You really are speaking ou of both sides of your mouth, just like the proponents of this legislation.
On the one hand you tear into CORGI and what it does, while on the other you say that Part P, which is nothing like as well organised is OK.
This is complete nonsense.
For Building Regs this has been the case since 1875 when the Public Health Act gave local authorities the power to make byelaws concerning buildings. Most followed the model byelaws but there were local variations.
And how many prosecutions have building control pursued as far as court in the last 20 years then?
Of that vanishingly small number, how many have resulted in prison sentences for the defendants?
and of those so sentenced (if any), how many committed the sole offence of failing to submit a building notice?
Nice round figure...
That is certainly one way of looking at it. However, I work for myself and I generally work 16 hours a day, excluding weekends. Whatever time I spend on DIY-related matters (including "research", which IME usually takes up more time than the actual piece of work itself) is typically time during which I could be doing paid work. Therefore, whatever time I spend on DIY usually costs me my standard hourly rate which is generally in the same ball-park as the hourly rate of a professional tradesman.
I appreciate this may not be a common set of circumstances.
We as we forget the building regs then and sink into the Tory third world.
See a Quack then
Matt you don't know how it works at all.
The Tory party would have ejected 66 hereditary peers? The Tory party would have applied common sense to new anti-social laws? Not the Tory party I know.
The LibDems could have one of those cast off baldy ones.
When did you last visit the House of Commons?
Ah, so what you are saying then, is that if we forget the basic rules of grammar we slip into NuLabour incomprehensibility...
No? So what are you prattling about then?
Is that no rules is third world anarchy and standards drop to third world levels, what the Tories always advocate. Ask people who have bought a new house whether they thing there should be tighter checks and certified tradesmen. They would say a resounding yes as they look at the shoddy surrounds. They have rules for working people and 'codes of conduct' for their own lot in the City. All the financial scandals of the past 20 years openly display it doesn't work. But they still scream no laws for them, while the USA manages to legislate quite well.
I never visited the FA but know the football rules.
We have plenty of "rules" - I think you will find that is partly the problem. They are so inane, pointless and unenforceable that it encourages people to ignore them. By extension however it also devalues the building regulations that do have a good purpose.
I agree that this is a poor state of affairs that will result in falling standards overall.
I don't see how any of this strengthens your assertion that people face jail time for non compliance with part P...
Worldcom, Enron .....the list goes on and on
The fiest test case will set the agenda on that.
There have actually been three just recently. See:
As far as I can see all three cases involved not working to IEE Wiring Regs, including some fundamental and dangerous bodgery and using a NICEIC logo without being actually members.
The Newcastle case, both men got fined 8050 each plus costs for a total of
23 offences.The Bath case, man fined 1500, work not in accordance with British Standards.
Carlisle case: 5000 fine, 5 offences at 2 sites. Lack of bonding, exposed live wires plus more.
=======
So, my analysis: In the cited cases, they deserved it. I'm surprised that the Newcastle and Carlisle case didn't result in gaol time, personally.
I would also summise that the ODPM has been suggesting that LBAs find someone to nick as these cases all came to light together, recently.
I also stand by my earlier point that LBAs aren't interested in going to court except in extreme cases. All 3 cases seem to classify as relatively extreme. Bear in mind, that's 3 prosecutions of tradesmen in over a year - not a high percentage of all the "illegal" work that probably going on.
No DIY prosecutions (yet) and I don't really forsee any, unless someone does something stupid and dangerous, in which case it might just be used as a chargeable offence where someone gets a shock of the house burns down. In all 3 cases, it would appear that Wiring Regs were not followed. If the work had been to standard, but not notified, I wonder what the magistrates would have done? Thing is, that I doubt that the LBA would bother bringing such cases to court unless they've had a really bad day.
I agree with John's point about devaluing the Building Regs. There are breaches such as these, which on the face of it, deserve the full force of the law - and there are technical breaches where someone, in their own house, knows well enough what they are doing, and just can't be bothered with the excessive beaurocracy.
It's not just about filling out a BNA and coughing up 100+VAT. It's about there being no real standard procedure for handling Part P. One LBA has told me that they want a 1st fix inspection - which is often more than inconvenient in electrical work, which like plumbing, is often done in an incremental fashion. There's the cost - 100+VAT for 40 quids worth of parts to do a few minor alterations. There's the waiting for the BCO or contract agents to turn up.
None of these things are such a problem in a large project like building an extension - the job itself is expensive and involves much time, and the BCO often acts as a source of useful information.
I also notice that Tonbridge BC have declared a specific procedure for Part P:
Tim
This also represents an element of fraud as well... he was selling something he was not legally in possession of i.e. NICIEC membership and the ability to personally provide certified work.
Difficult I guess since nothing bad happened - even though the potential was there (also without seeing the instalation yourself it is hard to judge just how bad it was e.g. things like was the cable sizing correct, could the required disconnect times be met etc).
It does not seem to be the LBA "way" - I get the impression they only follow the legal route when they are unable to curtail/amend incorrect work via advice and negotiation. If the only fault had been the failure to submit a BNA and the work was otherwise correct and done to standard it seems unlikely they would have spent the time and effort.
Yes, but don't forget to tell the BCO that all the blue/brown cable was installed by said kitchen fitter!
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.