Too late for building control?

[robsparky1975]

Sorry but if you are not a member of a CP scheme you must apply to a building control body and pay the requisite fee. If your local authority shows a lack of interest, which I am aware some do, then they are being negligent.

For Robsparky - did you actually cal out the LA to carry out inspections, the procedure is normally that you make an application, the LA acknowledges the application then awaits your call for an inspection at first fix are before if you wish to discuss any item. Payment is up front for a Building Notice or 25% first and the rest after the first inspection for Full Plans applications

Part P is being reviewed and it will not be long before the planned changes are out for consultation, hopefully it will be better organised than the original launch

I done it all by the book,called them before and after and still no show,i was not going to chase them up,i informed them and they didnt bother.

 

[LABCman]

Complain to the building control manager and insist that they issue the necessary certification, copy the complaint to the chief executive of the local authority involved. I am sure that you will get a response, but make sure you can quote dates to them.

 

[firemanowl]

Where is it written down that you can't test other peoples work or is it the scheme providers saying you can't? Why can't you use a 3 part EIC, you sign for the design and installation and someone else does/signs for the test. Isn't this what happens on the big site where there is a team of testers going round testing other peoples work?

 

[malcolmsanford]

Commercial/industrial are not under the control or legislation of Part P so quite rightly as you say on big sites you can test others work, As the Electrician on the site will not have designed the installation and one poor guy could not do all the installation work.

Domestic is totally different, which is why they have self certifying schemes that is why the single signature certificate was created.

Also though you could obviously us the single signature certificate for commercial/Industrial if you were doing a small install that you design/installed/tested.

 

[firemanowl]

How does it work on the big house building sites? Won't this be under part p also? I'm not too clued up with how big domestic sites work.

 

[malcolmsanford]

If the contractor is say a large firm that employs several electricians and they have a large install then the company have what is known as a QS. That signs off the work.

He would most likely be the foreman of the job, and so is overseeing all aspects of the installation. So he can truthfully say that the design, installation and testing is done to the BS 7671-2008 and the building Regulations. Now that is how it is done in the books .........................

 

[LABCman]

There is no restriction in BS7671 or Part P on competent persons (not in a CP scheme) from inspecting and testing work and providing the necessary test certificates to building control, indeed it is encouraged at paragraph 1.22 of AD P. The sample test report sheets are a direct copy of those in 7671 and clearly allow for different people to sign for Design, Construction and Inspection and Testing phases.

The only time restrictions are imposed is when the work is done by someone who is not competent to complete a BS7671 certificate such as a DIYer. In that circumstance we will not accept a certificate issued by a competent person unless he can confirm that he/she has supervised all stages of the work from design onwards including the physical installation and the inspection and testing, that can be evidenced by the competent person signing all 3 relevent boxes on the installation certificate. Any additional restriction placed by CP schemes on members signing off other peoples work is for them to manage not building control

 

[electromonkey]

There is no restriction in BS7671 or Part P on competent persons (not in a CP scheme) from inspecting and testing work and providing the necessary test certificates to building control, indeed it is encouraged at paragraph 1.22 of AD P. The sample test report sheets are a direct copy of those in 7671 and clearly allow for different people to sign for Design, Construction and Inspection and Testing phases.

The only time restrictions are imposed is when the work is done by someone who is not competent to complete a BS7671 certificate such as a DIYer. In that circumstance we will not accept a certificate issued by a competent person unless he can confirm that he/she has supervised all stages of the work from design onwards including the physical installation and the inspection and testing, that can be evidenced by the competent person signing all 3 relevent boxes on the installation certificate. Any additional restriction placed by CP schemes on members signing off other peoples work is for them to manage not building control

This is where I find Part P is flawed and inconsistent. If you take a house that has been re wired say 5 years ago and the owner of the property wishes to sell it. When piecing all the documentation together for the sale of the house, it is highlighted that the electrical installation has never had an EIC for the works carried out. It would however be deemed expectable for a PIR to be carried out so the condition of the installation can be examined. If everything appears sound on the visual inspection and the test of the installation is satisfactory, all parties can move on with the sale of the house without any come back. Also, if a property is re wired and the property is put up for sale one month later, who is ensuring that a EIC has been issued? I would suspect, the solicitors acting for the seller and buyer would determine that a PIR is a satisfactory document for the sale to go through and the EIC and notification is forgotten all about.

I'm not saying that I approve of this but as an electrician who regularly gets work from property sales where I can see work has been carried out but without certification makes a mockery of Part P. Unless ALL electrical work is notified prior to it's commencement I can't see how this issue of unnotified work can be properly policed.

 

[Mr.Si]

Part P is being reviewed and it will not be long before the planned changes are out for consultation, hopefully it will be better organised than the original launch

Sadly, that's what we thought in the Acoustics world with Approved Document E when it changed from 1989 to 2003. But that was a shambles with the way it came out with immediate effect etc, so let's hope this is done better...

 

[LABCman]

This is where I find Part P is flawed and inconsistent. If you take a house that has been re wired say 5 years ago and the owner of the property wishes to sell it. When piecing all the documentation together for the sale of the house, it is highlighted that the electrical installation has never had an EIC for the works carried out. It would however be deemed expectable for a PIR to be carried out so the condition of the installation can be examined.

Unfortunately the PIR only gives you the electrical characteristics of the installation anf only limited detail of the physical installation. There is no ready way of determining that all the cabling is in safe zones or is mechanically protected or if there are inappropriate hidden connections etc. All meter readings could be spot on but the wiring could be a nightmare.

all parties can move on with the sale of the house without any come back

Until somebody is hurt or a fire breaks out! The purchasers should be made fully aware of the limited electrical certification and they then can make an informed choice - buy or not

I'm not saying that I approve of this but as an electrician who regularly gets work from property sales where I can see work has been carried out but without certification makes a mockery of Part P. Unless ALL electrical work is notified prior to it's commencement I can't see how this issue of unnotified work can be properly policed.

We have seen sales fall through because completion certifcates or EIRs have not been in place and slowly, slowly it is getting through to people that if they want to make an honest, straightforward sale they do things right from the start or they suffer the consequences.

Also, if a property is re wired and the property is put up for sale one month later, who is ensuring that a EIC has been issued

Either building control has issued a completion or a CP scheme has issued the EIR within 30 days as required by Part P

 

[electromonkey]

Unfortunately the PIR only gives you the electrical characteristics of the installation anf only limited detail of the physical installation. There is no ready way of determining that all the cabling is in safe zones or is mechanically protected or if there are inappropriate hidden connections etc. All meter readings could be spot on but the wiring could be a nightmare.



Until somebody is hurt or a fire breaks out! The purchasers should be made fully aware of the limited electrical certification and they then can make an informed choice - buy or not



We have seen sales fall through because completion certifcates or EIRs have not been in place and slowly, slowly it is getting through to people that if they want to make an honest, straightforward sale they do things right from the start or they suffer the consequences.




Either building control has issued a completion or a CP scheme has issued the EIR within 30 days as required by Part P

I'm well versed on the what a PIR is and it's limitations as they are part of my day to day job thank you very much. Let's not forget that these are noted on a PIR too.

The point you're missing is this goes on on a day to day basis. I have carried out PIR's on what is obviously newly re wired houses and houses that need the documentation for sales to go through. Once a PIR has been carried out and any issues have been rectified, the person/people who carried out the original work are then in the clear. You may disagree and probably will as you are on the other side of the coal face but in all of the years since Part P, I've never heard of anyone being fined or prosecuted, or be told that an installation has to be ripped out and re installed.

 

[Des 56]

Labc man

To continue the point made by electromonkey

Other than installations that were shown to be absolutely shambolic,installed by builders or Joe down the road who thinks he knows a bit about electrical installation
There has not been one single prosecution for a person carrying out electrical installation to an acceptable standard where notification or lack of notification was not made
It is a standard procedure for Labc to accept a Pir and issue a regularisation certificate to get them signed off
This completely and utterly demolishes the whole point of competent person registration
Even insurance companies apparently now issue cover for diy electriucs to circumvent problems with house sales where no certification is available

The whole concept is an utter shambles and can never be made workable
One of the only groups of people affected by this shambles are fully qualified experienced electricians working for contractors or in other sectors who, because they are not registered to the nonesense, are unable to do simple domestic installation,whilst at the same time,seeing other trades,Plumbers Tilers etc, (who are permitted to carry out electrical work as part of their own trade)

These people are performing sometimes ignorantly and sometimes dangerously, while qualified sparks have to bite their anger at the nonesense of part p

These other trades routinely expand their remit of permitted work to take on full installations that were once done safely by electricians

Your posts regarding the administration of part pants and the procedures and warnings would be welcome advise, in an ideal world, where all was well in part p fairytale land

It is however an unwanted nonesense that closes out real electricians, whilst encouraging inexperienced and dangerous practices to flourish

It needs either to be altered drastically or better still.done away with

As it stands it is a useles extra expense for the law abiding spark, who now must factor in these extras, and become less competetive against those who are less competent and/or less law abiding

 

[IQ Electrical]

Labc man

To continue the point made by electromonkey

Other than installations that were shown to be absolutely shambolic,installed by builders or Joe down the road who thinks he knows a bit about electrical installation
There has not been one single prosecution for a person carrying out electrical installation to an acceptable standard where notification or lack of notification was not made
It is a standard procedure for Labc to accept a Pir and issue a regularisation certificate to get them signed off
This completely and utterly demolishes the whole point of competent person registration
Even insurance companies apparently now issue cover for diy electriucs to circumvent problems with house sales where no certification is available

The whole concept is an utter shambles and can never be made workable
One of the only groups of people affected by this shambles are fully qualified experienced electricians working for contractors or in other sectors who, because they are not registered to the nonesense, are unable to do simple domestic installation,whilst at the same time,seeing other trades,Plumbers Tilers etc, (who are permitted to carry out electrical work as part of their own trade)

These people are performing sometimes ignorantly and sometimes dangerously, while qualified sparks have to bite their anger at the nonesense of part p

These other trades routinely expand their remit of permitted work to take on full installations that were once done safely by electricians

Your posts regarding the administration of part pants and the procedures and warnings would be welcome advise, in an ideal world, where all was well in part p fairytale land

It is however an unwanted nonesense that closes out real electricians, whilst encouraging inexperienced and dangerous practices to flourish

It needs either to be altered drastically or better still.done away with

As it stands it is a useles extra expense for the law abiding spark, who now must factor in these extras, and become less competetive against those who are less competent and/or less law abiding

Excellent post.

 

[Geordie Spark]

The only thing I want from my Local Authority is for them to: a) empty my dustbin every week, b) keep my street clean, c) keep the streetlights working and d) keep their noses out of my business !!

 

[richy3333]

I'm just glad Scotland told the LABC to Part P-off :teeth_smile:

 

[LABCman]

Labc man

To continue the point made by electromonkey

Other than installations that were shown to be absolutely shambolic,installed by builders or Joe down the road who thinks he knows a bit about electrical installation
There has not been one single prosecution for a person carrying out electrical installation to an acceptable standard where notification or lack of notification was not made

You may wish to amend your statement about prosecutions, which is totally wrong, after looking at these links

New building regulations prosecution

Electrician Elgin 01343 569 277 or 07943 179505

We could have died - Chronicle News - News - ChronicleLive

http://www.constructiontrainingservices.co.uk/about/bathroomfitter_prosecution.pdf

You will find many more if you care to take a minute to look, and as a matter of fact prosecutions under Part P outnumber those under the other 14 parts of the building regulations, we recognise the dangers involved are more immediate and less obvious and act firmly accordingly.

It is a standard procedure for Labc to accept a Pir and issue a regularisation certificate to get them signed off

A sweeping statement if ever there was one, I work in building control and we do not accept PIRs as an alternative to an EIR in my LA

This completely and utterly demolishes the whole point of competent person registration Even insurance companies apparently now issue cover for diy electriucs to circumvent problems with house sales where no certification is available

I would be obliged if you could forward the details of the insurance company involved it would be useful to have somewhere to refer victims of dodgey installers

The whole concept is an utter shambles and can never be made workable
One of the only groups of people affected by this shambles are fully qualified experienced electricians working for contractors or in other sectors who, because they are not registered to the nonesense, are unable to do simple domestic installation,whilst at the same time,seeing other trades,Plumbers Tilers etc, (who are permitted to carry out electrical work as part of their own trade)

These people are performing sometimes ignorantly and sometimes dangerously, while qualified sparks have to bite their anger at the nonesense of part p

The concept of Part P is very good, simply to make it easy for competent persons to self certify whilst making others follow a different route. If Part P is not followed a criminal offence is committed and enforcement action will follow if the LA is made aware of the situation. Note that enforcement action only involves prosection as a last resort OR if the installation is dangerous.

These other trades routinely expand their remit of permitted work to take on full installations that were once done safely by electricians

It is the CP scheme organisers who certify such people - you are in a competetive market, adapt or fail!

Your posts regarding the administration of part pants and the procedures and warnings would be welcome advise, in an ideal world, where all was well in part p fairytale land

It is however an unwanted nonesense that closes out real electricians, whilst encouraging inexperienced and dangerous practices to flourish

So a free-for-all would be better than no control; let everyone do what they want with no restriction! I only wish that CP scheme electricians were all as good as you suggest infortunately we regularly have to point out errors to "Part P electricians" very disappointing and extremely worrying

It needs either to be altered drastically or better still.done away with

As it stands it is a useles extra expense for the law abiding spark, who now must factor in these extras, and become less competetive against those who are less competent and/or less law abiding

A consultation on changes to Part P will take place later this year - you will be able to respond as an individual or a company.

 

[Mr.Si]

So a free-for-all would be better than no control; let everyone do what they want with no restriction! I only wish that CP scheme electricians were all as good as you suggest infortunately we regularly have to point out errors to "Part P electricians" very disappointing and extremely worrying



A consultation on changes to Part P will take place later this year - you will be able to respond as an individual or a company.

No, I think what we need is something more like Gas Safe Register - As I understand it, it is much better put together and much more respected (yes there will always be cowboys, but a lot less - people understand that Gas is dangerous and it cannot be altered by even the home owners themselves, by law, but with electrical work, any man and his dog can alter it in their own homes and get the LABC to sign it off (if they are even aware they have to).

I don't think every LABC employee is as stringent as you!

So the Government NEED to do something more proficient to gain respect of the members of the trade and to make Joe-Public AWARE of the dangers of electricity (we all know why Part P came in, in the first place). Maybe the government need to do TV adverts and leaflet drop or something to make the public aware.

Not getting at the LABC, but the way the Government have handled it.

 

[telectrix]

while nobody wants a free for all, the main gripe with electricians is the fact that we have to pay the likes of NICEIC a ridiculous fee to be able to work. any qualified , experienced sparks should be able to pay a one-off registration fee to LABC and then be able to self-certify his/her own work.

 

[electromonkey]

I admire your passion LABCman but we seem to be coming from opposite directions but wanting the same outcome. Part P is a step in the right direction but it is an utter farce.

Personally, what do you think needs to be done to improve the current set up.

 

[LABCman]

No, I think what we need is something more like Gas Safe Register - As I understand it, it is much better put together and much more respected (yes there will always be cowboys, but a lot less - people understand that Gas is dangerous and it cannot be altered by even the home owners themselves, by law, but with electrical work, any man and his dog can alter it in their own homes and get the LABC to sign it off (if they are even aware they have to).

I was never a fan of CORGI however they make GAS SAFE seem like rank amateurs. Although it is illegal to work on gas without registration there are next to no checks on an installer once he is in the scheme. Below is an e-mail containing the reply comments from GAS SAFE regarding their ongoing checks on scheme members

Dear Sirs

We receive many questions about the validity of gas installations and I would appreciate it if you can please let me know what is the installer checking regime for Gas Safe.

1. Are sample installations checked before addmission into the register

Although sample installations are not checked prior to admission onto the register, newly registered businesses are bound to a 3 month probationary period whereby they would need to keep a record of all gas work carried out so that an inspection can then be actioned.

2. What is the interval between re-validation checks on installers skills

Business and engineer competency inspections are requested only if the inspector feels it is relevant, therefore there are no set intervals.

3. What percentage of installations are checked on an annual basis or are inspections only carried on receipt of complaints

If the Gas safe register receive a complaint that falls within our remit to investigate, we will carry out an inspection of the property or properties in question but that will be dependent on whether that is the most appropriate course of action to take, however, we are unable to provide you with specific percentages.

Basically once in the scheme if there are no complaints you NEVER get inspected - not what I expected from a CP scheme but apparrently all CP schemes are looking at similar 'risk based' inspection regimes. A good installer on registration can rapidly drop his standards to keep prices down and may never be caught! Is that sort of scheme what you really want?