioned in the guaranty conditions they cannot legally refuse warranty claims based on the lack of COC.

Edited September 6, 20232 yr by Beat

Jip, it seems Hubble is trying to get out of an warranty claim.

It's just Hubble trying to see if they can get out of a warranty claim.

Hence the reason i don't use ANY hubble batteries this business practice from Hubble has been reported many times all types of shenanigans not to honor the Warranty. I stick to FW and Greenrich.

I want to further this question.  To my knowledge a COC only covers the AC side of an installation.  At least, mine does.  The only mention of a solar system is a little "1" next to the "Alternative Power Supply Connection" section.  There is nothing else on there about batteries, panels, DC connections and the rest.  (The report submitted to council for approval is an entirely different matter though!)

Therefore, one would have a COC if you installed a new system, but if you added an additional battery to an existing system, there wouldn't necesarily be a COC as nothing changed on the AC side of the installation.  Therefore Hubble cannot even use a COC to confirm that the batery was installed by a licenced electrician, which is what I suspect they'd be after.

So then what is the point?

Can anyone confirm: would an installer issue a new COC when they add another battery to a system?

A very important point. There is absolutely zero information on the DC aspect. That is why it good to use the AREP or PV Green card CoC document which is much more comprehensive & covers the DC side in good detail. I use it because if there is a come back or a claim that the equipment installed wasn't to spec or an insurance claim me as an installer are fully covered. 

4 hours ago, Steve87 said:

A very important point. There is absolutely zero information on the DC aspect. That is why it good to use the AREP or PV Green card CoC document which is much more comprehensive & covers the DC side in good detail. I use it because if there is a come back or a claim that the equipment installed wasn't to spec or an insurance claim me as an installer are fully covered. 

out of interest, does the PV Green card CoC have the below letter head? 

6 hours ago, Burntwick said:

Now for my query.

My installer has kindly taken the master battery back to Hubble, but now they are asking for a COC. Why would there be a need for them to be asking for it? I do actually have the COC after the installation was completed, I just find it strange that they would want that. Surely anything out of the ordinary would already be logged to the BMS? Has anyone else been asked for their COC?
 

You should ask Hubble a few questions in return :

Who stands behind their warranty on their batteries ?  Can you have a copy of the guarantor's financial statements to see if they have a solid balance sheet to honor warranties ?  A guarantee/warranty is only as good as the person/company who stands behind it ...

Who manufacture the cells used inside the battery ? Is it new Grade A cells,  and how many cells are there inside ?

Who manufacture the BMS used to protect the cells inside the battery ?

( Long term testing done in Australia has shown that most battery system failures are due to BMS faults or failures ...) 

18 minutes ago, hoohloc said:

out of interest, does the PV Green card CoC have the below letter head? 

It honestly doesn't need to because it does not replace the CoC as we know it neither is it pretending to. However, it's got all the nity grity of the DC side of the installation & Breaker size, fuse sizes, string length, panel size, Wiring diagram & actually makes what should be a compete CoC for a solar installation. The solar installation CoC that can't answer how many panels are on the roof & what layout falls very short of what it should be currently. We not there yet in terms of cleaning up this industry but this document does go a very long way into bridging the gap. I am also not trying to affiliate to either of these two Bodies, I'm merely stating what good work has been done & formalization of these testing forms & documents covers the juicy important details required. I will post a pic of the document. If anything this should provide piece of mind for a person who gets such an installation done. 

By the way this is not some new CoC unofficial document it's a guideline that I really welcome & all these documents formally in my mind constitute a proper inspection of work done & will make any omissions & deviations stand out. 

When one looks at this document there is nothing left to the imagination in terms of what type of installation it was. What inverter? What power plant size. What AC & DC wire size used. What isolation & MCB sizes used....

My humble apologies to the original poster, we have side tracked your thread way off track!!!

1 hour ago, Steve87 said:

looks at this document

@Steve87, could you please post the document for download?  It seems like its a "good practise" document and we can all learn from it.

6 hours ago, Steve87 said:

A very important point. There is absolutely zero information on the DC aspect. That is why it good to use the AREP or PV Green card CoC document which is much more comprehensive & covers the DC side in good detail. I use it because if there is a come back or a claim that the equipment installed wasn't to spec or an insurance claim me as an installer are fully covered. 

How does one have the system assessed/checked to have one of these documents issued?

Thanks everyone for your input, I really appreciate it! It really does look like I'm getting the run around from them. It's annoying my first battery took a month to sort out and that was only because we had to start chasing them up. I'm assuming they are pulling this tactic because the second battery is going in not long after the first.

 

Considering these batteries are only 2 years old this isn't really giving me confidence in the brand...