New Electrical Regs - Again

Page 1 of 10  
This isn't the end of the story, just an update. Further info may follow when I've followed up.
I have been politely pestering my MP about the new electrical regs which are being imposed from next April, because those regs are a threat to my business in so far that they require certification of work, and I'm not (yet) qualified to provide that certification. That means that for some jobs around the home where a test certificate will need to be issued I probably won't be able to take the work on.
Just received a reply from Nick Raynsford MP (minister responsible for this crap), c/o my MP. In this reply NR advises that if I can't do the certificates myself there is an easy way out - call in the local council who will do the test and issue a certificate - at a cost of course. NR advises that householders will be happy with this additional cost because they will be reassured that the work carried out meets the regulations (sure they will....).
Anyway, got on the phone to the local council at the end of last week, asking the questions "if I've got to get the local council to do this as advised, then what is the procedure, how much does it cost, and what is the turnaround time?".
Quick answer: "What new regulations?". More discussion follows where I politely explain what's going on. Even quicker answer comes back: "That's madness". Oh dear, it seems that local councils aren't happy with what's going on in central government.
This morning I got a call from the manager of the department in the local council that is responsible for these sorts of things. He'd been away for a few days and was wondering what the note on his desk was all about. I explained. His response: "Well I know there is going to be new regs coming along in the future, but no-one has told us anything about it being from April". Furthermore, it turns out that he is a member of NICEIC and reads all their publications, and the NICEIC apparently know nothing about the imposition next April either.
As far as costs go, they haven't figured that out yet. But I am advised that it would have to be a minimum of 50 quid. More likely 100 quid, and if it requires a full test of the installation then there wouldn't be change out of 200 quid. Householders are really going to love this extra charge aren't they! And if they get a sparky in to do the work who is qualified to issue certificates on completion then the dear old sparky is going to ramp up his prices in the knowledge he's now got a captive audience to squeeze the life out of.
Now get this extra info which was kindly provided to me today. According to my source (who I consider to be very reliable given his position in the organisation) council employees are forbidden by law to set foot on or work on private premises, so there's no way they can carry out these tests and certifications.
Anyone spot a problem with these new regs yet?
If you haven't already, get cracking with letters to your MPs folks.
PoP
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Have you noticed that the NICEIC are now advertising on bus stops etc. Probably just a coincidence.
Adam
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I think you mean forbidden without owners permission. I believe that only the Fire Brigade and Customs & Excise can enter a house without owners permission and without obtaining a court order.
John

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Them and the other 11 authorities...
--
"The road to Paradise is through Intercourse."
The uk.transport FAQ; http://www.huge.org.uk/transport/FAQ.html
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I believe there a quite a number of bodies that have a statitory right of entry at least onto your land, depending on circumstances. One such, IIRC, is the Ordnance Survey.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I feel sure that in due course David Blunkett will see fit to open the list still further.
He's already bringing in the RIP bill despite fierce opposition, allowing a vast number of people direct access to your phone calls and email services.
And by the looks of Blairs speech to the conference this week ID cards will be in the Queens speech in a couple of weeks time.
Still, mustn't grumble. Living in a nanny state has its advantages.
PoP
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 06:51:57 +0100, PoP

Which really does demonstrate that the interest is in interfering with people's lives rather than an understanding of the technology. Every time governments try this game, there is a simple way to circumvent it. With email, all that is required is to have it hosted on a server offshore and outside UK jurisdiction, and then to use appropriate encrypted links to collect, and there is little that they can do.

It does?
Living here is fine, but I don't need very much from the state and would prefer not to fund it to the extent that I do.

.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

When I have visited other countries and had guns pushed in my ribs my police and border guards, and then land in the UK and see police without guns, I then realise that what we pay is worth it, as the alternative is not worth considering.
--
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
Version: 6.0.520 / Virus Database: 318 - Release Date: 18/09/2003
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I take your point, although there are not as many police without guns as there used to be, especially at ports and airports.
That aspect is very positive, I agree, but my basic premise is that the individual should have the freedom to do whatever he likes (especially in his own space) *provided* that it does not interfere with the equal right of others to enjoy the same.
It doesn't need very much intervention from the state to achieve that, and there is a point where intervention becomes intervention for its own sake. I think that we are over that line.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Serves you right for telling them you were coming.
"Zat Heenternational Mayne of Meestery; we keeked heem out! We don' wan' none of hees steenkin' combee boilers 'ere!"

But you didn't see the itchy trigger fingers.
--

Dave

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 06:51:57 +0100, PoP

The RIP bill is already passed !!!!
The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.
The insidious thing about this Act and many of the modern ones of the last couple of decades is that they empower the releveant Secretary of State to make statutory regulations which increase the scope/effect of the primary legislation.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[17 lines snipped]

Like what?
--
"The road to Paradise is through Intercourse."
The uk.transport FAQ; http://www.huge.org.uk/transport/FAQ.html
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'd love to know of a state that can't be referred to as 'nanny'. Heard on the radio today that a cafe owner in Iraq was prosecuted for 'allowing' a 'boy and girl' to hold hands. Just the thing nannies might object to...
--
*The only difference between a rut and a grave is the depth.

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@argonet.co.uk London SW 12
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2 Oct 2003 10:26:08 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ukmisc.org.uk (Huge) wrote:

Could you give me a couple of months? I might come up with something..... ;)
PoP
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Only for members of the 'inner party' if I remember my Orwell correctly.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:40:15 +0100, PoP

Yep. I had that letter as well. It's one of his standard ones where he thinks that he has an answer that will appease people doing DIY electrical work. He's deluded, I think.

Why am I not surprised? Of course the reality is that the local authority isn't even intended to do inspections because one isn't really intended to do anything other than employ a NICEIC registered electrician.
With Johnny TwoJags squeezing the local authorities from the other end, the government can pretend to have made a real saving because the scam (sorry scheme) appears to be self funding because of self certification.
Of course, what is really happening is the creation of another closed shop whereby the government can keep tabs on yet another sector which might have been working for cash. I don't condone that, but this is an underhand way of putting some bureaucracy around self employed electricians and small traders that dies not need to be there. The so called savings of accidents are a complete whitewash.
In effect, of course, this is another stealth tax.

Hmm. I don't see how that can be. What about building inspectors? He must have meant something specific.

.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hi Andy Hall In you wrote:

And Pest Control Officers, Social Workers (are they the same thing...?)
--
Fishter
unhook to mail me | http://www.fishter.org.uk /
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Since when have Social Workers controlled anything :-))
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't think they actually control the process, but I thought they had to be consulted when matters of disabilty are concerned. They're a sort of buffer between the "Is it really necesary" and the "It can be done with other methods" sort of things. I know we have to consult them on things like entry systems, and other access control methods, even for private dwellings in which a disabled persons live and are asking for help with payments or exemptions from. I just thought that other systems of this nature would have to have come under their scrutiny as well.
--
www.basecuritysystems.no-ip.com

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[46 lines snipped]

I consider this unlikely.
--
"The road to Paradise is through Intercourse."
The uk.transport FAQ; http://www.huge.org.uk/transport/FAQ.html
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.