Is Part Pee fit for purpose / who is policing this scam ???

[Dustydazzler]

So mini rant coming up ...

While I am sure the wider majority of sparks follow the rules and certificate and notify their relevant work BUT in recent months I have been to numerous jobs where the customer has had significant wiring additions like new circuits in bathrooms , kitchens rewired and complete board swaps yet none of these jobs have any paperwork and non of them notified

Which is rather frustrating when I pay out significant fees to keep legit

 

[7029 dave]

I've always felt its a bucket with holes filling more buckets with holes (although I'm prepared to stand corrected as i don't have anything to do with domestic, so this is just my uneducated musings)

Part P includes notification of new circuits right?

When is a new circuit not a new circuit?

Say a redundant 16a radial in 2.5 to a single 20a DP switch is found in an airing cupboard. A competent homeowner decides to remove the DP switch, install a single socket, then extends this to 3 more sockets with more 2.5 in an adjacent room, creating a radial socket circuit.

It's not a new circuit - the run from MCB to first point was already there after all right? So I would assume its non notifiable - but the characteristics are significantly different.

Yet if someone were to run a new 2.5 radial from source of the same design, it would then become a new circuit? It's literally that one original length from MCB to first point making it an "existing circuit".

I'd say the addition of those extra sockets to an "existing circuit" leaves far more room for error than, say, adding a single PIR operated light next to the DB from a new, dedicated 6a MCB - but that would be classed as a new circuit and notifiable - despite being a far simpler task

Oh but hang on - what about if a new PIR light was installed next to the DB but instead of being fed from a new dedicated 6a MCB, was just fed directly from the output of an existing lighting circuit 6a MCB? It's not a new circuit - it's fed from the same MCB as an existing circuit, so it's just an addition to that circuit surely and wouldn't require notification?!

Why on earth would the latter be non notifiable, but the former would be ?

Take also replacement of damaged lengths of cable - I believe this is actually specified on some LABC guidance I read somewhere as being a reasonably acceptable DIY task. Example:

Homeowner drills through an out of zone RFC 2.5 cable between two socket outlets (Lets say its an RFC just feeding that room). Its in old colours. He pops to Wilko, buys a few metres of new 2021 date stamped 2.5 and proceeds to replace the damaged section and puts it in zone in the process. Sounds reasonable right?

Let's say instead he drills through both legs of the ring after they leave the DB . So he replaces both legs from the MCB to the first and last socket, with his 2021 embossed 2.5, leaving the main part of the ring intact.

It's not a new circuit - but would an inspector raise questions on seeing the new cable leaving the DB?

Sorry- I've clearly thought about this too much. Waiting to be corrected gladly.

You are not alone I have thought of these situations too. Electricity is Electricity no matter what the dangers are still the same.

Its just the scam bull that tries to differentiate.

 

[Dustydazzler]

There are still sparks out there and some I know are scam registered / were scam registered who only issue a MWC for a board change and have never notified a board change in their life to this very day

Yet others have to go through the entire EIC process along with building control notification along with the associated costs

It really does feel like one rule for some and one rule for another with absolutely no one steering the ruddy ship

 

[Dustydazzler]

You are not alone I have thought of these situations too. Electricity is Electricity no matter what the dangers are still the same.

Its just the scam bull that tries to differentiate.

I remember when the scams first reared their ugly heads around the mid 00s and even something like fitting a new pond pump was notifiable under the part pee scam ?

 

[Zerax]

There is one thing that will come back and cause the homeowner an issue, when they go and sell the property they have to produce the correct documentation as requested by the buyers solicitors, this is will cause issues with the sale. They can lie of course and say that no additions /alterations have taken place within the property, but this will leave them wide open to a potential law suit.

From my experience and that of everyone else that I know who's bought/sold property... nobody cares less about whether any electrical alterations have been done. In any case, there's standard indemnity insurance that's taken out to cover all this.

A mate of mine built an extension... then sold the house, but couldn't find the completion certificate straightaway. The very next day he took the certificate to the solicitor who told him not to bother as she'd already taken out indemnity insurance ! He wasn't impressed. That's how it works these days. The argument that if works are not certificated/notified it'll cause problems doesn't hold water.

It's similar to EPC certificates... almost meaningless nonsense. Nobody ever buys or not buys a house due to the Energy rating. In any case, the way it works is crazy... I recently removed a storage heater as it was costing way too much to run it... this caused the Energy rating to go down from C to D !

 

[lozarus]

From my experience and that of everyone else that I know who's bought/sold property... nobody cares less about whether any electrical alterations have been done. In any case, there's standard indemnity insurance that's taken out to cover all this.

A mate of mine built an extension... then sold the house, but couldn't find the completion certificate straightaway. The very next day he took the certificate to the solicitor who told him not to bother as she'd already taken out indemnity insurance ! He wasn't impressed. That's how it works these days. The argument that if works are not certificated/notified it'll cause problems doesn't hold water.

It's similar to EPC certificates... almost meaningless nonsense. Nobody ever buys or not buys a house due to the Energy rating. In any case, the way it works is crazy... I recently removed a storage heater as it was costing way too much to run it... this caused the Energy rating to go down from C to D !

Was just going to make this point. Solicitors want the deal to go through so they get paid. Estate agents want the deal to go through so they get paid. Sellers want the sale to go through so they get paid. Buyers want the sale to go through so they can get their house - moneys the driver, noone wants to be waiting any longer than necessary because a bit of paper is missing

 

[Dustydazzler]

a 60 quid indeminity policy will get a missing electrical cert / notifiaction through no problem

heck for a 150 quid you can get a policy that will cover a 2 storey extension thathas no paperwork

 

[UNG]

Yep...And its time someone like the BBC did a major program about these schemes . "Gas safe" also !!

Why would they do that when Matt Allright has been promoting them for years under the Watchdog banner

I agree, the scams are a waste of money and time, unless they are policed properly and actually achieved what they were designed to do (assuming the main goal was safety over profit).

However, the conscientious folk out there who are genuinely trying to comply who are conscious of safety and the wellbeing of society end up the people paying the price.

I believe there is a distinct difference between people who are struggling and trying to get on and those that are just blatantly cheating the system at the cost of everyone else.

The problem the CPS's need to address is how the larger multi operative companies and their operatives are assessed.
What also needs to looked at and possibly published is qualification and experience level of all operatives for the tasks they are approved to undertake no matter what size the company is so the consumer knows what they are buying into when they employ someone to provide an EICR for example

Problem is there's not enough organisation of thr discontent to turn Thier numbers into voices loud enough to be heard. I'd like to think 100,000 sparks (time-served or otherwise - those with a moral compass say) would easily be rounded up, putting names on paper and this ---- needs to stop....but then CPSs will grease palms and it'll be for nought

You need to look back a few years to the parliamentary committee that was tasked with reviewing part P, when it wasn't going their way Clancy and Co circumvented the committee and met with the relevent government minister and got the legislation revised which is what they wanted before the committee had even reported

Part P is only fit for purpose if you are HMRC the only 2 people I ever heard of being taken to court under Part P was for tax evasion or misdeclaring tax and not for poor workmanship

People who buy into these schemes need to see them for what they are, they are by no means a guarantee of good compliant workmanship as has been seen from some of the threads on this forum.

 

[7029 dave]

There is one thing that will come back and cause the homeowner an issue, when they go and sell the property they have to produce the correct documentation as requested by the buyers solicitors, this is will cause issues with the sale. They can lie of course and say that no additions /alterations have taken place within the property, but this will leave them wide open to a potential law suit.

The OP is in possession of a EIC

 

[Dave OCD]

I'm totally disillusioned with it all too. Nearly every week I see atrocious and occasionally dangerous recently done electrical work, often by registered contractors too ! And I had an e mail from Certsure a few weeks ago explaining that I'll automatically transfer from being an Elecsa Registered Contractor to the NIC Domestic Installer Scheme soon when they 'retire' the Elecsa name. I'm feeling quite insulted as a conscientious tradesman with over 36 years of post-apprenticeship experience. So tempted to knock the Part P registration on the head and just carry on as normal......

 

[ipf]

I'm totally disillusioned with it all too. Nearly every week I see atrocious and occasionally dangerous recently done electrical work, often by registered contractors too ! And I had an e mail from Certsure a few weeks ago explaining that I'll automatically transfer from being an Elecsa Registered Contractor to the NIC Domestic Installer Scheme soon when they 'retire' the Elecsa name. I'm feeling quite insulted as a concientious tradesman with over 36 years of post-apprenticeship experience. So tempted to knock the Part P registration on the head and just carry on as normal......

Don't like the sound of that......are you saying the Domestic Installer Scheme is equivalent to the Elecsa Registered Contractor.....or are they downgrading you?

Plenty of us were saying on here over 10 years ago, how things had been deteriorating for years....and warning of the upcoming consequences.
It is indeed, constantly getting worse, be it work practice standards or the class of basic materials available.
Plenty of todays rules and regulations seem to be making allowances for sub standard users. Take 'maintenance free' joint boxes as an example.... If a 301 or 401 is installed correctly, what is the problem? I'm sorry but, these days, some 'electricians' can't be trusted to do so.

 

[7029 dave]

I'm totally disillusioned with it all too. Nearly every week I see atrocious and occasionally dangerous recently done electrical work, often by registered contractors too ! And I had an e mail from Certsure a few weeks ago explaining that I'll automatically transfer from being an Elecsa Registered Contractor to the NIC Domestic Installer Scheme soon when they 'retire' the Elecsa name. I'm feeling quite insulted as a conscientious tradesman with over 36 years of post-apprenticeship experience. So tempted to knock the Part P registration on the head and just carry on as normal......

Dont worry too much Dave. I know plenty of sparks with years of experience that are allrounders, industral everything, they opted for the DI scheme just to get round the part pee for their domestic jobs plus it was cheaper.

 

[Intoelectrics]

Don't like the sound of that......are you saying the Domestic Installer Scheme is equivalent to the Elecsa Registered Contractor.....or are they downgrading you?

Plenty of us were saying on here over 10 years ago, how things had been deteriorating for years....and warning of the upcoming consequences.
It is indeed, constantly getting worse, be it work practice standards or the class of basic materials available.
Plenty of todays rules and regulations seem to be making allowances for sub standard users. Take 'maintenance free' joint boxes as an example.... If a 301 or 401 is installed correctly, what is the problem? I'm sorry but, these days, some 'electricians' can't be trusted to do so.

I think there are 2 main reasons:
1. Costs in general are higher than ever and profit making at all costs is more of the focus than ever, so materials cheap to manufacture is important to the companies as competition is higher than ever.
2. Modern life is fast paced, since the birth of mobile phones and the internet, everything is expected yesterday.

 

[Dave OCD]

Don't like the sound of that......are you saying the Domestic Installer Scheme is equivalent to the Elecsa Registered Contractor.....or are they downgrading you?

Plenty of us were saying on here over 10 years ago, how things had been deteriorating for years....and warning of the upcoming consequences.
It is indeed, constantly getting worse, be it work practice standards or the class of basic materials available.
Plenty of todays rules and regulations seem to be making allowances for sub standard users. Take 'maintenance free' joint boxes as an example.... If a 301 or 401 is installed correctly, what is the problem? I'm sorry but, these days, some 'electricians' can't be trusted to do so.

I think they see the Elecsa Registration as somehow inferior to their own Approved Contractor scheme but I always thought it was on the same level ? With all due respect and no offence intended to 'D.I.'s I really don't want that all over my van...
I suppose I'll have to talk to them but don't expect anything positive that doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

 

[ipf]

I think they see the Elecsa Registration as somehow inferior to their own Approved Contractor scheme but I always thought it was on the same level ? With all due respect and no offence intended to 'D.I.'s I really don't want that all over my van...

Understandable.
I really think you'll be able to sort it, though. Insist on what you want and argue about the cost, if it's not a fair deal.
I know they're robbin' barstewards ........but they won't want to lose a ready made membership fee.

 

[Teddy Lop]

As I understand it, the onus is on the homeowner to employ someone who will carry out the works in accordance with the law, so part P does not provide an apparatus for going after all the cowboys, only their victims.

Problem today is too many people are total melts who don't do their due diligence or want it yesterday which is a scam rich environment. The people who just have a whimsical shrug when you inform their brand new kitchen or whatever has its wiring all bodged is what gets me, you think, "why are you not livid?" Thats worse than the overplayed outrage of those who knew they had a prat.

The NIC EIC's prosecution of a token few prats who use its logo is about all the policing our industry really gets isn't it?

I explain part P to people thus - "imagine if 90% of all car crashes were being caused by an unlicensed 5% of drivers. The part P approach would be to more heavily regulate, burden and patronise the 95% while completely ignoring the existence of the 5%"