ODPM admits Part P consulation flawed

... Well, not exactly.

But the Government's report on the consultation process and the Regulatory Impact Assessment includes:

  1. The RIA was criticised by 89% of those who gave an opinion on the document. The primary concern was the inclusion of accident figures from portable and non-portable appliances when Approved Document P is only applicable to fixed electrical installations. Table 1a in the RIA shows that
76% of fatal accidents and 74% of non-fatal accidents will not be directly affected by the introduction of the Part P proposals as they are not part of the fixed installation and hence outside the scope.
  1. The public respondents focussed on the cost of the small number of accidents attributable to fixed installations (approximately 24% of fatalities and 26% of non-fatal accidents) and suggested that the savings in Table 2 in the RIA should exclude portable and non-portable appliances, making a saving of only £38m rather than £104m for an average of 2.6 deaths and 447 accidents per year. Whilst commenting on savings, some respondents queried the source of the 20% saving in accidents quoted in paragraph 33 of the RIA.
    formatting link
    if anyone doubted where support for Part P comes from:

  1. There were 206 letters to the ODPM supporting Part P, mostly electrical contractors and 142 letters to Members of Parliament, again from electrical contractors, requesting their support for Part P in Parliament. ...

  1. Views expressed on DIY work on quality and safety issues are (numerically) divided in the consultation. Those respondents who support DIY suggest that more information should be given at DIY outlets and cheaper instruments made available to improve quality and compliance of the DIY installation with good practice. The industry and safety regulators believe that the most dangerous installations are those undertaken by DIY workers and un-qualified practitioners. It is further suggested that these are the installations which would not be inspected and tested by qualified persons unless the owner asked for the inspection and tests.
    formatting link
Reply to
Owain
Loading thread data ...

I saw an item on yesterday's TV news in which a lady who had tragically lost her daughter was used to support the new regs. There is no way they would have helped her, as there is no retrospective testing. Also she said the extra cost of £5 to £10 for the extra work involved was well worth it. Who gave her the figures? I cannot believe them accurate, while I have every sympathy with the lady I realy believe she was being used for pure propaganda by cynical officials.

Reply to
Broadback

formatting link
g_023509-06.hcsp#P233_39101

formatting link
g_023509-07.hcsp#P246_42355

So are they going to drop part P. well it was wishful thinking.

mind you it not often the government get misleading intelligence/information is it.

I do agree that all trades people who carry out electrical work for money should be fully qualified , like the Corgi gas people. How ever for DIYers who are competent (what ever that means see the gas installation conversations). I think DIY electrical work should be allowed, as long as all standards are followed. Of course it would help if the government put the standards on the internet for free even just the private house hold sections.

Reply to
James

It "might" have some effect if everyone emailed their MP and our illustrious PM and his babbling deputy. Its easy enough and at least lets them know everyone isn't just rolling over to play dead even if no effect is the outcome.

Reply to
John

All they have to do is revise the definition of the word 'competent' - this would overcome most of the objection to this nonsense.

Reply to
Mike Harrison

this would overcome most of

But what are the chances the Part P regs will be changed to allow DIY electrical (to standards of course) work again (with out the need for building control or part p certified electrician??? or building control).

One interesting question though. If you are a fully qualified electrician do you still need to pay to £1000 (estimated total part p up sign up costs over a year) to work on homes ? If so what is the incentive to sign up, industrial work is far more lucrative

Reply to
James

On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 18:54:48 -0000, "James" strung together this:

Yes.

There isn't one, unless you really really want to be an electrician, which I don't anymore so I'm not.

And, you still have to be registered for that don't you?

Reply to
Lurch

Yes, if you read the trade press, lots of electricians are now dropping out of the industry, particularly if they were near retirement age anyway. Apparently, almost none have signed up for any of the Part P schemes. Expect a massive shortage of electricians to undertake domestic work, even on the black market. There was already a shortage before all this happened.

No. It is the responsibility of any company using your services to be satisfied that you are competent. Some do this by requiring NICEIC only (more fool them), others use other criteria. At a former employer, after some poor work from NICEIC contractors, the requirements were changed to require qualified electricians only on-site (C&G certificates had to be presented on first arriving on site by each person). That actually ruled out all the NICEIC contractors we had been using, and most work was then done by one-man-bands, from whom we got a much better quality of work.

Reply to
Andrew Gabriel

On 3 Jan 2005 19:34:22 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew Gabriel) strung together this:

I'm nowhere near retirement age though, I'm 26. I just don't want to be associated with an industry that's fallen to pieces. I do data, telecoms and security now, which I always preferred but stuck to mainly doing electrical work as that was what I wanted to be from an early age and it's what I am qualified to do. Unfortunately I'm now not 'competent'.

Ah, well I might carry on doing industrial work then, although there are still plenty of rougharse electricians work on industrial installations so I can't see the point. It's even more of a shambles than I thought.

Reply to
Lurch

I've only noticed today that the ODPM has already issued what they are calling "corrections" to Approved Document P - see

formatting link
contains a clarification on what constitutes a kitchen for the purpose of the Act:

"Kitchen is defined in the Building Regulations as 'a room or part of a room which contains a sink and food preparation facilities'.

"As a guide only, in open plan areas the zone of a kitchen may be considered to extend from the edge of the sink to a distance of 3m or to a nearer dividing wall."

And also the statement that:

"Work not in a special location on: Telephone or extra-low voltage wiring and equipment for the purposes of communications, information technology, signalling, control and similar purposes"

need not be notified.

(So a building notice is still required if you want to install a phone socket or coaxial aerial socket in the kitchen!)

Approximately zero.

Reply to
Andy Wade

So if I temporarily relocate the toaster I'm allowed to replace sockets in the kit^H^H^Hroom next to the dining room to my heart's content?

Reply to
Andy Burns

Personally I would be happy to take a test/exam to prove I am sufficiently knowledgeable and "competent".

The trouble is, apart from costing a small fortune, you appear to have to be employed in order to do this. This is clearly something that has been cynically pushed by contractors/employers to further their own selfish cause under the disguise of "safety".

Reply to
Bruce Tanner

No, seems that telephone/elv work doesn't apply to kitchens, only to special locations (which are bath, shower, pool or sauna)

Also the rule that repacing a single fire/rodent/impact damaged cable cable is not notifiable, doesn't stipulate that it has to be accidental damage, maybe I could hire out rats particularly partial to PVC.

Reply to
Andy Burns

"Lurch" wrote | Ah, well I might carry on doing industrial work then, although | there are still plenty of rougharse electricians work on industrial | installations so I can't see the point. It's even more of a shambles | than I thought.

It's really only an issue where there is no other notifiable work being carried out, i.e. minor works and rewires. For extensions, new builds, kitchens where there is a new connection to a sewer, or other notifiable work, then the electrical work can simply be added to the building regs application.

I expect most of the electricians on new build housing schemes are pretty rougharse too though.

Owain

Reply to
Owain

formatting link
> This contains a clarification on what constitutes a kitchen for the

Great - that brings my garage and possibly the covered BBQ area under BC as well then !!!!

Reply to
Mike

On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 21:13:52 -0000, "Owain" strung together this:

It's not the notification that's the problem, it's the joining of the rip off old boys clubs.

Yep, as are most of the the NICEIC members that I know of. I don't want to be associated with it.

Reply to
Lurch

All rats are particularly partial to PVC. Their only preference over it is scented soap.

Reply to
Mike

Bzzt. Yes you're quite right of course & I stand corrected.

Reply to
Andy Wade

electrician do

electrician,

Would I be correct in saying that domestic electricians do not need to certify their work. Whose responsibility is it now, the householders or the sparky's to apply to the local BCO or whatever it is?

Are there in fact any qualifications needed in a domestic sparky? I know a while ago none were needed, but dont know if this has changed.

NT

Post a fowwow-up to dis message

Reply to
N. Thornton

I always thought it was a necessity for any contractor to be responsible for their work. If only to provide a timed guarantee period. If it was found to be a faulty or un-safe installation (not up to current safety standards for the industry), then you could be sued by the purchaser to redeem costs for any remedial or replacement work. Liability insurance and all that. The Amendments to Part P of the building regulations only reinforce this requirement. It won't stop anyone doing their homers at the weekends.

The need for electricians to register for self testing and certifying of their work is only bringing them more in to line with other trades likes gas fitters and the likes. So why the sparkies are all shunning this registration, I don't know. It could actually mean an increase in their work load, and maybe their reputations, if they were able to qualify their own work and have jobs randomly checked to see if they are keeping in line with all the good trade practices.

We have registration to NACOSS and the ACPO, SACPO schemes, and it means a random check is carried out on some of the work we do in peoples homes or offices. The tester will choose a customer at random from our invoice book and call them to see if they can arrange a visit to see the work that was carried by us. They also ask customers if they found our whole attitude and service polite and courteous. We actually pride ourselves in giving customers good service, and strive very hard to keep it that way. The independent check from an outside body is one way of knowing that your work is still good, and can actually show up any slackers in the den.

The need will soon be here for a seller to have a full survey done on their home before a sale can go ahead. The survey will include all gas, electric and structural design and safety Etc. Etc. so that a new buyer knows they aren't walking in to a dump that going to blow up, burn down or fall over after they move in. It will be down to the survey companies to keep a good reputation in this field as well, because anyone found falsifying documents for a profit will be shot at dawn.

Don't you think these changes would make a sound investment if buying a new house? You'll already know that you're not moving in to a dangerous bodgit and ham flung shack with your family. Even though some wrinkles do need ironed out on the current amendments wording.

Reply to
BigWallop

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.