Is a part P course worth doing?

[Tidy Max]

So i know that there is no such thing as being part P qualified (thanks to the forum) however, is it worth doing a part P course?

With very limited domestic experience the regs book as become my bible when working on a domestic property (no paid work yet chaps and the only notifiable work completed will be used for my NICEIC assessment). So ive been looking at Part P courses and debating whether its worth shelling out for one?

Has anyone on here completed one and if so what did they teach you?

Did they teach you anything that just reading the building regs wouldn't?

Basically i was under the impression part P was a qualification not just something you register for to prove you competency, it was the next course i was planning on doing however i would probably rather get my 2394 done instead

Sorry if these questions have been covered, ive used the search function but entering part p in literally returns every thread on the forum.

Max

 

[SPARTYKUS]

I'll be blunt, the Part P thing is a series of 5 odd exams that one must get 100% in. They're just a load of cobblers in my opinion, it doesn't prove anything to have them, as you just keep banging away at the A B C D or E's until you get 100% and off you go.

They're a tick box exercise and a way to make money out of you.

You'd be better off doing something worthwhile like what you mentioned

 

[Tidy Max]

Thanks for the reply, i'll concentrate on the 2394 then.

I was just going to do the 2395 however i was lead to believe that was the more thorough harder qualification to achieve. I was under the inpression 2394 is for limited scope testing where 2395 is alot more comprehensive. But after alot of reading up i don't think thats the case, it appears more to me that the 2391 has been broken down into 2?

Anyway, thats for another thread lol.

Cheers Spartykus

 

[SJD]

You mention NICEIC assessment, if this is for Part P, won't you need to have completed and passed a Part P course to pass the assessment? You probably won't learn too much new though. If I recall, it was about 8 short exams, spaced throughout the course, each with around 10 to 20 questions (varied, according to the topic) and you had to get between 80 and 90% to pass (also varied), and any you failed you could retake the next day (at least, that was how the course I did was run).

I would say 2395 is more useful than 2394, there is a huge amount of overlap and I think you'd need the 2395 if you went for one of the scheme approvals for EICRs. If you've done 2394, you might be faced with doing 2395 as well to get that, at a later date. Yes, the 2391 is broken down into the two, but given the overlap, it just doesn't make sense to me to have to do both. That said, 2395 is actually not so trivial to pass, there is a 'real' 2hr (if I recall) written exam that a lot of people have trouble with.

 

[Tidy Max]

Ahhh, cheers SJD, there is alot of conflicting information knocking around on this forum (thats not a dig, there is on any forum), so even though part p courses don't give you a qualification, you still need to do one for your scam provider certification?

The conclusion i had come to was that part p was something you registered for, and when registering the scam provider comes to assess your work and deems you competent/incompetent.

However, do they require to see proof of a part p course to decide your competent?

and if thats the case what is the difference between the 1 day course and the 5 day?
and are you allowed to take a regs book in with you re: like the 17th course?

Thanks for the advice regarding the 2394/5, basically,
a learning provider has told me to do both without a doubt (i could see the pound signs in his eyes)
i concluded i should just do the 2395
however i am practically inexperienced (don't panic, i'm not a Electrical Trainee) i thought i should do the 2394 too
but i'm also skint and 475quid is a lorra lorra cash!

Written exams are my forté SJD but testing isn't lol

 

[SJD]

I'm not sure exactly what NICEIC will or will not accept re qualifications, you need to demonstrate being suitably qualified to install to Part P - with ELECSA, having passed a Part P course (plus 17th Edition regs course), they were happy. This is separate to having done work to be assessed. The Part P course I did (EAL Domestic Installer) was 7 days - it included the short exams I mentioned, also you had to install a few circuits in a work bay, and be assessed they were done OK (again, hard to fail, the instructor gave you chance to correct any mistakes as you went along). I don't know what a 1 day course would cover, unless it is just to test your competence in Part P i.e. assumes you already are familiar with it. There were no books or regs allowed in the short "tests", but as already mentioned, they are multiple guess and not hard.

 

[spark 68]

Don't even bother with the useless 'Part Pee course' and save your money for something worthwhile, Part P is a building reg, nothing more, nothing less.

The so called Part P courses are false advertising IMO, a lot of people think you need to do this to register with a scheme, and/or you can sign off your work after doing this course, You don't and you can't, the course providers are more than happy to perpetrate this myth for obvious reasons.

Have a look at each schemes entry requirements to get a better picture.

 

[SJD]

Looking at a NICEIC info sheet (INFORMATION SHEET 2: Guide to Registration – Domestic Installer Scheme), it specifies training requirements needed for a “Proposed Qualified Supervisor”, such as C&G 2382, and about half a dozen alternatives (including a couple of Domestic Installer alternatives). I had understood to be a QS in these schemes, you did need some such qualification - which could be one of these Part P courses, or one of the alternatives they list. I’d agree though with spark 68 they are perhaps not the best value for money (in my case, I wasn't paying my own fees, so that wasn't an issue!).

 

[spark 68]

I can only speak from experience of Elecsa personally, though they are all similar, and you only need a minimum of the 17th edition qualification wise, at least for now, although this may be changing.
The scheme providers are more interested in your cheque book lol.
If I don't pay next years fees do I suddenly become incompetent ? (don't answer that! lol...:dunce2.

IMO you would be better off buying the book 'Electricians guide to the building regulations' and GN3 (you will need GN3 anyway) as this will have more information and be arguably more use than the course.

 

[Toonlad]

Isnt part P being done away with soon ?? or getting a complete rework.

 

[AndyP]

When i registered I thought napit elecsa want you to have 2391 (was befor 2394/5) NICEIC i thought was the only one that would let you join without it.

I would think 2394 is more suited to you as it is initial verification, what you need for installing new works. 2395 is for EICR's. You would need to know initial verification tests befor you can do EICR's. I think your may lack a little experience to perform EICR's yet anyway.

I also thought next year you will need a NVQ level 3 to join a part-P self certification scheme. I think some of the colages are starting to advertise a new NVQ level 3 for those that wish to join a part-P scheme and dont have an electrical NVQ level 3.

 

[DNS1]

I did a "part peeee" course (EAL VRQ) so I had something to show to the scam assessor.

I've got a lot of experience in domestic work, but haven't done a formal apprenticeship. The VRQ is an alternative way of showing you've at least got a vague idea of what you're doing before they send an inspector out to check you for registration.

To be honest, I don't like the idea of HAVING to have an NVQ to be registered. It would stop a lot of people like myself (years of experience bashing houses and an engineering degree) from doing basic domestic work.

As I've said before, I think there needs to be something half way to stop the people who register with zero experience and can't tell which screwdriver is which, but which ensures experienced non-apprenticeship sparks don't lose out.

 

[Tidy Max]

Cheers for the replies, i agree with you AndyP i also think i should do the 2394.

The more i look into Part P the harder it is to understand!

I already have my level 3 NVQ which is a brucey bonus

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[brucelee]

At the present minute only the 17th edition qulaification is required as it stands now ie C&G2382-12
and you have to be able to design, install and I&T the the regs and also your installation has to comply with all applicable building regs
yes napit prefer you to have the 2391-10 now 2394 and 95 but they have there own version you can do which isnt probably recognised by anyone other than them so do the C&G courses

I hear that when they do change it you will require a NVQ which i believe as others have said that it will be for people who want to join a scheme

If you have your NVQ and all other quals, dont bother with the part p course
just buy GN3 and elecys guide to building regs

Then enrol for the 2394 followed by the 2395 and later i you want to progress to design and verification then the 2396


they are thinking of changing it to

 

[AndyP]

+1 to bruce

i agree

i didnt realise you have an NVQ level 3. if your a proper sparks there is no need for you to do a domestic installer course.

providing your NVQ level 3 is in electrical not pottery or cooking