New Electrical Regs - Again

[PoP]

The possible issue with this could that if the work carried out was not up to certification standards and material or life was lost before it was eventually certified, the person carrying out the work would most likely be sued and their professional indemnity insurance would most likely not cover them. That could happen now without the new regs, but with the new regs the certification should be carried out at the point of installation, not some indeterminate time later.

And what about a situation where some work was carried out and not certified, and someone else comes along and bodges a change from which loss results? If the initial changes weren't certified then the practitioner may well find himself facing a charge due to someone elses poor work. Again, could happen now.

I see some good in these new requirements in so far that if the standard 16th edition tests are carried out then the likelihood is that the installation is safe, and certificated as such.

The bit I do not like about these new regulations (and which I continue to badger government about) is the notion that you have to be NICEIC registered in order to prove you can write certificates. I'm going to college in the new year to do the C&G2391 course which will provide me with the knowledge to perform the tests. From that (and using the approved test equipment) I could most likely write valid certificates. But those certificates would be meaningless unless I were an NICEIC member.

This is like saying to someone that they have just passed their driving test but they aren't allowed on the road until they have gained their AA membership. The bit that government can't grasp is that NICEIC membership does not equate to improved safety.

PoP

[PoP]

Furhter info available on that.

I spoke with the building control manager of our local council about this a couple of days ago. He and his department will be responsible for carrying out these tests. And he wasn't aware that from next April this is going to land on his plate.

Re costs, he wasn't able to give exact guidance but did say that for carrying out window inspections the standard cost is £70. If the electrical inspection is broadly the same amount of work then that's what the bill is likely to be. However I intimated that perhaps the testing might have to be more thorough and take more time - and he didn't flinch when I said maybe the bill would be £250 or more.

So I carry out a general DIY type job for a householder to fit a new light fitting and charge him £30 for the job. Then the council come along and stiff the householder for another £250. If it weren't for the requirement to be an NICEIC member I might have been able to carry out those tests and issue a certificate for an all in cost of say £40 (a £10 uplift - I'm already on-site so no call-out charge to issue the certificate). So the householder will get badly stiffed by this new legislation.

PoP

[PoP]

Home office - the local government can charge you the uniform business rate for use of home or part thereof as business premises, because you fall into the business rate arrangement which shopkeepers and others have to dedicate some of their money to. That legislation is there already:

to wife, parents/children - haven't you heard about S660? With that power (which has been on the statute books since 1936) the Inland Revenue can (and have recently) pretend that the income actually belongs to the worker and not those to whom it was paid. Result is a backdated tax bill for the individual with several 0's on the back end.

IT contractors have been particularly badly hit with S660, one example recently put the tax bill at £42,000 owed. Check the following story:

[PoP]

Some minor works are exempt, but the rules are none too clear presently.

PoP

[derek]

Because the certificate would be proof positive of a Vat fraud and a fraud against the business.

I don't personally know the detail of how the individual taxes are applied, where the limits are but at the very least there's excise duty on road fuels, vehicle excise duty, "new car tax",and council tax, as well as all the "nickle and dime" permits, licences, stamp duties, and charges (OPRA etc). to go towards the 80%.

Good idea

DG

[derek]

That's not "domestic electrical work" IE work on a house.

But it's almost as bad as that, it's pretty bad now before they've even started. I bought an ordinary ceiling fan from B&Q, called a local electrician in to fit it and he refused "your ceiling's too low mate it's against the rules" but I have an ordinary modern house built in 1976 the ceiling is 7' 6" from the floor. "Somebody might pick up a little child from the floor and throw it up into the whirling blades of the fan"

So I fitted it myself.

1 year later got a Corgi man in, he came into the front room and said "You can't have an open gas fire in a room with a ceiling fan" I said we don't use them both at the same time the fan is to cool us down the fire is to make us warm" and even if we did the fan has no effect on the fire. Doesn't matter he said It's against the rules, I can't service the fire.

And they haven't started yet!

One of the things bothering me is that I'll have to have all these petty non- compliances resolved before I can sell the house.

DG

[Andy Hall]

I was really thinking of DIY when I made that point, but for professionals I agree with you.

The new regulations do allow limited work to be done without certification (minor works). This is where the argument on the government's part falls down even further. If a minor work such as an addition to a circuit is done incompetently and causes a fire or other problem, then what happens? It didn't require notification. Apart from the statistical factor of the amount of wiring, wiring accessories and so on required for a full house rewire being Nx greater than that for a minor work, there is no real basis to say that somebody who can do a minor work competently can't do a full rewire or vice versa.

Agreed, but it doesn't require a sledgehammer like this to achieve that.

That's because of the real agenda which is to force tradesman to be members of organisations who document their members. First of all this promotes the closed shop mentality which is a carrot for the trade union leaders. Secondly and more importantly, it is a way of keeping tabs on tradesmen for tax purposes.

If customers know that a certificate has to be issued, I suspect that fewer tradesmen will be doing work for cash. Hence the government picks up VAT, income tax and national insurance. I don't condone tax evasion for one moment, but if the government would like to keep tabs for this reason then it should be honest about it and not introduce control in this way.

I'm sure they do. It just happens to be a convenient organisation with a suitable bureaucracy to track its members whereby they can outsource the form of tracking mentioned above at zero cost to the tax payer, thereby claiming another victory. Their undoing will be that they have patently listened to the lobbying of this organisation and have ignored the electorate.

What goes around, comes around.......

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Frank X]

fuel duty I'll give you, but we are not talking serious money. A higher rate tax payer can probably take all this over stuff into account and offset it against lower tax bands and allowances and still come out with an overall tax rate less than the marginal rate of 55.5%.

Don't get me wrong, only getting to keep 44.5% of the money you earn is a disgrace but don't overplay your hand.

[Andy Hall]

I think that this would be a minor work, but I take your point.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Tim]

"derek" wrote

Similar-ish (true) story:

I need a new central heating controller/timer fitted.

Call in an electrician: Electrician: "Sorry gov, you'll need a heating engineer to fit that!"

Call in heating engineer: Heating engineer: "Sorry gov, you'll be needing an electrician to do that!"

Thinks - ... - ah, ok - fits it myself.

[John Armstrong]

What if it is a kitchen light fitting?

[Greg Hennessy]

I've heard of that reason before.

I can see it from his angle. If he did fit a gas fire with one in place and some idiot managed to gas themselves to death through CO poisoning.

When he'd finished doing a stretch for involuntary manslaughter, the idiots next of kin would bankrupt him using some no win no fee ambulance chaser.

greg

[Dave Plowman]

Suppose a neighbour decides on some DIY gas work, and hasn't a clue about how to do it correctly. And blows up your house. Or doesn't follow plumbing regs and poisons your water. Or takes a load bearing wall down which effects the integrity of your structure?

Or perhaps likes noisy parties every night? Or wants to run a brothel?

All these with in the confines of his own house, and perfectly ok in your ideal world where the state leaves everyone to do their own thing regardless.

[PoP]

Yes, rereading your message I did tend to infer the tradesman rather than the DIY bodger.

Absolutely.

Actually I see the converse argument - but either could be right.

Lets say that the householder has a need for some relatively minor work to be undertaken, which according to the new regs requires certification. Tradesman says "100 quid for cash, or with certificate

300 quid". I tend to think that a large number of householders would be keen to save the 200 quid.

Agreed. Only until the Labour government came along it was perfectly legal to mitigate your tax affairs so as to legally pay the minimum amount of tax possible - that was referred to as tax avoidance. Nothing wrong with that. Only now it is your responsibility to pay as much tax as possible to the exchequor.

Tax evasion is another matter - where tax is due but you fail to pay it.

The Lord Levy's of this world are exempt from these rules because they happen to be Labour Party supporters:

Their undoing will be that they have patently listened to the lobbying

Whilst I believe that Labour will be returned at the next election I'm comfortable that their majority will be significantly reduced as things stand today. There's a couple of reasons for this.

First, where's the opposition? The Tories haven't woken up yet to the idea that the country doesn't like baldie who is currently leading them. Second, the electorate are not yet p'd off enough with Labour to do the job properly.

From a personal standpoint I want Labour to be returned for a third term. Reason being that they've sowed lots of seeds that are going to erupt, and they should carry the can in the full glare of the electorate. That should keep them safely out of harms way for at least a couple of parliaments.

Problem is that if the Tories get in then they will carry the can for those deeds, and we'll have the same game of political ping-pong going that was there in the 70's. I don't rate the LibDems, they are just Labour in disguise.

Another issue that Blair has seriously overlooked in my opinion is these student fees that they've been so keen on increasing. Lots of students will be very unhappy at having to take on massive loans so early in their careers - and may spend a lifetime never voting for Labour.

PoP

[PoP]

It may not be. I did a job recently for a householder where a bulb was smashed in the kitchen light fitting, leaving the wire element of the bulb poking out at a dangerous angle - it was one of these shrouded light fittings with 3 bulbs and lampholders. The only reasonable way of fixing this was to take the light fitting off the ceiling and dismantle it, re-assemble, then put it back.

Being in the kitchen (or bathroom) and having physically disturbed the installation means that this work would be covered by the new regs, and I would expect to be charging in the region of 20-30 pounds for that job (from memory I think I actually charged 10 pounds because I was working on some other minor jobs around the house).

PoP

[Owain]

"PoP" wrote | Home office - the local government can charge you the uniform business | rate for use of home or part thereof as business premises, because you | fall into the business rate arrangement which shopkeepers and others | have to dedicate some of their money to.

And once you are labelled for business rates many councils will then follow up checking whether you have a waste disposal contract, either with them or with a private contractor. Business rates don't include waste disposal.

Then the water people want to put you on a business water meter ...

Owain

[PoP]

It was. As explained in another reply, if I had not needed to remove the light fitting from the ceiling then it would not have been covered by the new regs, but because I disturbed the electrical installation then it would have been.

I wonder about the idiocy of the rule regarding a kitchen/diner? Presumably (unless it is blatantly kitchen) I can pretend it is in the dining room to avoid the certification. Or a kitchen if I want to protect my arse from litigation.

PoP

[PoP]

Your figures are not unrealistic IMHO.

If you think about this logically then when you get up on Monday morning to do your mon-fri stint you finally start earning money for yourself at about 3pm on Wednesday afternoon. Up until then you are working for Gordon Brown and his grandious tax squandering schemes.

PoP

[Dave Plowman]

Anyone care to speculate as to the reason? An *extractor* fan I can understand.

[Huge]

How many lives will these new regulations save?

I suspect the answer is very close to "none".