BCO / Part P problem

This is what happens when you try to do the right thing...

I phoned our local building control before starting my re-wire a few months back, to check what the procedure was for inspection of electrical work carried out by non-Part-P registered people (i.e. me!). This was to happen as part of a lot of notifiable building work.

I'd read all the advice on here, including about changes in April this year which allowed local authorities to charge you for inspections. So I was pleased to hear (after being passed around several people - only one person knew the answer!) that our local building control still get a qualified electrician to do two inspections - one at first fix, one at the end - and don't pass on the cost. Wonderful. I got on with the re-wire, in between lots of other work.

Notifiable building work finished over a month ago. Everyone happy. Just waiting for the electrics.

Finally finished the first fix last week. Phoned them up to tell them. No BCOs there - message taken, promised to phone back. Didn't. Phoned again today. No BCOs there - message taken, promised to phone back. BCO covering our case did this time.

I re-capped the situation - that I'd been told to let them know when I was ready to have the first fix inspected, and I now was, hence the call. BCO: "We don't inspect electrical work." "No," says I, "I was told that - I was told you'd send someone around

- probably an electrician." BCO: "Who's going to pay for that?". "You, I was told" BCO: "Oh no, we're not going to pay for it. Your building plans said the electrical work would be carried out by a competent person and signed off by a competent person. You have carried out work illegally in contravention of your original plans. From October 1st you need to pay to submit a certificate notifying us of this illegal work seeking retrospective approval. Or you could get a competent person to sign a certificate in accordance with the original plans." "But I've already spoken to someone there and been told I could do this" BCO: "Who did you talk to that told you you could do this, and when?" "I don't know who, but I might have a record of when" BCO: "Well we have no record of this, so you have contravened the original plans" "But there are lots of things on those plans that were changed, including this - all changed with your permission - as far as I know, changed by conversations, sites visits, chats with the builder, and conversations on the telephone - none of it in writing, including this" BCO: "We have no record of this change, and unless you can tell me who you spoke to and when..." "Am I supposed to document every phone call I have with building control in case someone later challenges the advice that building control has given me? Surely it's not my job to cross check you!" I reckon he was about to hang up, and I'm stuck with him so... "So what can I do to sort this out?" BCO: "Your best bet is to pay someone to inspect your work and provide the certificate to us." "Do you have anyone you'd recommend?"

Unsurprisingly, they did. Unsurprising, the district council, and the firm they recommended, seem to have quite a "cosy" relationship.

I'm cross with the surveyor for preparing plans with the wrong thing on them (he knew about this before submitting them, and wouldn't change it, saying "it's the way it's done, but you can always change it by talking to building control afterwards if they agree") - but I'm livid that (for the second time) I've been given contradictory advice by supposedly qualified council officials. In both cases, this is bad advice that's cost me time and money.

I mostly wanted to share a rant, but if anyone has any constructive suggestions, they'd be welcome too!

Cheers, David.

Reply to
David Robinson
Loading thread data ...

Might I be the first to say, dont tell them in the first place!

Kevin

Reply to
Leaky

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember David Robinson saying something like:

Planning Offices Muck sprayer Lunch time Go.

Reply to
Grimly Curmudgeon

Exposed USB ports at rear, drop keys, smallest USB card, viruses.

Is the work going to be charged by how much you have done? If so connect 1 socket or switch to each new final circuit, that is it. You can legally extend whatever unless it is a kitchen or bathroom without notifying and thus reduce the value of the work done.

Next time record telephone conversations and confirm everything discussed in writing by registered letter. Record communication with the suggested firm and ask some pertinent questions, if there is a cosy relationship it needs the doors blowing off it "Michael Caine style".

In the meantime complain to 1) District Auditor 2) local lib-con politician 3) PM office 4) FOI request to HSE about deaths caused by fixed wiring vs portable wiring and for interest deaths of incompetent competent members caused by fixed wiring.

Reply to
js.b1

Take it up with your local councillor.

Reply to
<me9

Yes - easily. If you're making expensive reliances on what someone has said, for God's sake get it in writing!

Pete

Reply to
Pete Verdon

While that is the option of choice it seems for most electrical only work, its not really an option if doing extensive other controlled building work where significant electrical work needs to form a part of it.

Reply to
John Rumm

Well the obvious one is not to fold at the first "no". I would start with a letter stating what was agreed and what has happened so far. Chances are it will reach a different person from one one you spoke to last time. You may even get lucky and find the one who gave the original advice. Either way it throws it back into their court with an audit trail this time.

You can always offer to make your test results and any design notes, drawings etc, available to them for their reference, but suggest if they want more, such as third party certification they are welcome to arrange it at their expense (as specified in section 1.26 of approved doc part P, and as agreed with then in your discussion of nn/nn/nn etc!) See what that does for you. If they contest they did not agree to a variation, you can always highlight some other plan deviation that they agreed verbally and seem happy with etc.

If it does transpire you can only get progress by getting a third party certificate, then do all the part P notifiable work (kitchens, bathrooms, new CU etc), plus the absolute minimum of other work required. Then negotiate with an independent sparks to do a PIR etc. Having only one socket on each ring circuit outside the kitchen etc ought to cut down the cost a fair bit! Present your paperwork, and then you can set about "extending" the circuits etc with what will now be non notifiable work at your leisure (even if that does represent 80% of the actual work).

(I am making the assumption here that you are confident to do all the work to an appropriate standard and test accordingly etc).

Reply to
John Rumm

I agree with John R Additionally, I would reiterate what has been said by most posters that you need to record every telephone conversation or face to face conversation throughout the job I do this in a lined A4 bound book and put the date at the top of each page. The left side is tel calls in - the right is tel or conversations out. large line under each day if two or more days on one page - which is not common. As a matter of principle I ask the name of the person I am speaking to in every tel conversation. Good morning, Sir/ Madam - I am asking about xyz, my name is Dr George... please my I have your name (or if they ring first - please may I know to whom I am speaking? My name is Dr George). Note the time of the call - and if you are as anal as me and you want to impress a court later (if the action does go to court) not only the minutes but also the seconds! If I am doing an expert witness job and state that I spoke to xyz and the conversation started at 10:23:15 by my computer timer which is logged onto a MS or Google time link, it creates a "competent" impression.

So you could state to Mr Uncooperative of the council (did you by any chance get HIS name?) that you spoke to Mr x at 11.30 on the 29th Jan and the conversation lasted 4 mns 30 seconds and that you have a contemporaneous note of the content of that conversation where he advised you of the BCO's policy whereby you could do the work yourself and that the cost of the inspection was covered in your BC fee and that you understood that they subcontracted this work out to electricians as not too many of the BCOs were qualified electricians! smile"

As to what to do, I would add to the others' excellent suggestions the possibility of simply deducting the electrician's fee from your final BCO bill or if it is paid up front from your first lot of rates and let them take you to court.

It is not likely that they will bother if you can provide a defence.

Alternatively, you can write a letter to every single BCO individually addresses saying

"Please will you contact me about our conversation on such and such a date at such a time" and hope you find him that way.

Chris

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D\

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0|

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0|

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D/

Reply to
chris

Problem is, I've already done it all "properly". First fix on entire re-wire is complete.

Yes, but don't know where I'd get a Megger from.

Cheers, David.

Reply to
David Robinson

Where do you live (roughly)?

Reply to
Tim Watts

Not really a problem I would have thought, since if the BCO (or his subcontractor) is not going to inspect as per your prior arrangement, then a third party sparks is not allowed to sign off your work under their competent persons authority since they did not do the work. All they can do is a system inspection and test, and report on that. So you can finish all the wiring, but leave large lumps of the circuits unconnected and have him test what is connected. (this is/was common practice when a supply company insist on test results for connecting or reconnecting a new supply - one would install a new CU and one socket and get that tested).

eBay if needs be - standalone one usually turn up for £50 or so. You can also hire multifunction testers, which will have the advantage of being recently calibrated etc. Failing that, where abouts in the country are you? (I am sure a few folks here might be able to lend you one)

Reply to
John Rumm

I'm not normally paranoid about giving my general location out, but I don't want this thread to have any link with the BCO (which my location would give).

Anyway, following on from all the excellent advice here, I trawled my email and found I'd discussed the relevant conversations with the person who prepared and submitted the plans to the BCO. So I did have a record (or sorts!) of dates and approx times. Turns out I'd phoned building control twice about this - once the day the plans were submitted, and once the next week (because someone had said check what they are going to charge) - I received identical advice both times.

I also read Part P section 1.26 (1.28 and 1.29 were also relevant), phoned the recommended electrical firm to get a quote (their advice matched that on here and 1.28 and 1.29, saying _they_ could only do a periodic inspection at the end; cost =3D =A3150 + VAT), and re-checked the submitted plans - which were indeed wrong - which was one of the reasons I'd phoned them the very same day they were submitted!

With all this in hand, I phoned the BCO again. He did say that I hadn't followed the original plans, but other than that seemed to accept all the above - I went through the order of events, phone calls, read the relevant sections of part P, noted that the electrical inspectors had said exactly the same as section 1.29. I'm not sure he completely accepted that I had notified them of the change by phone, but I pointed out all the other changes that had been made by phone and verbally, and that no one had told me that this change had to be followed up in writing, and it was my first time doing anything like this, so what could I do? He accepted sections 1.26 and 1.29 applied, saying "I suppose we'll have to pay for to come around and inspect it when it's complete".

The position is now that I must tell them when all the work is complete, and they'll send the electrical firm around to do a periodic check. They will pay for that and accept it for the issue of the final building certificate.

So: one inspection, not two.

Yes, I've kept a careful record of this phone call!

I'm still a bit confused though. I'm happy I'm getting an inspection and not paying for it, but surely the "better" way would have been for building control of pay one of these "special" inspectors to come twice and give the proper "final" certificate?

Cheers, David.

Reply to
David Robinson

You're trying to apply logic to something that isn't logical, so don't be surprised if it comes out looking stupid. There was never any intention that electricians would be brought in to perform full inspections when Part P was being devised - it was expected that the BCO would just eye it over, much like they do everything else, and is why they were not allowed to charge extra for it. It's the councils which have gold plated this bollocks which have made their own mess of the whole thing. There is no requirement for them to be doing this at all.

I would suggest you take photos of every bit of the installation which you are going to cover over (including all the areas where there are no electrical bits and pieces), just in case someone later says "We needed to see it all before you plastered", or some such.

Reply to
Andrew Gabriel

The firm may convince the BCO otherwise :-)

As stated, do keep photos of everything with rulers and plumb lines taped to walls. It can be so handy for your own use, never mind anything else. Does mean you make things neater, but "proper DIY" tends to be neater because they are not against the clock, profit statement & mouths to feed out of it.

As Monsieur Gabriel states, there is no need for a BCO to go to such extreme inspection lengths. There is a copy on the net somewhere of the "tick box checklist" they are supposed to go through re eye- balling including MEB. More extensive work may require an RCD test, but I have to say what good is an RCD test now when they can and do fail within 12-36 months (never mind being subject to a recall before your paintwork is dry :-)

Reply to
js.b1

Fairy snuff; if its anywhere near SE Essex, then drop me an email.

Sounds like an acceptable result ;-) well done!

Good: pointless bureaucratic exercise complete then.

Yup, don't expect any of this to make sense, be logical, serve any useful purpose etc.

As the others have said, this is a problem created by pen pushers at various levels. If you do the work yourself, and are a member of an organisation that is allowed to self certify, then you can. If that is not the case then someone else is not allowed to sprinkle holy water over your work and make it good since there is no scope in the rules for anything other than self certification or your own work, or oversite by BC. Since many BC departments don't want to do the oversite themselves, you get the mess we are now in.

Professional electrical installers will be used to doing work to decent standards, and also reporting on complete installations "after the fact". Commenting on the suitability of half done work for the benefits of a BC department is not really part of their bag! (no doubt many would be able to do it, and could work out a charging structure for it, but I expect most figure its more to their advantage to hold out for the full PIR!)

Reply to
John Rumm

If you didn't intend to employ a member of a Competent Person's Scheme, why did you tick this box on your form?

Not a day goes past without someone lying to me that previous work, agreement to unauthorised or non-compliant work has been 'passed' by previous inspectors, other Councils, even me. So forgive us if we sound cynical.

Plans are a means to an end; the end is a building that complies with the Building Regulations. Many changes on site don't change this, or made to comply fairly easily. Changing from a CPS to a non-CPS electrician is a fundamental change requiring more inspections and therefore more expense.

For work that has been completed, it's becoming my default position to get the owner or builder to get a Periodic Inspection Report, and protect the new notifiable circuits with an RCD. I would, however, still call to inspect wiring before it's covered over; maybe combined with a more general inspection of steels, roof, floors, etc., pre-plaster. Some authorities who are more pushed for staff may not be able to oblige.

During the course of my work I will come across builders, engineers, roofers and other trades who are a) not half bad, b) average, and c) cowboys. The first group can fall into this category for two reasons, i) they do a good job, and/or ii) they don't cause me problems. It's possible that the electrician he informed you of (I suspect he wouldn't "recommend" anyone) fell into subset b)ii).

It is always possible that there is a less than honest relationship between the two, but if there were I doubt he would be so open about it- nothing would be said, but later that night you'd get a phone call from the electrician offering to help you out of your difficulty.

Lobby your MP to get rid of Part P?

Reply to
Hugo Nebula

A couple of colleagues at work moved a while back and got similar questionaires from their buyers. Their solicitors strongly advised they not fill them in at all (even though they had nothing to hide), which they didn't, and it didn't seem to make any difference. There was actually nothing about Part P, but they did have questions about double glazing, new boilers, anything structural, any under- ground drains work, IIRC.

Reply to
Andrew Gabriel

That sounds like the questionnaire based on the law soc proforma. The later versions include some comment on electrical works IIRC. (I think ours did when we sold in Aug 98). No guarantee that they are all using the same version mind you.

Reply to
John Rumm

I didn't - the person drawing up the plans did - after I told him otherwise (twice!). Not the only problem we faced. And he came doubly recommended!

True - I think that was probably the case the first time I phoned. His attitude was quite different when I phoned back with dates, times, and transcripts from notes I'd made / emails I'd sent.

[snip]

I wrote to my then-local MP when Part P was being introduced. Got a letter back from from the Office of the Deputy Prime minister saying that DIY would still be allowed, but inspections would be carried out by building control. MP added note saying "does this answer your question?". I'm not sure it did.

Part P would probably be OK if all BCOs agreed on interpretation, and if that interpretation cost zero money and little time. Given that any formal BCO involvement must cost money, I can't see how this can work

- though if you're paying for inspection and certification of other notifiable building work any way, then hopefully it can be done in a way which adds no extra costs to me.

Not sure getting rid of part P could be pushed to the top of Mr Cameron's agenda right now, unless it came as part of a big money saving agenda. NICEIC would be on the other side, screaming that it would cost private sector jobs as well as voicing unsubstantiated-but- scary-sounding safety concerns (reality = it would push them off their nice new gravy train).

Cheers, David.

Reply to
David Robinson

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.