T
tonys
In writing as well to cover ones bum, but offer to put it right first.
In writing as well to cover ones bum, but offer to put it right first.
B
BlueToBits
AFAIK in a domestic installation there is no legal requirement to report a dangerous installation. It would be impossible to do so.
All work carried out must be certified as compliant, including those parts of the existing installation the new work relies upon for safe operation. An installer must not undertake work that cannot be certified as compliant. So given that the onus is that negligence has to be proved, how can an electrician be prosecuted for not providing a danger notice for other parts of that installation if his or her installation certificate does not cover those parts of the installation?
A PIR is a different beast. The inspector declares that he has inspected and tested in accordance with BS7671. If he fails to do this, he then could leave himself open to potential prosecution.
The PIR is designed to be a report of the safety of the installation, but it is generally used as a means of passing the buck onto the inspecting engineer.
Those not 100% sure of what they are doing when carrying out a PIR are leaving themselves wide open.
All work carried out must be certified as compliant, including those parts of the existing installation the new work relies upon for safe operation. An installer must not undertake work that cannot be certified as compliant. So given that the onus is that negligence has to be proved, how can an electrician be prosecuted for not providing a danger notice for other parts of that installation if his or her installation certificate does not cover those parts of the installation?
A PIR is a different beast. The inspector declares that he has inspected and tested in accordance with BS7671. If he fails to do this, he then could leave himself open to potential prosecution.
The PIR is designed to be a report of the safety of the installation, but it is generally used as a means of passing the buck onto the inspecting engineer.
Those not 100% sure of what they are doing when carrying out a PIR are leaving themselves wide open.
Interesting points but I wouldn't like to be standing in court saying "yes your honour, I saw exposed live parts on the cooker outlet but I was only changing a dimmer"
I think as a competent person, you have a duty of care to the client and while that does not extend to checking all parts of the installation, it has to extend to at least pointing out items causing immediate danger that you've seen.
I will continue to use the Electrical Danger Notification whether it's a legal requirement or not.
B
BlueToBits
Absolutley, of course I would bring it to the attention of the householder. But my point is that you cannot be held legally responsible for failing to report the danger. It is very possible you would not be aware of this danger - or anything else that may be an immediate cause of danger. The Danger Notice is one way of bringing to the attention of the client anything you may notice, but it won't protect your bum because your bum does not need protecting.
The moral issues are, of course, a different kettle of fish, but you can't placate them by merely issuing a piece of paper. The Minor Works Certificate for the dimmer switch describes exactly what was done and may even recommend that the installation should be inspected.
By all means issue a Danger Notice to the client for the exposed cooker outlet, after all, he didn't realise it was dangerous. But what actually killed him was was the portable fan heater falling into his bath whilst plugged into the socket by the soap dish. He thought is must be OK because his electrician didn't give him one of those danger notice papers for it.
"but, your honour, I didn't see the socket....."
"I put it to you that you failed in your obligations because were more focussed on scaring your client into buying a new cooker when you should have recommended a full inspection report"
S
sparky1ste
couldnt said it better myself!
very well put. but, to take it a little bit further, if , say, fitting an extra socket or whatever, and issuing a MWC, you could , on that MWC, state clearly " the installation should now have a full inspection report. " by doing so, though, you are implying that the installation may be unsafe, scaring the customer, and worst of all, shooting yourself in the foot in the customer's eyes as you are the expert and should ensure that the installation is safe.Absolutley, of course I would bring it to the attention of the householder. But my point is that you cannot be held legally responsible for failing to report the danger. It is very possible you would not be aware of this danger - or anything else that may be an immediate cause of danger. The Danger Notice is one way of bringing to the attention of the client anything you may notice, but it won't protect your bum because your bum does not need protecting.
The moral issues are, of course, a different kettle of fish, but you can't placate them by merely issuing a piece of paper. The Minor Works Certificate for the dimmer switch describes exactly what was done and may even recommend that the installation should be inspected.
By all means issue a Danger Notice to the client for the exposed cooker outlet, after all, he didn't realise it was dangerous. But what actually killed him was was the portable fan heater falling into his bath whilst plugged into the socket by the soap dish. He thought is must be OK because his electrician didn't give him one of those danger notice papers for it.
"but, your honour, I didn't see the socket....."
"I put it to you that you failed in your obligations because were more focussed on scaring your client into buying a new cooker when you should have recommended a full inspection report"
i may not have worded this in the best way, but what i'm trying to say is " how far do you go, when all mr. jones wants is an extra socket for his sky box.
Well I'll stick with what I wrote in post 43, if I've seen it, I feel I need to report it and anyone working for us has that made quite clear from the start.
B
BlueToBits
I always do if there's no label on the CU or it's out of date, and yes, I agree, it's my way of "covering my bum."
Good question, and I hear this may be addressed in the 1st ammendment of the 17th.
Don't get me wrong, We were talking about legal obligations and responsibilities. I'm not saying that anything observed as unsafe shouldn't be reported, only that it should be reported because it is the right and proper thing to do, as I am sure everyone here would do irrespectively, and not merely to avoid a legal threat, whether it exists or not.
N
nickblake
If an installation is such a poor and dangerouse condition , i dont think you'd carry out the work , a good experianced spark will know the condition as soon as they walk in and look at the installation any works carried out require assesing befor work comences even if its just changing a light switch, this means bonding in place etc you cant do work unless this is installed the point im making is we live in a world where you'll be sued at the drop of a hat , a case springs to mind guy came home drunk smashed hell out of his CDU got blown across the room and broke his arm sued and won £15k , this is my point if youve seen its dangerouse even if youve not touched anything you should issue a DN ,I have contacted elecsa regarding regestering DN's and they have replied that it has been passed on the the commitee for consideration
T
tonys
I was at the traffic light this morning sat next to another van advertising the ole company status stuff NICEIC Approved Contractor/Part P, then written on the back was Landlords Safety Certificates from £55.
Wasn't a local southerner contractor given the telephone number being displayed, must of been desperate though.
Noticed on the NICEIC website my old company still there with out a QS, even though the rules allow about 120 grace for a company to carry on working under the logo, shocking really. Also know of another company with-out a QS for a lot longer, still going strong under the logo, shocking really.
Wasn't a local southerner contractor given the telephone number being displayed, must of been desperate though.
Noticed on the NICEIC website my old company still there with out a QS, even though the rules allow about 120 grace for a company to carry on working under the logo, shocking really. Also know of another company with-out a QS for a lot longer, still going strong under the logo, shocking really.
B
BlueToBits
Yet another tome from BlueToBits. I do have a life... honest....
nickblake:
Yes, I agree. If you know who they are, have you contacted the NICEIC and told them?
nickblake:
- The onus of proof is required to successfully sue someone. This, in reality, is very difficult to do.
- As soon as you enter other people's property you are open to be accused of anything, hence Public Liability Insurance and Professional Indemnity Insurance.
- It is not a requirement to report potential danger to any authority in such cases (exceptions apply) There is no case to answer to. It is impossible to prove that you failed to mention something that you may or may not have noticed.
- Iis very unlikely that notifing DNs will ever happen as there are lot of issues at stake in doing so.
- A DN is proof that you have noticed something, in your opinion, immenently dangerous. Your client could break his neck and die falling down the stairs in the dark, because you told him his lights were dangerous and on your advice he switched them off at the main. Should an inquest find your DN in back of a kitchen drawer proving you made an error in your determination (after all, eveyone makes mistakes), you could be sued by his family for mis-advice leading to death. Had you not issued the DN, but nevertheless informed him verbally of your suspicions of danger, there would be no proof of your error. Either way you have met you moral obligation and told the client you believe there is danger. The DN does not go to some higher authority for sanctioning. It can only ever be used as evidence against you, the issuer. If he electrocuted himself on what you reported as dangerous, then you can pat yourself on the back and say "I told you so" whether you issued a DN or not. No one will offer their gratitude and there is no prize for getting it right. There is, however a significant penalty for getting it wrong.
- Issuing a DN does not make you a better person or a better electrician. Anyone can say "you can't do that...", but only the informed and experienced can add "...but I can if I do this first".
- Irrespective of how 'dangerous' other parts of the installation are, there is no problem in carrying out work which will very likely improve the overall safety. The certificate wording needs care and the section "comments on the existing installation" could be "no comment", or describe anything that the installer believes to be unsafe. If an electrician is not confident that the work will be compliant work or issue the correct certification for that work only, then, rightly, he should walk away without undertaking the work.
- Every installation must be suitable for it's environment. If external services are such that a CDU could be mutually detrimentally influenced by a drunken attack fom a person with suicidal anger management issues, then appropriate precautions such as additional mechanical protection should be put into place. If the electrician in your example failed to warn his client that his CDU was only rated to IPA21,(2 pints India Pale Ale and a Babycham chaser), then it is right that he was sued and, if I had my way, should be locked up and the key thrown into never-never land. Of course, I ALWAYS protect user accessible parts with submarine grade steel armour plate rated for impact penetration resistance against depleted plutonium tipped amunition rounds, just to be safe because you can never be 100% sure...
- It should not be too difficult to get a better lawyer than the one the electrician in your example had. The only way the drunken client could have won that case is if the electrician failed to turn up to the hearing. Check the source of the story. "The Daily Sport" perhaps?
Yes, I agree. If you know who they are, have you contacted the NICEIC and told them?
L
lyndonh
The correct name for this is "Electrical Installation Conditions Report" this covers a visual inspection and checks circuits and takes test readings. This is the most complete report on an existing installation. Of course, if a customer just asks for someone to check an installation visually nothing is wrong with that it just isn't a complete report, it is just a visual report. Maybe the customer has reason to think someone has tampered with the fittings, who knows. There is nothing wrong with a professional person giving a visual report on something. You don't need to be a member of a scheme to give a certificate, you need to be competent if you did c&g level 3 you would have covered testing and proved competence. Remember schemes are their to help maintain standards for those who feel they need help in keeping high standards or help keeping up with the latest news etc.
T
trev
Is that bit a joke?
P
Plonker 3
i bet the OP is glad they waited 3 years for this bit of advice lol
Your post should be moved to page 1 of this thread,thats to save the likes of me trawling through the pages before realising it was a reply by someone who is a bit slow with their typing
E
Engineer54
Nah, he's just fallen hook line & sinker for all the blub he's been spoon fed by them!!
OFFICIAL SPONSORS
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc
Advert
Thread Information
- Prefix
- N/A
- Replies
- 55
Thread Tags
Advert
Advert
TrueNAS JBOD Storage Server
-
-
-
Understanding TrueNAS JBOD Servers: A Comprehensive Guide- Started by Dan
- Replies: 8