Part P? Are we all being misled?

[Elidor]

Part P of the building regs is 'statutory' and the documents are guidance on how to comply - they are not the only way to comply...

Ok, Where does it state they are statutory?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I’m just confused to hell as everyone makes authoritive statements on this and many other forums that these "Approved Documents" are "Mandatory", "Legally binding", "Statutory" etc. yet the Part P document itself states clearly under the "use of guidance section" that there is no obligation to adopt any solution contained in the approved documents...

I was originally questioning the requirement to notify building control either directly or through a scheme sponsor. If this a requirement clearly detailed in the Building Regulations then fine, not a problem (I don’t have a copy yet). If it’s a requirement under Part P, and I’m interpreting the above statement correctly then I’m under no obligation to adopt any solution contained in the approved documents... So I’m under no obligation to notify the building authorities directly or via a scheme sponsor? (Question not statement)

I’m still learning and have probably missed some key point but rather than just tell me im worng is anyone able to show me with reference to relevant docs? Its the only way I learn lol

I don’t have a copy of the building regulations to refer yet, anyone know where I can get a copy or is purchasing a hard copy from HMSO the only option? I did have a link to a online version in my coursework but the link no longer works.

 

[Apollo]

Do away with Part P!,and register all who passes C&G 2391 to certify electrical work,after all the 2391 is the hardest of all exams and surely proves your competency to carry out and test/certificate electrical work.(and BTW i sit mine in august)

Whilst I understand what you’re saying in the most general of terms this isn’t and would never be the right way.

The 2391 really when all said and done is a course for PIR's (in the broadest of terms) everything else you learn earlier in your courses to become an electrician. Unless you undertake PIR's day in day out IMHO there is very little need for the 2391.

Granted it will open doors for you and allow you to undertake PIR's with the legal system partly behind you should you fall foul.

I know of a few plumbers (why is there the dislike between sparky's and plumbers????, I digress) who have sat their Part P course done the 2382 and then go onto sit and pass their 2391, all by reading the books available. Does that make them more able to certify work than me... Does it F**K!!! but on paper it does. I've been a sparky for a long time, only now that I am going into business for myself am I contemplating doing the 2391, does that mean I don’t know how to test or do PIR's no it does not, I’m very proficient in both.

Having to have 2391 to certify your work is unfeasible it would diminish the qualification we all have and prove to make them worthless. When inspection and testing is done at grass roots level....


Paper only goes so far to provide competency experience is the key!!!


There is no sure fire way to eradicate all the cowboys around, it’s not just the kitchen fitter and the like it’s also time served sparky’s that will not change with the times. Despite what we all think Part P is more than likely here to stay so embrace it, don’t fight it!

Personally the way I see it as long as I know my work is 100% right and I can rectify other peoples mess ups then I’m happy, it keeps me in work. Why should I worry about what other people are doing and that they're taking my work, at the end of the day if you’re not getting any work its cause your doing something wrong. You have to be more than a sparky to be in business these days!!!

 

[Apollo]

Ok, Where does it state they are statutory?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I’m just confused to hell as everyone makes authoritive statements on this and many other forums that these "Approved Documents" are "Mandatory", "Legally binding", "Statutory" etc. yet the Part P document itself states clearly under the "use of guidance section" that there is no obligation to adopt any solution contained in the approved documents...

I was originally questioning the requirement to notify building control either directly or through a scheme sponsor. If this a requirement clearly detailed in the Building Regulations then fine, not a problem (I don’t have a copy yet). If it’s a requirement under Part P, and I’m interpreting the above statement correctly then I’m under no obligation to adopt any solution contained in the approved documents... So I’m under no obligation to notify the building authorities directly or via a scheme sponsor? (Question not statement)

I’m still learning and have probably missed some key point but rather than just tell me im worng is anyone able to show me with reference to relevant docs? Its the only way I learn lol

I don’t have a copy of the building regulations to refer yet, anyone know where I can get a copy or is purchasing a hard copy from HMSO the only option? I did have a link to a online version in my coursework but the link no longer works.

The way it works is this:

Parliment pass an act, in this case the building Act 1984 for that Act come regulations in our case Part P of the building regulations 2010. so yes they are law and are statutory.

Part P is part of the said Building regulations and so yes this requires you to either notify LABC or sign up to a scheme. BS7671 is the standard we work to.

Have a look on legislation.gov.uk about the building regulations and you can obtain copy's of the complete building regulations fairly cheaply if not free. try googling and it'll come up with loads of options.

 

[Bradzz]

Maybe this is why places like B & Q/ Wickes/ homebase/ and the like can sell electrical items to jo public, as it is not law, and just a guidance?

The building regulations are statutory and legally binding. No problem there. Part P on the other hand is a guidance document and NOT statutory? My understanding is that we are under NO obligation to adopt any particular solution detailed in any of the approved documents as long as the requirements of the building regulations are met in another way and do not compromise safety? Correct?

Where in the "Statutory" regulations is it a requirement to notify building authorities of any domestic electrical work or pay to register yourself as a competent person with one of the Part P scheme providers?

Surely it's in everyone’s financial interest to meet the requirements of the building regulations in a way that doesn’t involve handing over hard earnt cash to the likes of the NICEIC just for the fun of it? Do we really have to?

I understand and appreciate the importance of standards and on the surface the system looks like a good idea but does it work? Does it stop people carrying out poor quality, dangerous installation work?

Looks to me that it forces the minority of tradesmen who have good industry qualifications and are capable of carrying out the work with a genuine understanding of electrical safety charge so much more money than the "Kev's mate" who will do the best job ever for 20 quid no questions asked. As a domestic customer with no understanding of all this red tape who will you chose to carry out the work if you are paying for it?

Has anyone ever been prosecuted for carrying out domestic electrical installation work safely and not being part of a scheme sponsor or informing the building authorities?

[FONT=&quot]Rant over, any feedback much appreciated.[/FONT]

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Maybe this is why places like B & Q/ Wickes/ homebase/ and the like can sell electrical items to jo public, as it is not law, and just a guidance?

Exactly....joe public can do whatever they like in their homes if it doesnt come under part p,if it does then they can still do it and notify and pay the fee.....thats why it's pointless to keep bleating on about stopping the sheds selling them the gear.....The only difference between them and us is we pay into a scam to self notify.

Remember as well that probably the majority of minor works jobs likely to be attempted by non electricians dont come under part p anyway.

 

[topquark]

Plus a lifetime's experience, training and a conscience

 

[telectrix]

and those that do most likely will not be notified anyway. if a householder buys a CU from B&Q, £60, installs it, do you think he's going to pay LABC £300 on top. apart from testing.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

and those that do most likely will not be notified anyway. if a householder buys a CU from B&Q, £60, installs it, do you think he's going to pay LABC £300 on top. apart from testing.

No......but you cant blame B&Q for that.

 

[Elidor]

For anyone who didn’t know (myself included. All my course work still references the building regulations 2000) The Building Regulations 2000 and all amendments were revoked on 1 October 2010 and are no longer in effect. The Building regulations 2000 have been replaced with Building Regulations 2010. Available for free download from here.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk

Part P was also updated from 6th April 2006 (Just in case anyone was not aware) and available for free download from here.

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/br/BR_PDF_ADP_2006.pdf

On the theme of my original post, notification is a requirement of the building regulations which is reinforced in the Part P approved document. The Building Regulations 2010 is only 56 pages long and not as intimidating or difficult to read as i expected it to be. I know some of you already replied to the post to this affect but I needed to see references to relevant regulation and documentation etc. Reference to the requirements for notification can be found in many places and is pretty much a central theme of the regulations. Some main areas include schedule 3 (Page 45), schedule 4 (Page 49) and part 3 (Page 10).

Thank you all for your comments and feedback, i can sleep easy with a little more understanding now. Until my next post lol

 

[telectrix]

no, i know that. my point is that because part p is not policed and it's only when things go pear=shaped that all the pundits leap out of the woodwork with the ( perfectly sound ) advice of " should have had the job done by a qualified spark" . that's shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. what is needed is this advice publicised before work is done as has been said on this and other forums many times, a scheme similar to gas safe is required for all electrical work over and above changing accessories. even then we would get members of the public fitting class I fittings to lighting circuits without cpc. whatever happens will not affect me as i am nearing the end of my working life. might be able to drag it out longer with more testing and less installation. LOL. better stop now or Bill will be on my back for competing with his post lengths. hehe.

 

[Ponty Massive]

Whether it's statutory or not the general public believe it's law and that's the reason why we must be registered. Otherwise we'd get no work

I can't agree with that. Most of the customers I have done work for have never heard of part P. I have only been asked once if I was "registered with anyone" and even then was never asked to prove it. It wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference to me whether I'd been registered or not.

As many previously have said,I do believe there should be some registrations (as gas safe) but not a DI scheme where the chippy can install a 40A shower. Electricians only. How do you define an electrician, well that's another thread again.

Needs to go back to the start and get rid of all the nonsense.

 

[johnboy6083]

just a thought, i read part P a whuile ago, and it states, that the work must be notified to the LABC before work conmmences. if the LABC are needed to inspect thework, this shall be carrioed out free of charge to the householder.

or words tio that effect.
whats stopping me, going about and doing a good job, but stating in mt terms and conditions, that it uptio the householder to notify, and that it is checked by the LASBC. of course i would certify the installation as per normal

 

[telectrix]

where is that?the bit about inspecting FOC?

 

[johnboy6083]

ill, try and find it tel. im sure its there

 

[johnboy6083]

right tel. read from 1.24 to 1.26, and pay particular attention to the last few lines of 1.26