notifiable commercial work

[Phillcbr400]

Have been searching the net but can't find much info. What works are notifiable when working on a commercial premises?

 

[Deleted member 72666]

I am doing work at moment at Dudsbury golf course Dorset and trust me the maintenance guys have worked on and done things to installation there you would not believe, that has multiple 3 phase supplies coming in and they are fools.

You've got me on the edge of my seat now Stuart, c'mon spill the beans!

 

[snowhead]

Why would I phone them when I can get paid to sort it out,

That might have been the case if you hadn't have made 1 slight mistake.

 

[stuartcourt]

I will get the pictures of my mates phone, but outside lights around a fountain taken from 3 phase board on bodged in 40 amp breaker and then the pond itself on another phase admit a 6 amp to open connections under the fountain. Fountain well over 5o meters from board and ran in different flex with taped connectors now and again. It beggers belief

- - - Updated - - -

What was my mistake

 

[snowhead]

What was my mistake

This statement.

I am doing work at moment at Dudsbury golf course Dorset and trust me the maintenance guys have worked on and done things to installation there you would not believe, that has multiple 3 phase supplies coming in and they are fools.

 

[stuartcourt]

Humor me do you also think I should have said something

 

[KAS1]

I think he means circuits lol

 

[snowhead]

Humor me do you also think I should have said something

You've missed the point;

Calling Dudsbury Golf Course,,

 

[stuartcourt]

see your point and love the font size

 

[FrankUK]

I'm not an electrician but I am fairly qualified and my trade encompasses a large part of electrical work, so I am familiar with both single phase and 3 phase circuits, but I'm always surprised how you guys on this forum always lean towards the BS7671 as if it was a Bible. It is not. It is not law...it is a guide.

The law does not allow a defense against poor workmanship if someone gets electrocuted and dies. If you can prove that you installed to the 'Guide' then that may be a defense, but as far as I know, this has never been tested in Court.

If an installation is not compliant with BS7671 in all respects but no one gets electrocuted, are you breaking the law? I don't think so.

Dis-respecting a member because you think he is not fully qualified or Part P registered and is 'in your opinion' installing sub-standard work is wrong. Lots of installations fail to meet current 'Guidelines' i.e. 17th Edition, but also fail to electrocute people. Example such as a house built in the 70's and never rewired.

Until the 'Guide' becomes 'Law' (excepted where it is encompassed into building contracts) it is just that....a Guide. Any installer willing to take the risk of taking on the responsibility of electrocuting someone by doing dodgy work should be left to risk the might of the law.

We should not condemn someone because we think their work is sub standard against the latest edition of the 'Guide', we should consider if their work is acceptable against the chance of someone being electrocuted or the possibility of fire etc due to undersized cables et al.

I changed the CU in my home a couple of years back before I was Part P registered and did not inform the local BI, Nobody has died so far, but now that I have a piece of paper to prove I can safely do it, does that make it a safer installation?

I think that a broader view of the regs is over due. In my opinion, safety is now being over-ruled by the need to increase income. Updates to the Guide are being delivered far to often for my liking.

Consider that a new installation a few years back that complied with the then current 16th Edition..would you now consider that it is sub standard as it does nor measure up the the 17th Edition (with amendments) - and is it any less safe?

" I'll try to respond to the incoming flak, as time allows"

 

[KAS1]

Shame on you leave the electrical work alone

i'm not an electrician but i am fairly qualified and my trade encompasses a large part of electrical work, so i am familiar with both single phase and 3 phase circuits, but i'm always surprised how you guys on this forum always lean towards the bs7671 as if it was a bible. It is not. It is not law...it is a guide.

The law does not allow a defense against poor workmanship if someone gets electrocuted and dies. If you can prove that you installed to the 'guide' then that may be a defense, but as far as i know, this has never been tested in court.

If an installation is not compliant with bs7671 in all respects but no one gets electrocuted, are you breaking the law? I don't think so.

Dis-respecting a member because you think he is not fully qualified or part p registered and is 'in your opinion' installing sub-standard work is wrong. Lots of installations fail to meet current 'guidelines' i.e. 17th edition, but also fail to electrocute people. Example such as a house built in the 70's and never rewired.

Until the 'guide' becomes 'law' (excepted where it is encompassed into building contracts) it is just that....a guide. Any installer willing to take the risk of taking on the responsibility of electrocuting someone by doing dodgy work should be left to risk the might of the law.

We should not condemn someone because we think their work is sub standard against the latest edition of the 'guide', we should consider if their work is acceptable against the chance of someone being electrocuted or the possibility of fire etc due to undersized cables et al.

I changed the cu in my home a couple of years back before i was part p registered and did not inform the local bi, nobody has died so far, but now that i have a piece of paper to prove i can safely do it, does that make it a safer installation?

I think that a broader view of the regs is over due. In my opinion, safety is now being over-ruled by the need to increase income. Updates to the guide are being delivered far to often for my liking.

Consider that a new installation a few years back that complied with the then current 16th edition..would you now consider that it is sub standard as it does nor measure up the the 17th edition (with amendments) - and is it any less safe?

" i'll try to respond to the incoming flak, as time allows"

 

[KAS1]

This is an electricians forum not for pretend electricians, what is your trade??????

I'm not an electrician but I am fairly qualified and my trade encompasses a large part of electrical work, so I am familiar with both single phase and 3 phase circuits, but I'm always surprised how you guys on this forum always lean towards the BS7671 as if it was a Bible. It is not. It is not law...it is a guide.

The law does not allow a defense against poor workmanship if someone gets electrocuted and dies. If you can prove that you installed to the 'Guide' then that may be a defense, but as far as I know, this has never been tested in Court.

If an installation is not compliant with BS7671 in all respects but no one gets electrocuted, are you breaking the law? I don't think so.

Dis-respecting a member because you think he is not fully qualified or Part P registered and is 'in your opinion' installing sub-standard work is wrong. Lots of installations fail to meet current 'Guidelines' i.e. 17th Edition, but also fail to electrocute people. Example such as a house built in the 70's and never rewired.

Until the 'Guide' becomes 'Law' (excepted where it is encompassed into building contracts) it is just that....a Guide. Any installer willing to take the risk of taking on the responsibility of electrocuting someone by doing dodgy work should be left to risk the might of the law.

We should not condemn someone because we think their work is sub standard against the latest edition of the 'Guide', we should consider if their work is acceptable against the chance of someone being electrocuted or the possibility of fire etc due to undersized cables et al.

I changed the CU in my home a couple of years back before I was Part P registered and did not inform the local BI, Nobody has died so far, but now that I have a piece of paper to prove I can safely do it, does that make it a safer installation?

I think that a broader view of the regs is over due. In my opinion, safety is now being over-ruled by the need to increase income. Updates to the Guide are being delivered far to often for my liking.

Consider that a new installation a few years back that complied with the then current 16th Edition..would you now consider that it is sub standard as it does nor measure up the the 17th Edition (with amendments) - and is it any less safe?

" I'll try to respond to the incoming flak, as time allows"

 

[Des 56]

Any installer willing to take the risk of taking on the responsibility of electrocuting someone by doing dodgy work should be left to risk the might of the law.

That's a rather extreme opinion Frank !

It seems to remind me of a Neville Chamberlaine type apeasment,"turning a blind eye" and "it's not my concern"

 

[FrankUK]

Shame on you leave the electrical work alone

What exactly does that mean?

I'm not allowed to touch the electrics inside my chiller?

Your job finished at the isolator....and I would assume that you would not even contemplate understanding the internal electrical control wiring diagrams that I have to deal with. As I said, I am quite qualified, electrically and in other areas.

But, your quick response just confirms my thoughts about the electricians mindset regarding the 'Guide'

 

[KAS1]

Must of missed the bit about a chiller I read something about a CU

What exactly does that mean?

I'm not allowed to touch the electrics inside my chiller?

Your job finished at the isolator....and I would assume that you would not even contemplate understanding the internal electrical control wiring diagrams that I have to deal with. As I said, I am quite qualified, electrically and in other areas.

But, your quick response just confirms my thoughts about the electricians mindset regarding the 'Guide'

 

[FrankUK]

Any installer willing to take the risk of taking on the responsibility of electrocuting someone by doing dodgy work should be left to risk the might of the law.

That's a rather extreme opinion Frank !

It seems to remind me of a Neville Chamberlaine type apeasment,"turning a blind eye" and "it's not my concern"

Not at all. It just seems to me, as an outsider, and from my short time on this excellent forum, that electricians tend to view everything someone posts in relation to the 'Guide', as if it were the LAW. It is not, so if someone post something that does not 'exactly comply' with the 'Guide' they are immediately shot down and ridiculed.

Don't get me wrong, I don't condone dodgy and unsafe work, and I've come across many instances, I'm just trying to point out that, even when installations don't meet the grade ('Guide') they are not always unsafe.