Rogue Traders...

[Lurch]

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 23:58:27 GMT, raden scrawled:

Seen it once, already having the nightmares.

[r.p.mcmurphy]

Is it really true that no one except a corgi can touch gas? i thought competent people could install gas too?

steve

[Séan Connolly]

Competent CORGI installers yes ;)

[chris French]

In message , Séan Connolly writes

Beeep! Wrong!

For doing your own gas work, indeed all that the law requires is that the person be competent, as the OP says (though many people, including my local plumbers merchant who I had an argument about with about it)

Quite what competent means in that situation is of course moot point, much discussed here before.

However Corgi registration is required for doing paid for work.

[Alan]

In message , Séan Connolly wrote

The incompetent gas fitter on that program was CORGI registered!

The program also implied that no-one unless they were CORGI registered could turn the gas off - presumably even if there were a gas leak.

[Andy Hall]

The first requirement is that somebody doing gas fitting must be competent.

The second requirement is that somebody doing so *for reward* must be CORGI registered.

[Kevin Brady]

If you are paid to do it, then you have to be CORGI registered. If you do it yourself, or someone does it for free, then you/they have to be competent.

[Mr Fizzion]

F.

[Richard Conway]

Well, presumably if you weren't CORGI registered you wouldn't be qualified to spot a gas leak anyway.

[Séan Connolly]

Thats interesting, as its not how British Gas (or B&Q) would explain it to you at all. (I'm not saying your wrong as you're clearly not!)

[Peter Andrews]

Competent is easy - if you have done it correctly then you are competent, if it's incorrect then you are incompetent. .and that also applies if you are CORGI registered!!

[Dave]

If you do it FOR YOURSELF you need to be competant, but do not need to be CORGI registered, if you do it 'for free' for someone else it is my understanding that you are deemed to be working for reward - if your mate buys you a pint for your trouble that's a reward... so you need to be CORGI registered.

Comments?

Dave

[Set Square]

I guess that most people - CORGI registered or not - could tell the difference between a house and a pile of rubble where the house *used* to be!

[Richard Conway]

Ah yes, but only the CORGI chap could put it down to a gas leak - to the average man in the street it could have just fallen down (or would he have to be a qualified builder to work that one out?)

[Frank Erskine]

Unlike the sgns in B&Q which state that ANY gas work must be done by a CORGI-registered person.

[Bob Mannix]

You are confusing competent (we all know what that means) and "competent". In the eyes of the law you would have to demonstrate "competency", which "they" generally take to mean being CORGI registered. The onus would be on you, if not a CORGI, to prove you were "competent" (even if competent and IF anyone asked of course!), which would involve showing you had lots of experience, satisfied customers, years in trade etc., I suspect. No-one would probably ask unless there was a problem. If there was a problem you couldn't really say "I must have been competant as it's OK" IYSWIM.

Lets call a spade a spad - the intent of the law is to stop DIY gas work (under the pretence this makes the world safer and to safeguard the professional bodies). The interpretation of any grey areas in law would be bound to have this slant.

If you are merely competent, do the job, and there are no problems and no-one asks, then it's *probably* illegal (even if perfectly OK) but what the eye doesn't see....

Bob Mannix

[Mary Fisher]

But they don't ask to see your certification, even if you're an old woman buying stuff.

Mary

[John Rumm]

This seems to be one of those situations where there is no logal definition as yet. Since primary legislation has not spelt out what competancy is, it falls to the courts to make an interpretation. They will only do this when there is a specifuc requirement to do so (i.e. as a result of a case. As far as I am aware this has not happened yet.

So while you are correct that we know what it mens to be competant in a technical sense, I am not convinced that *anyone* actually knows what that means in a legal sense.

Currently the Health and Safety Executive explicitly acknowledge that DIY gas work is legal.

See

page 50 :

One of the consultation questions they asked was :

"Should DIY work be legally prohibited, eg by restricting the sale of gas equipment to registered gas installers?"

Part of the conclusion was:

"We understand concern about the possible risks posed by incompetent DIY gas work, but believe at present there is insufficient hard evidence of incidents to support the introduction of a legal ban."

Even if you look at the more public facing

get the evasive non answer:

"Q. Is it legal to do DIY on appliances and/or flues ?

A. A competent person must carry out all work on gas appliances. It is always safer to use CORGI registered gas installers to carry out any gas work. Any employer or self-employed person, for example, a landlord, who carries out gas work must be CORGI registered."

Depends on why it went wrong I expect. However if you actually *are* competent then it ought not go wrong as a result of any acton under your control.

I would say the law is clear that it is *not* illegal, so that can not be the intent of the law. The HSE also make it clear that they do not currently support the idea of making it illegal. However, there is obviously a strong desire to discourage DIY gas work. One way that this is done is by allowing many to believe that it is illegal.

[Ian_m]

Not forgetting the case where, like my mates, the kitchen extension builders fitted all the cooker gas pipes back to meter cupboard, BUT the system was tested and commisioned by a Corgi registered fitter.

[Bob Mannix]

I agree with you both here and the snipped bit further down. It is the case (as you say) that legal precedent, which will define the law in detail, is yet to be set. My point was that I bet (if you like) that the covert intent is to discourage DIY and that, given that, when legal rulings are handed down, they will slant that way. You are right that it isn't and cannot be said to be definitely illegal to DIY gas work unless CORGI registered *yet* as the law has not been refined. I suspect (and said) that it will

*probably* turn out to be illegal.

The unfortunate thing is that it will be (in the end) DIY work that was neither competent or "competent" and which causes death or injury (ar, at best, significant damage) that will trigger the legal ruling. This too will slant the outcome. No-one is going to take a competent person to court for doing a proper job even if they aren't "competent", I suspect!

Bob