Building Regs and electrics latest

[N. Thornton]

The next question is what can be done about it?

Regards, NT

[Stephen Dawson]

to

Thank you, Have just put hourly rate up by £1 per hour tocover Part P costs.

Steve Dawson

[G&M]

The regulations or the cowboys ?

[Lobster]

This is what happens currently isn't it? If electricians are prepared to test and sign off on a d-i-y'ers work, as they do now, then AFAICS the difference between the old and new systems will just be that it will be compulsory to get the testing done rather than just 'a good idea'; and that it will apply to smaller works?

Is that about the size of it?

David

[G&M]

I had a heck of a job finding an OFTEC person to sign off my boiler installation. Nothing is hidden on that so it is easy to check every joint. But would an electrician be prepared to sign off my wiring with thousands of joints all over the house ?

[Owain]

"Lobster" wrote | This is what happens currently isn't it? If electricians are | prepared to test and sign off on a d-i-y'ers work, as they do | now,

Are they?

It's one thing doing a straightforward insulation and RCD test etc on an installation or an extension, but for new installation work there should (minor works excepted, and by one definition if it requires Part P approval it's not minor works) be a *full* Design, Installation and Test certificate.

I think it would be unwise for an electrician to sign a Design certificate unless he has been responsible for or has checked all the calculation sheets and other aspects of the design of the installation. He shouldn't really sign off the Installation unless he is willing to take responsibility for every aspect of the installation - so he should really have sight of every cable run and connection, to ensure they are all compliant and good workmanship, if they were not installed under his direction and supervision.

Of course, if BCOs can't certify electrical work because they haven't the expertise, and demand an electrical engineer's certificate (as the currently demand structural engineer's certificate, say), and the electrical engineers won't certify someone else's work ...

Owain

(Dealer enquiries invited for this new Chinese electrical product, enables you to run a cooker and a shower off a 13A socket, special feature glows red to indicate current flow...)

[N. Thornton]

regulations

[Lobster]

How would you go about becoming what the ODPM describe as a (quote) "fully qualified electrical contractor", which is what you will apparently need to be in order to be able to self-certify?

Could it be a matter of attending evening classes to get a C&G qualification, or will it also include (say) time-served apprenticeship?

David

[Owain]

"Lobster" wrote | How would you go about becoming what the ODPM describe as a (quote) | "fully qualified electrical contractor", which is what you will | apparently need to be in order to be able to self-certify?

There is nothing about qualifications in the ODPMs proposals (unless there has been a recent change). The requirement is to be a member of a recognised scheme, such as knicker-ache.

| Could it be a matter of attending evening classes to get a C&G | qualification, or will it also include (say) time-served | apprenticeship?

This is the point. Plenty of time-served qualified electricians (and equally competent diyers) will be unable to self-certify installations because they are not a member of a scheme.

Owain

[G&M]

I imagine we'll all treat them with the respect they deserve.

(On reflection it would have been the same answer for the cowboys :-)

[G&M]

When I lived in Scotland years ago, where electrical work IS part of the building regs already, any full IEE member could sign off electrical installations. Does anybody know if this is still the case and if so why it isn't the case in England ?

(Of course this was a bit of a nonsense as some IEE members were software people, the BCS having no charter at the time, but one hopes those people didn't abuse their position)

[Andrew Gabriel]

Many of us went to the effort to respond to the consultation paper, pointing out the mistakes in the figures and the stupidity of the whole thing. The risk and cost analysis in the document was appallingly badly done, and riddled with the most obvious errors right from the start. Many of us in this newsgroup are routinely involved in risk and cost analysis as part of our jobs, and this is something that was instantly obvious to all of us. It wasn't clear if this was simply pure incompetence, or if it was a deliberate whitewash.

Anyway, it quickly became clear from the original document and from the responses many of us got that whatever the motivation for it was, saving lives and injuries was certainly not a factor. I think we did what we could. I asked for a meeting with ODPM (like we had over the Gas Safety regs when they were reissued) but that never happened. In practice, I don't suppose anything is actually going to change. My local BCO department didn't think it was justified or that anyone would take any notice of it, and hoped my response to the consultation would get it chucked out. Unfortunately, they were not allowed to officially respond or add their names in support of my response, but they privately wished me well with it. As the BCO said to me, the trouble is things like this devalue all the building regs, including the parts which really are important.

-- Andrew Gabriel

[jim_in_sussex]

Is the text of the new Part P Elec regs downloadable?

I looked on odpm.gov.uk but no sign of it.

[Hugo Nebula]

On 6 Jul 2004 23:45:15 -0700, a particular chimpanzee named [e-mail] (jim_in_sussex) randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

AFAIK it's not published yet.

[G&M]

Interesting point. I've been assuming it is just the IEE/BS regs but of course these are copyright of the IEE and so can't be given out free.

[Andy Hall]

There are numerous other places where British Standards are referenced in Approved Documents for the Building Regulations. For the most part, you have to buy BS documents and they are not that cheap.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Andrew Gabriel]

The proposal was only parts of BS7671, and it added other things too. One of the comments I made was keep the regs together. If they think there are deficiencies in BS7671, ask the IEE/BSI to address them. Don't start making up a separate set of wiring regs. The proposed additions in the consulation document were, like the rest of the document, badly thought through or worded. (In contrast, the IEE wiring regs are mostly well thought out.) There was also a chunk of info in there which has no place in building regs at all, and the wording was bad enough for Part P to encompass telephone, data and doorbell wiring (unless they included one of my suggestioned changes).

So, are you going to do a building notice to put in an extention phone or install a doorbell, or flood wire your house with Cat 5 or alarm cabling? Well sorry, but these were not in the list of items you are allowed to do without a building notice.

My response is still online

I don't know if the original consultation paper is still around.

[G&M]

That's fine but the Approved Documents generally show what is acceptable practice and only refer out to BSI for material specifictions (e.g. lintels, gravel or whatever) or other such things.

To have part of the regs you need to meet not under ODPM control is a bit of a problem to my mind and needs addressing such that the IEE regs become unnecessary.

[Andrew]

In article , Andy Hall writes

West Sussex libraries have online access to them, and you can print a certain amount off. But they (WSCC) pay for this access so they are careful to enforce the restrictions. Other libraries presumably have similar arrangements.

[usenet]

Ooh, coo, I'm a C.Eng. with an electrical engineering degree, can I sign off my own installations?