Gas Safe Register - No More DIY ?

Just received a flyer from a local heating company about the gas safe register.
It states (quote) "Under the new regulations from 1st April it will be illegal for anyone other than a gas safe registered engineer to perform work on gas appliances in your home"
Does this mean that a 'competent' DIYer can no longer install a gas fire or a hob or a boiler. It was my (limited) understanding under the CORGI scheme that only 'paid for' work or work in a rented out property had to be done by a CORGI engineer?
Has it changed ??
Cheers
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

See recent thread. There's no change in the law. The gas industry has always struggled to understand the laws that apply to it.
--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

and the new scheme is being run by crapita who do have a bit of a reputation for less that accurate publications!
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:53:24 +0000 someone who may be John Rumm

Indeed. They will no-doubt word their spam very carefully to imply all sorts of things while not actually saying them. This can be seen in other things they operate, such as the BBC tax system.
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote this:-

And you had better not die as they will write to your parents and tell then your attendance at school is not up to scratch.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7963081.stm
Adam
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:23:07 GMT someone who may be "ARWadsworth"

A sad example, but still an excellent example of just how crap Crapita are.
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
writes:

Such as the letter I received this week from Crapita that informed me that I need to take immediate action to prevent the risk of a court appearance as I do not have a TV license for my address:-)
Adam
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
news:Lg5zl.4609

,
But you don't have a TV... Let them take you to court - just for a laugh!
--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

He could own a dozen TVs, It doesn't necessarily follow that he needs a licence.
--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've given up even sending abusive replies back
I just ignore them
--
geoff

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

I used to reply when they included a reply-paid envelope and a tick-the-boxes form, as that's the max time and money I was prepared to spend on it. Then they didn't bother you for 3 years. Since there's no longer a quick free way to reply, their stuff (which usually says things like someone's on their way around to visit) just gets put in the junk mail pile.
A few years ago whilst I had scaffolding up, I took the opportunity to put up a TV and FM aerial, and I thought that might result in more persistent nagging, but I don't see any sign they've noticed it. The TV part isn't connected to anything inside.
--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
writes:

You just reply on the back of the envelope and then write "return to sender" on the address side. The reply need not be abusive and it may be illegal if it was abusive.
I would be delighted to have a reply-paid envelope and a tick-the-boxes form to return every twelve months so that I could respond for free and state that I do not use a TV. I would also consider using a freephone number if there was such a system.
Every envelope sent back costs the TVLA money.
Adam
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 15:31:45 +0000, ARWadsworth wrote:

It also costs the postal service and that puts tension between the two parties which may help in the long run to reduce the nag pile.
--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
writes:

By the time it get to court, they have to visit your address via a court order. You do not need to speak to TV licence people or let them in your home. They have no powers worth talking of.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I assume you also do not have a TV...
If I were in that position (I'm not as I have both a TV and a licence) and had time I would be almost tempted to let them take it to court and waste their time and money in doing so.
Neil
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Neil Williams coughed up some electrons that declared:

I'm in that position with the house I'm fixing. After the last, unacceptably abusive letter from them, I sent an extremely abusive letter back inviting them to either **** off or take me to court. I made many disparaging remarks about Capita and their ability to do anything right.
They came back with a surprisingly grovelling (but probably form) letter and promised not to bug me for a while...
So far they haven't. Whilst childish, it made me feel good, so sod 'em.
Cheers
Tim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:20:15 +0100 someone who may be Tim S

Well done.
The BBC do like to libel people by putting things like, "ACTION REQUIRED IMMEDIATELY", on the outside of their threats. The best response to these threats I have seen recently is at <http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/tv/ and is worth repeating here:
==================================================================== Paul Willars, Regional Manager, East Anglia Enforcement Team, TV Licensing, Bristol BS98 1TL
Dear Mr. Willars Thank you for your insolent communication of 'November 2008'.
Just who the Hell do you think you are to "require immediate action"? As far as I am aware, having a TV licence is not a condition of residence in the UK. Permit me to remind you, that as a mere subcontracting profit-making organisation, you are in no way empowered to make up your own laws.
You state in the first paragraph of your litter that "as yet we have received no answer to previous communications from you."
Would you run that past me again, please? While it's true that I've only received one answer from you in reply to previous communications from me over the last five years, you are hardly likely to have received any answers to communications from me: that's not how letters work, you know.
Passing over that illiteracy, with all due respect, I call you a liar.
Some five years ago you sent a perfectly reasonable letter pointing out that there was no television licence for my address, and as the previous occupier did have a television while she lived here, I informed you that I had just moved in, that I did not have a television, and that I had no intention of acquiring one, but if I did, I would buy a licence.
Is that one of the replies you haven't received? If it is, I'd like to know how it is that you replied to it and said that you would not be writing to me again for a period, and then only to ascertain whether the circumstances had changed.
Since then, I have received a constant barrage of ever shriller demands, and where a few of these enclosed s.a.e. I replied to them, informing you that there was no television at this address, and that I had no intention of getting one. Is this your idea of not having received any communications from me?
Then the letters demanding money with menaces began to arrive. At my own expense I replied, warning you that a repeat of your importuning and threatening letters would incur a secretarial charge for any reply I should make. I did this as a service to all those whom you might intimidate into buying a licence unnecessarily, and to this end I am sending copies of the current impudent demand, and of this letter, to my solicitor, my MP, to the relevant Government Minister and to Private Eye.
I give you notice that from the day this recorded delivery letter is delivered, replying "immediately" in response to your demands will incur a premium of 50% above my usual secretarial rate of 35/hr plus postage and materials, minimum charge one hour.
Since the last time I wrote to you, the Postcode Database has been corrected and my address is included, and presumably your IT software pounced on a 'new' address and saw there was no TV licence for that 'new' address. It is this mitigating circumstance on this occasion which prompted me not to make the charge of which I informed you in my letter of 5th March 2008. However, had your software been properly written in the first place, it would have flagged-up the fact that there was no television receiving apparatus at the 'new' address - from which address, I repeat, I have been writing to you for the last five years - always assuming, of course, that you had risen above your usual level of incompetence and noted the fact.
I can take care of myself, and I'm not afraid of your blustering and posturing, but there must be thousands of old, simple or timid folk whom you are hounding and who will have no-one to turn to, and many of them will be intimidated into buying a licence they do not need. I would call it 'demanding money with menaces'.
Apart from your apology, I don't wish to hear from you again. Let me reiterate: in the unlikely event of my wishing to use a television capable of receiving broadcast signals, I shall get a licence. In the meantime, I take every letter you send me as an insult, not only to my honesty, but to my taste and intelligence.
As a mark of my confidence in your organisation, I hereby withdraw your presumed right of entry to my property, and inform you that any such incursion will be trespass.
You should remain, sir, my humble and obedient servant
====================================================================
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

How timely... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7973987.stm
--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 31 Mar 2009 14:36:01 GMT someone who may be snipped-for-privacy@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew Gabriel) wrote this:-

I doubt if the BBC are going to change their attitude. As well as little old ladies the BBC also pick on solicitors <http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_home/DisplayArticle.asp?ID90355 and dead soldiers <http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/content/eveningstar/news/story.aspx?brand=ESTOnline&category=News&tBrand=ESTOnline&tCategory=xDefault&itemid=IPED05%20Mar%202009%2006%3A10%3A41%3A000 .
I support much of what the BBC does, but the way they flood non-customers with marketing materials is a good way of getting up people's noses. When I ceased to be a customer of a gas supplier they sent me a letter thanking me for my custom. They have not bombarded me with spam asking me to take up their offer again.
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/content/eveningstar/news/story.aspx?brand=ESTOnline&category=News&tBrand=ESTOnline&tCategory=xDefault&itemid=IPED05%20Mar%202009%2006%3A10%3A41%3A000 .
Until I read that BBC article, I had assumed that the licence fee collection process was nothing to do with the BBC itself, but contracted out by the government.
--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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.