Part P investigation.

[BlueToBits]

I thought I would share this with anyone interested.

About 3 months ago I recieved a phone call from our local trading standards.
They had been contacted by a householder who was having a central heating system installed. The plumber informed her that her water supply was not correctly earthed. She told him that she had been fully rewired only a few months earlier and, after showing the certificate to the plumber he advised her to take it to Trading Standards as he incorrectly assumed that because it was written on a photocopied form it was not a legitimate certificate.

Trading standards asked me to do a PIR on the installation. There was a few defects and although the test results I recorded were very different from those on the certification they were all OK. I noticed that the water main had recently been changed. The old stop-cock was still there with a new bonding cable correctly attached to a cut pipe. It had not been moved with the pipework to the new main, hardly the fault of the electrician who did the rewire, but a code 1 defect nevertheless. I submitted the PIR as requested and heard nothing again until yesterday.

Trading standards have requested that we carry out remedial repairs on behalf of the client and it now transpires that the electrician had not notified building control of the work he carried out under Part P.

Had the water main not been upgraded the plumber would not mentioned anything to the householder and this would likely have never come to light. Apart from a few other minor defects (unmarked switch wires etc.), the quality of the installation workmanship wasn't that bad.

Because the client has a legitimate complaint and the law has been broken, building control and trading standards are obliged to investigate. The customer is now faced with a £350 bill for building control on top of my bill for carrying out remedial works. I'm pretty sure the client will be seeking re-imbursement from the electrician who is now also facing possible prosecution.
All because someone else failed to re-connect the water earth bond.

 

[tonys]

And the way councils have got to find savings any prosecutions like take a back burner I think.

Exactly mate, the only people concerned with others working outside the remit of Part P is its members lol and I only laugh because its so true and the truth can be a bugger at times.

 

[BlueToBits]

Exactly mate, the only people concerned with others working outside the remit of Part P is its members lol and I only laugh because its so true and the truth can be a bugger at times.

It appears that the customer, Trading Standards and Building Control are also somewhat concerned, not to mention the electrician in question. TV consumer programs love this type of content because it makes for good viewing figures, so someone out there must be interested.

The truth is, like it or not, Part P is the law in England and Wales, and failure to comply with it is a criminal offence.

The general public don't understand electrical regulations. They rely on, and pay for electricians to do this for them.

 

[pushrod]

Yet to see a definitive answer from someone on this thread as to who is ultimately responsible for notifying the LABC when a non part P contractor is employed. I thought it was the homeowner, Bluetobits thought it was the contractor. In this case it could be that the electrician has told the owner that they will leave the installation in a safe, compliant state ie the test results , but that it was down to the owner to notify the LABC.. The spark has not used part p certs, just bs7671 ones.

I think there are responsibilities on all of us to understand the law, including the owner in this case. Did they not expect some correspondence from the LABC, or was it not a surprise that they didn't receive any? We do not know for sure exactly what has happened in this case, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that the spark was under the impression that the owner was going to inform LABC. Maybe the owner has not bothered to do what they should have done and are now trying to get out of it by blaming the spark. If the electrician was a complete cowboy would they have bothered with any certs?

 

[SMB]

If you noticed that the gas connection to a boiler was loose, would you fix it?

No, but im fairly confident that I would give him / her a phone call.

 

[BlueToBits]

Yet to see a definitive answer from someone on this thread as to who is ultimately responsible for notifying the LABC when a non part P contractor is employed....

It is the installer's responsibility to notify LABC, be it the householder as a DIY job, or a contractor.
If the installer is registered under an approved scheme (NIC, NAPIT etc) the notification must be made within 30 days of completing the job.
If the installer is NOT registered under a scheme, an application must be made to LABC BEFORE work commences. Work may proceed when the application is approved. The LABC will inspect the job on completion and issue certification. They may also want to inspect at an interim point, say after first fix before approving the 2nd fix. Their charges are high due to the cost of appointing an inspecting engineer for possibly 2 inspections.
The procedure may vary slightly between different local authorities.
If a contractor untertakes the installation without notifing LABC it will be deemed to be a DIY job unless the householder can demonstate otherwise.

 

[tonys]

The truth is, like it or not, Part P is the law in England and Wales, and failure to comply with it is a criminal offence

There are lots of laws created by Parliament to which people prefer just to ignore. When you see your TAXES paying for ex MP's Husbands to watch **** and others to pay cleaners and buy biscuits etc, do you really blame people for not subscribing to these schemes ? I don't give a monkeys, I'm just going about minding my own business and looking after my own affairs.

I'm a QS, so have no problems writing out and issuing certificates with a NICEIC Approved logo, so have no need to worry about anything. But for others to get involved helping trading standards/building control or who-ever to try and help nail an Electrician who took their chances to earn a living and done a proper job, well in my book are wronguns and would not be welcome on a job with or near me.

Live and let live is my moto especially when the banks/elite and the scheme FREELOADERS are ripping the **** out of us.

 

[SMB]

Anger.

 

[ukpablo]

tony, i hate the rules and regs the same as everybody else, however thay are put in place to produce a standard across the board, we are not talking about taxes, nailing a specific sparkie etc etc, we are talking about somebody breaking the law!
This is fact and if it was not then anybody who can pick up a screwdriver would be doing our job.
Yes its a rip off all this part P!
Yes its aload of bull too!
but thats the law and the rules, so break them at ur own peril because if somebody gets killed by something u have done and u cannot justify it etc, then u will be doing bird and being not registered will be the ammunition they will be looking for from the off!

 

[tonys]

so break them at ur own peril because if somebody gets killed by something u have done and u cannot justify it etc, then u will be doing bird and being not registered will be the ammunition they will be looking for from the off!

Is the above aimed at me, or you just generalizing ? I think the latter.

Breaking the law by not registering electrical work with building control as nothing to with the standard of work carried out. Two totally different issues whether or not your registered with a scheme provider. Carrying out bad unsafe work would come under a different charge in the courts.

Building Control are fully aware that a 17th Edition 2391 Electrician does not have to be registered with a Part P scheme provider to be competent to carry out electrical work and certify it. That is the reason they will/prepared to accept Certificates from people like me with out belonging to any Part P scheme provider. (even though I'm a QS and can do a cert anyway)

The only law being broken is failing to notify building control and even Part P members can fail to do this.

 

[ukpablo]

tonys, im not aiming it at u mate, just generalising. what u say is true to some extent. i dont get into slanging matches on here, i just make comment on a thread with an opinion.
whether it be my opinion or fact, so i hope the spark does not get in any trouble, however im sure it will put the frighteners on him for future jobs regarding notification.

Happy sparking to all!

 

[tonys]

Pablo

Thought you was generalizing mate and I hope the spark don't get into bother either.

 

[BlueToBits]

There are lots of laws created by Parliament to which people prefer just to ignore. When you see your TAXES paying for ex MP's Husbands to watch **** and others to pay cleaners and buy biscuits etc, do you really blame people for not subscribing to these schemes ? I don't give a monkeys, I'm just going about minding my own business and looking after my own affairs.

I'm a QS, so have no problems writing out and issuing certificates with a NICEIC Approved logo, so have no need to worry about anything. But for others to get involved helping trading standards/building control or who-ever to try and help nail an Electrician who took their chances to earn a living and done a proper job, well in my book are wronguns and would not be welcome on a job with or near me.

Live and let live is my moto especially when the banks/elite and the scheme FREELOADERS are ripping the **** out of us.

Are you saying that you pay £££s for NICEIC approval, to be 100% legit, and you are happy that other 'free-loading' electricians should be left alone and allowed to break the law because they are 'only trying to make a living' and if it's OK for MPs to cheat their expenses, it's open season for electricians to break the law because you think it's a bit crappy?

A taxi driver may appear be the best driver in the country and is credentials look fine to you. Is it OK with you if he does not actually hold a driving licence? Would you give him £2000 up front in taxi fares to drive you and your family around for the next 40 years knowing that if there was an accident, you may not have any recourse? After all, he's only trying to make a living...

Do you think that the customer should have taken the same attitude and 'put up and shut up'?

 

[tonys]

NICEIC Approved Contractors get automatic part p status, so its costs them nothing. I have access to certs because I'm a QS of a friends company, so I can issue certs for nothing, but that's neither here nor there.

Its a fact that Qualified Electricians, do not need to register with a part p scheme to carry out work in domestic dwellings.

An unregistered part p but competent Electrician is allowed to carry out Electrical Work in a Domestic Dwelling! Not Against the Law.

The Taxi driver who does not hold a driving not be driving a motor vehicle full stop. Against the Law.

So your comparison is way off, therefore the two are not comparable imo.

 

[BlueToBits]

NICEIC Approved Contractors get automatic part p status, so its costs them nothing. I have access to certs because I'm a QS of a friends company, so I can issue certs for nothing, but that's neither here nor there.
.

Not quite. It still costs to notify as required by part P

Its a fact that Qualified Electricians, do not need to register with a part p scheme to carry out work in domestic dwellings.

Agreed. Anyone can do electrical work in a domestic dwelling.

An unregistered part p but competent Electrician is allowed to carry out Electrical Work in a Domestic Dwelling! Not Against the Law.

Agreed as above. Anyone can work in a domestic dwelling, but it's against the law for the installer to fail to notify LABC under part P. The approved contractor does it on completeion through their scheme, the non-approved contractor does it in advance direct to their building control department.

The Taxi driver who does not hold a driving not be driving a motor vehicle full stop. Against the Law.

The same as an electrician who does not notify LABC under part P full stop. Against the law.

So your comparison is way off, therefore the two are not comparable imo.

I disagree. Both are breaking the law because neither carries the correct documentation. The taxi driver has no licence from DVLC to drive, the contractor has no licence from LABC to carry out electrical work.
Don't take my word for it. Phone your LABC tomorrow morning, or check out this:
http://niceic.com/Uploads/File1247.pdf
where is says quite clearly:

....To comply with the law you must notify your local building control office before you begin any work and pay the appropriate fee for them to inspect the work.

 

[pushrod]

check out this:
http://niceic.com/Uploads/File1247.pdf
where is says quite clearly:

Hmmm if you look at your link you will see that the flow chart on page 3 which is quite clearly aimed at the customer says
"Make sure you inform your local building control office before you start any work "

My point right at the start of this thread !!!