discrepancy from a scam

[sedgy34]

so if your nic registered and you change a DB you have to do tests ze r1r2 on final circuits and zs,s etc put in the box wired by others
and
if your napit registered ive been told you do ze & zs,s on final circuits only as you havnt wired the property

so if someone wires there house DIY and they call you in to change the DB you change the DB and put in box Wired by others as you have to notify the DB change the installation gets a Part p certificate

your thoughts on this as my half day scam is getting closer and i want to put it in as a question!!

 

[Octopus]

Not confirmed yet but have been proposed.....


Will be decided at the end of year.

According to who. Turkeys don't normally vote for christmas!!

 

[Guest55]

Sounds like the changes may affect membership to schemes badly. So somehow don't think they will go ahead.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

They will to stop the current set-up from collapsing completely.
Scheme membership numbers have been dropping anyway since their peak in 2008 , and that is a fact my friend.

 

[sedgy34]

Not confirmed yet but have been proposed.....

Fewer types of job that need to be notified.
Cheaper council fees for sparks that arent in a scheme but are qualified.
Third party inspections / certs for diy work.

Will be decided at the end of year.

think they should keep the good sparkys exempt from this scheme!!

 

[Plonker 3]

They will to stop the current set-up from collapsing completely.
Scheme membership numbers have been dropping anyway since their peak in 2008 , and that is a fact my friend.

Hardly surprising they are dropping with nothing being done to enforce it.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Guest55]

According to who. Turkeys don't normally vote for christmas!!

According to some of the big boys on the IET forum who were privvy to the consultations earlier this year.
The info seemed fairly reliable , as these guys have no personal interests in the domestic sector.

 

[Des 56]

What's changing

I suspect Biff is dead right

There is likely to be a step backwards towards common sense

The red tape may be altered in favour of anyone to install
The red tape stays in the sense that the notifiable jobs remain,maybe reduced scope,they are hoping that compliance will improve if the fees are lower and people actually hear that part p exists

The labc function will likely be done by registered sparks who hang on to the dream of it actually working,hoping theymake a few bob out of it (a far fetched possibility)but sparks tend to be mugs for many these days

 

[Plonker 3]

think they should keep the good sparkys exempt from this scheme!!

We managed since eletricity was first invented withour it, but for some reason now it is required.

It should just be for folk with no qualifications like kitchen fitters, plumbers etc.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Guest55]

As Des suggests , de-regulation might not help domestic sparks as such , but might help kick start the whole economy with
more people doing building and renovation works with less red tape to worry about.
This is the thinking behind the changes in my opinion.

 

[Silly Sausage]

This made me laugh...number of votes
Protect You and Your Family - Keep Part P (Building Regulations) - e-petitions

 

[trev]

Was one of those 569 yours Archy?

 

[sedgy34]

just remember the scams proffiteering are from the good sparks also they wont want to allow this as the income will drop and they will have to chip in for there golfing days out.

 

[Silly Sausage]

Not when Manchester wanted to charge me near that amount for a CU change notification!


Here are the proposed changes...
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/2077837.pdf

 

[Guest55]

just remember the scams proffiteering are from the good sparks also they wont want to allow this as the income will drop and they will have to chip in for there golfing days out.

The NIC and ECS are only one voice in the industry and its plain to all that their financially dependant on things staying the same.
They wont get things all their own way.

 

[Guest55]

Not when Manchester wanted to charge me near that amount for a CU change notification!


Here are the proposed changes...
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/2077837.pdf

Yep , read that couple of months back , quite interesting but things arent set in stone yet.

 

[Plonker 3]

Not when Manchester wanted to charge me near that amount for a CU change notification!


Here are the proposed changes...
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/2077837.pdf

Having just briefly looked at thay document it looks loke Part P was introduced to make us work to the relevant BS7671. Why not just make that a legal document and do away with alk the beuacracy.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2